Favoritism Unfavorable: Why Showing Preference Harms Your Leadership and Team, by Jonathan H. Westover PhD

Abstract: This article examines the detrimental effects of favoritism in leadership contexts, demonstrating through behavioral science and organizational case studies how preferential treatment undermines team dynamics and performance. The author presents compelling evidence that favoritism creates destructive ingroup/outgroup mentalities, leading to decreased motivation, innovation barriers, information silos, and talent loss. Drawing from extensive consulting experience, the article highlights how favoritism manifests as problematic "inner circles" that fracture team cohesion and breed resentment. Beyond merely identifying the problem, the piece offers practical, evidence-based alternatives centered on equitable recognition distribution, psychological safety promotion, and transparent evaluation criteria—providing leaders with actionable strategies to foster fairness and inclusion that ultimately enhance organizational effectiveness, employee satisfaction, and team unity.

Episode Transcript

Favoritism Unfavorable (00:00):
Why Showing Preference Harms Your Leadership and Team Abstract

(00:11):
demonstrating through behavioral science and organizational case studies how preferential treatment undermines team dynamics and performance.
The author presents compelling evidence that favoritism creates destructive ingroup/outgroup mentalities,
leading to decreased motivation,innovation barriers,

(00:31):
information silos,and talent loss.
Drawing from extensive consulting experience,the article highlights how favoritism manifests as problematic "inner circles" that fracture team cohesion and breed resentment.
Beyond merely identifying the problem,the piece offers practical,
evidence-based alternatives centered on equitable recognition distribution,

(00:56):
psychological safety promotion,and transparent evaluation criteria—providing leaders with actionable strategies to foster fairness and inclusion that ultimately enhance organizational effectiveness,
employee satisfaction,and team unity.
One challenge I see time and again is leaders playing favorites amongst their direct reports and team members.

(01:19):
While showing preference may seem harmless or even motivating in the moment,
my experience and the research both clearly demonstrate how favoritism ultimately undermines leadership effectiveness and team performance.
Today we will explore why favoritism is an unfavorable leadership approach through sharing relevant behavioral science,

(01:41):
highlighting its negative impacts,and offering practical alternative strategies rooted in principles of fairness,
inclusion and empowerment.
By better understanding how and why preference damages cohesion and productivity,
leaders can take action to start leading their teams in a more equitable and positive manner.

(02:02):
The Psychology of Favoritism Research has consistently found that favoritism fosters perceptions of unfairness,
which significantly hinders team dynamics and functioning (Niehoff & Moorman,
1993;
Sweeney & McFarlin, 1997).
At a basic psychological level,humans have a strong innate desire for fairness and react negatively to preferential treatment of others (Adams,

(02:30):
1963;
Folger & Cropanzano, 2001).
When a leader shows preference for one or some individuals,
it creates an ingroup/outgroup mentality that can breed resentment,
distrust and reduced motivation amongst those on the outside (Tajfel & Turner,

(02:52):
1979).
These psychological mechanisms have real organizational consequences,
as perceptions of unfairness correlate with decreased performance,
commitment,cooperation and job satisfaction (Cohen-Charash & Spector,
2001;
Colquitt et al.

(03:13):
, 2001).
In my experience consulting with leadership teams,
favoritism all too often manifests as the cultivation of an "inner circle" - those select few individuals the leader relies on most,
champions regularly and looks out for above others.
However,this inner circle approach seriously undermines group cohesion and divides the team into warring factions.

(03:40):
Those on the outside looking in begin to question if their efforts and contributions even matter to the leader at all.
Morale and motivation start decreasing within this disenfranchised group,
while resentment and distrust builds not just towards the leader but the favored individuals as well.
Before long,office gossiping and pointed criticisms emerge,

(04:03):
sabotaging any semblance of positive team dynamics or culture.
Productivity takes a nosedive as energy shifts from collective work to managing interpersonal frictions.
Specific Negative Consequences To illustrate how favoritism plays out more specifically,

let me provide three examples of common negative consequences I have witnessed as a consultant across different organizational contexts (04:21):
Stifled Innovation - At a tech startup I worked with,
the CEO was clearly closest with two of the engineers,
routinely championing their ideas over others in meetings.

