The concept of organizational management practicing nepotism may be viewed from an ethical standpoint. Sometimes, this is hard for managers to omit or deny employment to a relative even if they are not qualified enough to take the positions. This leader will look for ways to help loved ones, and in academic literature, this topic is raised from an ethical perspective (Gini & Marcoux, 2012). The practice of nepotism in business is unethical and counterproductive, and its implications in the business sector are inadmissible due to labor inequality and bias towards potentially talented employees.
Practicing nepotism in an organization from the basic concern is that it brings about the issue of contradiction of the typical customs in employment to hiring and promoting the most qualified and performing candidates for the job. The practice blocks legit ways of ensuring that a suitable candidate is hired to take the business to other levels by engaging and operating business activities. While a relative is a potential candidate, they may be lacking the basic skills, including not being career-oriented. An employee should be loyal to the company and view the business as an opportunity to advance their career (Parboteeah, 2019). A company should also be ensured that they have practical experience during hiring since this is essential for them to integrate themselves into the business operations.
Moreover, the determination of the position’s strengths for the job should be considered while hiring a candidate. Managers may not be willing to demand high performance from a close relative. On the other hand, every organization has a culture, and every new employee should adapt and fit into it. Suppose managers secure positions for their relatives, there are high chances of demolishing business operation culture since every activity needs someone to have social skills to communicate with people and clients (Melé, 2009). Therefore, nepotism in business brings down the basic concerns while hiring or promoting an individual.
However, people may object to this claim by arguing that if individuals can employ their relatives, they take them and mentor them to fit whatever the business demands. As far as an individual is willing and able to work, taking them for the position does not matter or negatively impact specific operations since a candidate can be closely monitored and mentored to meet the company’s performance standards. Having loved ones among employees can be a form of control over other employees who may start working more productively due to the closeness of a manager’s relative (Morrison, 2015). Therefore, different ethical concerns arise when discussing the issue in question.
On the other hand, one can argue that nepotism in business is moral since it leads to greater trust, majorly termed as swift trust. A leader may have more trust in their relative if they see that such an employee performs immediate duties diligently and responsibly. Additionally, nepotism can reduce the cost of recruiting new members to an organization (Kokemuller, n.d.). Thus, working with a relative may lead to personal interest and a greater sense of ownership to succeed moral practice.
Nevertheless, the concept of nepotism in business as a just act is associated with underperformance. Business objectives can be achieved only through high demands, excellent work, and commands but not approaches aimed to encourage relatives to work efficiently (Gini & Marcoux, 2012). This also takes time and reduces the business’s output, which are negative perspectives. Moreover, modern companies, as a rule, need active employees working with passion and optimism while taking advantage of an opportunity to nurture their career, and this behavior is normal in the modern business sector.
Another argument to support the claim is that an inexperienced relative can harm the business. The inability to work in groups, poor education, and some other negative aspects affect performance directly. As a result, interpersonal conflicts with colleagues may arise, which is immoral behavior. Difficult relationships between a leader and a relative can harm the overall efficiency of teamwork (Jones, 2012). If a manager hires family members, their individual interaction can be transferred to the workplace. Therefore, leaders’ loved ones may not work towards common objectives to benefit the company, which is an unacceptable perspective in the context of business success.
Personality conflicts caused by hiring relatives lead to immoral behaviors that can further break family relationships. For instance, shouting at each other in the workplace for personal reasons is inappropriate and unprofessional. This will certainly affect other employees who want to work in a friendly atmosphere. Moreover, there may be no disciplinary actions taken upon relatives, which is evidence of labor inequality (Parboteeah, 2019). This behavior changes other employees’ views on how the management acts on the issue and may lead to whistleblowing as a measure to avoid the loss of organizational efficiency and destructive relationships among colleagues. Such outcomes prove that nepotism in the business sphere is unethical.
Contrary to the aforementioned argument, one can remark that having a relative as a subordinate strengthens productivity. Leaders’ loved ones realize that they gain value by acquiring jobs and strive to prove their professional suitability by demonstrating zeal. In today’s business environment, colleagues rarely show open hostility towards one another unless interpersonal conflicts arise (Jones, 2012). Even in case of a high tension between a manager and his or her subordinate relative, controversies are not made public. This forces both sides to stay calm and follow the culture and norms of a specific company to equalize all the organization’s employees.