(04:42):
This created an environment where other high-potential contributors were afraid to propose new solutions,
for fear of being shot down or having ideas stolen by the favored few.
Innovation and creativity significantly declined as a result,
hampering the company's growth ambitions.
Information Siloing - At a manufacturing plant,the production manager handed important project details and responsibilities preferentially to a select handful of direct reports.

(05:13):
This closed loop made it near impossible for others to get up to speed or meaningfully contribute,
siloing critical knowledge and decision making.
Product rollouts suffered major delays and budget overruns as a result of reduced coordination and collaboration across departments.
Talent Exodus - A consulting firm I evaluated was losing mid-level associates at an alarming rate.

(05:38):
Upon interviewing departing staff,I discovered the primary reason cited was a perception that the partners only mentored and promoted a small clique of protégés,
ignoring everyone else's career development.
Top talent continually left feeling there was no future or opportunity for advancement if you weren't part of the favored inner circle.

(06:00):
In each case,the leader's preferential treatment severely hindered core business functions like progress,
efficiency and retention - demonstrating the practical downsides of favoritism beyond just morale impacts.
When preference replaces principles of equity, the costs can run deep for any organization.

(06:21):
Alternative Strategies for Equitable Leadership Given the behavioral and organizational issues stemming from favoritism,
what can leaders do instead to foster healthier and higher functioning teams through fair and inclusive treatment of all members?

Here are some research-backed strategies I've seen work well (06:36):
Distribute Recognition and Opportunities Equitably Make a point to learn about and highlight contributions from across the entire team on a regular basis at meetings,
in communications and rewards programs (Peterson,2004).
Routinely rotate high-profile project leadership,presentation opportunities,

(07:00):
training chances and more equally amongst competent staff (Koys,
2001).
Formally track involvement,recognize accomplishments and express gratitude for all individuals at equal intervals (Coyle,
2018).
Promote Psychological Safety and Voice for All Cultivate an environment where each person feels confident proposing ideas or raising concerns without judgment or fear of retaliation (Edmondson,

(07:29):
1999).
Proactively solicit diverse input especially from quieter voices and those on the margins to make them feel heard (Rock,
2009).
Address all questions and critiques respectfully to validate every team member's worth and contribution (Schein & Schein,

(07:49):
2018).
Adopt Objective Evaluation Criteria and Transparency Grade performance according to clear,
documented and commonly understood standards that apply equally to all (Folger & Konovsky,
1989).
Communicate rationales for all major decisions openly and afford right of appeal for fair re-consideration (Kim & Mauborgne,

(08:15):
1999).
Periodically survey staff regarding perceived fairness to check assumptions and make amends for any implicit biases uncovered (Lind,
2001).
By implementing equitable strategies like these mentioned above,
leaders can demonstrate appreciation for all individuals while motivating the whole team towards unity in working for shared success.

(08:41):
And the benefits are abundant - from enhanced retention and satisfaction,
to greater productivity through full participation and cohesion across the entire group.
A Ubiquitous Challenge with an Evidence-Based Solution As someone who has witnessed the harms of favoritism firsthand too many times throughout my consulting career,

(09:02):
I hope this essay helps convey why showing preference needs to stop being a go-to leadership approach.
The behavior undermines trust,divides teams and sabotages performance,
as research and lived experiences sadly continue corroborating.
However, the good news is it doesn't have to be this way.

(09:23):
By making a sincere commitment to fairness,inclusion and equity as core guiding principles,
leaders have a proven solution readily at their disposal to heal divisions and empower their entire staff.
With some self-awareness,effort and the right strategies,
favoritism can be replaced by equitable leadership yielding stronger bonds,

(09:46):
better results and healthier workplace cultures overall.
Our organizations and the people within them deserve nothing less.