Additionally, one can argue that having a relative brings calmness and organized activities, thus improving the business’s outcome. Relatives take their duties as employees and know that promotions, salary increases, and regular bonuses may favor them. This helps assume that such employees can perform their duties responsibly. Moreover, having a close relative as an immediate superior guarantees them the work process with no fear of receiving commands that may lead to depressions affecting them psychologically (Jones, 2012). This knowledge may stimulate their performance and stimulate diligence and productivity, hence benefitting the company. Therefore, they may generally argue that relative differences are put aside and work towards achieving the ultimate performance objectives.
When responding to this, one can state that no matter how good intentions are, this will always remain to be unethical due to long-run outcomes. Relatives working close to their managers will not do their best to achieve the organization’s goals and objectives since they are likely to be focused on personal interests. Even if such employees receive favors, for instance, job promotions, increased salaries, or bonuses, these benefits cannot make them demonstrate the maximum possible potential due to their confidence in the future (Kokemuller, n.d.). If this behavior is aggravated by ignoring colleagues’ interests, this may create hate and tension in the team and make other employees believe in job discrimination promoted in their workplaces. These outcomes, in turn, reduce business productivity and prove the threat of nepotism.
Another argument is that nepotism hinders the success of business operations in an organization. The strategy of employing as many family members as possible may lead to work incompetency. An unqualified individual can occupy a position that does not meet their educational level and the skills they have, which is the consequence of nepotism. This, in turn, may result in inferior production that does not meet the required standards. Such an outcome arises due to assigning job responsibilities to a person who does not possess sufficient knowledge and skills to work productively (Morrison, 2015). This situation may be considered unethical since it is associated with poor performance of the company in general and cause losses due to customers’ reluctance to interact with an organization in which employees are incompetent. As a result of such behavior, the company may find itself in a critical condition that may be challenging to reverse; hence, it may hinder stable profits.
In addition, one can note that nepotism is associated with the erosion of leadership skills from the organization’s topmost position. The majority of leaders can be misguided by their relatives, which is manifested in incompetent decisions and directives. This can also happen because their relative employees are trustworthy among colleagues due to their social status. As a result, the shift in traditional leadership principles may be influenced by active relatives promoting individual views on control over colleagues and performance results (Parboteeah, 2019). Since these opinions are often based on the pursuit of personal benefits, the organization is unlikely to take advantage of such decisions and initiatives, and leadership will be ineffective.
One might reject this argument by stating that practicing nepotism in business may take this sector to another level since a son, daughter, nephew, or another relative can work hard to fulfill the organization’s goals and objectives, thereby proving one’s loyalty. Their performance and behavior are closely monitored by top-ranked leaders who have created the positions for them. Moreover, since their education level does not fit their positions, they can engage different individuals who are experts in specific fields and may help adapt to specific working conditions better. For subordinate relatives, this may take them a few months to learn how specific activities and performed and duties are followed, thereby gaining the necessary experience. However, even at the initial stage, an insufficient educational level is a significant deterrent against engaging relatives to work.
One may also argue that due to trust and loyalty to those who are related to top-ranked leaders, they will be working with little or no dateline restriction since their activities are approved by the management. Their moves and individual decisions can benefit the organization because motivation stimulates the achievement of high-performance results and the desire to prove personal suitability. Their work is trusted, and no one can question whatever they do; hence, when involved in different business processes, they are believed to deliver the best to the organization (Parboteeah, 2019). The position justifying nepotism may be based on how relatives can report arising issues to the management. They, as a rule, are in close relationships, which simplifies communication. One of the beneficial implications is an opportunity to find suitable solutions faster due to such a productive interaction. Managers’ relatives can spy every issue and behavior in the organization to their leader, who, in turn, can resolve the current gap of issue timely and effectively.
In response to the aforementioned objection, one can note the organization’s growth is majorly focused on leadership qualities and skills that help control all the employees in an unbiased and equal manner. Having a relative who keeps thinking that they are part of a leading team will ruin the organization’s plan and activities. They may bring miscommunication and mistrust amongst employees and the company’s management. Moreover, since these individuals are trusted and seen as loyal, they may be lazy because no close monitoring is promoted (Melé, 2009). These arguments are objective reasons to note that nepotism may take the business into disagreements within the organization and culture laziness, thereby affecting goals and development objectives negatively.
Furthermore, this is not only unethical but also immoral to hire relatives to occupy positions that do not suit them while talented and experienced employees cannot count on good jobs due to nepotism promoted by leaders. This perspective is associated with a brake on the company’s innovative development due to the lack of modern ideas and development concepts that skilled workers could offer. Hiring or promoting individuals with a rich professional background can improve the dynamics of business processes. Promoting relatives with no experience and skills can lead the business to stagnate since such employees will not add any value to their operations, which is a crucial reason to engage professional workers (Morrison, 2015). Moreover, an individual with advanced knowledge is more inspirational to the team, and they can drive the business to a higher level due to personal energy and motivation. Thus, having a qualified employee working in the right position contributes to business operations positively and helps create a productive work environment.
Additionally, nepotism is immoral since it may lead to challenges associated with maintaining a positive microclimate in the team. If one of the group employees is an employer’s loved one and misbehaves, he or she, however, can avoid adequate punishment due to proximity to the management apparatus (Morrison, 2015). Supervisors of lesser status may attempt in their careers for trying to hold privileged employees accountable for the lack of professionalism or work discipline. As a result, such challenging situations may lead to poor job satisfaction in the team, which, at the same time, is one of the critical performance prerequisites. The argument is based on the fact that individuals having relationships with the employer in the company wait to benefit instead of making efforts to create a favorable microclimate in the team.
Nonetheless, one might reject this argument by stating that everyone has equal chances of being employed in any organization. Hiring a relative does not mean that this employee is not qualified to take the duties of the business. Moreover, one should take into account that having specific education is not evidence of highly productive job perspectives since experiences are more significant than theoretical knowledge (Melé, 2009). A relative is likely to work consistently and have control over some minor activities that are done in the absence of a management team.
In response to this, one can provide an opinion that having a close relative in the organization can alter the management team’s commands and leadership skills significantly. Leader’s loved ones may start operating on their own without any further consultation or communication with their team members, which is a bad result of group activities (Morrison, 2015). Bias and harassment in various forms can manifest themselves as the methods of struggle with the established order, which can reduce team morale and affect productivity negatively. Moreover, before employing a relative, a leader should understand what his or her loved one pursues in one’s career. Their objectives and views on personal professional growth need to be assessed to be aware of a future employee’s expectations. Therefore, this is unethical to have a relative in the organization since their behavior might reduce team morale and cause conflicts and disagreements in the team.
Due to the business objectives of gaining more profits and having a well-organized team, practicing nepotism is not only unethical but also unreasonable approach due to various negative implications. Any case of potential nepotism needs to be monitored to avoid interrupting sustainable business processes and prevent organizations from losing talented and qualified employees replaced by managers’ relatives. After reviewing different standpoints, one can assume that employing a loved one may be associated with some positive prospects, for instance, increased team productivity and responsibility. Nevertheless, most of such employees have no relevant work experience, may be unqualified, and have no social skills that may add value to the organization and the work process in general. Therefore, this is crucial to provide employment opportunities to qualified candidates who can change business operations to other levels due to individual skills and desires to introduce relevant innovations.
References
Gini, A., & Marcoux, A. M. (2012). The ethics of business: A concise introduction. Rowman & Littlefield.
Jones, R.G. (Ed.). (2012). Nepotism in organisations. Routledge.
Kokemuller, N. (n.d). Business ethics and nepotism. Chron. Web.
Melé, D. (2009). Business ethics in action: Seeking human excellence in organizations. Palgrave Macmillan.
Morrison, J. (2015). Business ethics: New challenges in a globalized world. Red Globe Press.