The Role of Neopotism
Dictionary.com described nepotism as "patronage bestowed or favoritism shown on the basis of family relationship, as in business and politics" (Sorry, no OED on hand.)I believe that nepotism should extend to include close friends that are seen as family, and as a result, are held above and preferred over others in the workplace. Such managerial structure can cause a break down in communication, false assumptions and accusations, and other conflicts within the work environment.
After having worked in a administrative office based-off nepotism, I have observed many coworkers actions following along these lines: One of the preferred people states another coworker is irresponsible, rude, etc. The head managerial positions assumes this statement is true, and as a result, commences to act in such a manner that indicates he/she believes so. The worker accused is effected by such actions, vents to a not reliable source, and a gossip chain begins. This gossip returns to the person who stated the comment in the first-place, and now, that person can use to it to strengthen their argument against that person (using hearsay to do so). This nepotistic-hearsay trend will continue to either 1. that person quits 2. that person retaliates or 3. that person starts to "s*ck-up" to the initiator. Essentially, it is an evil pattern that only increases in veracity and damage until the person who hires on nepotism, the manager, stops it.
My manager will not stop it, but only defends it by statements such as "Gossip is at every workplace." Yes, she is correct that gossip exists at every workplace, but does every head administrator listen to such gossip as holding any truth? The concept of the telephone game should appeal to a fair-minded, intelligent administrator that gossip can be used to be aware of a situation, if one exists, but not the means to understand such situation and address the situation either directly or indirectly through actions and words. To do so only strengthens the negative impact of gossip, and as such, the lack of communication and trust in the workplace.
If the manager does not recognise their errors and the deep likelihood that the gossip can hurt their staff, what can a staff member do? Discussing the matter with the manager may work if they are a true, open-minded person. If they are not, though, one has to bide his or her time. This is what I am doing at this moment-
Bidding time allows one to think of this topic in a different light. It is impossible to escape it, as any communication will illustrate the situation either in minor or major tones, but the conscious consideration may lead to some insight. For example,is Eric not getting his work done because he is irresponsible? Or is he irresponsible because the workplace calls him so to such an extent that he wonders if he should endeavour to complete his tasks efficiently? Another one may be, what is the positive role of nepotism? Well, ideally, if the manager's friends and/or family hired are loyal people, the manager has a core leadership which they can trust and depend on. Even if some person in this leadership is creating an uncomfortable environment or situations for the other coworkers, at least the manager may rest easy in either the fallacy or reality of a cushioned seat in case she is rocked off- "you push me, my minions will push you back." This way, she does not have to wonder even if she acts fair-minded when dealing with her staff since it does not effect her or her position in the slightest. An ideal setting for the lazy, self-centered minded.
So, in short, since I am considering this situation from many angles, I can at least understand why a normal, self-comforting person would prefer a nepotistic managerial style- it makes their job easier!
After having worked in a administrative office based-off nepotism, I have observed many coworkers actions following along these lines: One of the preferred people states another coworker is irresponsible, rude, etc. The head managerial positions assumes this statement is true, and as a result, commences to act in such a manner that indicates he/she believes so. The worker accused is effected by such actions, vents to a not reliable source, and a gossip chain begins. This gossip returns to the person who stated the comment in the first-place, and now, that person can use to it to strengthen their argument against that person (using hearsay to do so). This nepotistic-hearsay trend will continue to either 1. that person quits 2. that person retaliates or 3. that person starts to "s*ck-up" to the initiator. Essentially, it is an evil pattern that only increases in veracity and damage until the person who hires on nepotism, the manager, stops it.
My manager will not stop it, but only defends it by statements such as "Gossip is at every workplace." Yes, she is correct that gossip exists at every workplace, but does every head administrator listen to such gossip as holding any truth? The concept of the telephone game should appeal to a fair-minded, intelligent administrator that gossip can be used to be aware of a situation, if one exists, but not the means to understand such situation and address the situation either directly or indirectly through actions and words. To do so only strengthens the negative impact of gossip, and as such, the lack of communication and trust in the workplace.
If the manager does not recognise their errors and the deep likelihood that the gossip can hurt their staff, what can a staff member do? Discussing the matter with the manager may work if they are a true, open-minded person. If they are not, though, one has to bide his or her time. This is what I am doing at this moment-
Bidding time allows one to think of this topic in a different light. It is impossible to escape it, as any communication will illustrate the situation either in minor or major tones, but the conscious consideration may lead to some insight. For example,is Eric not getting his work done because he is irresponsible? Or is he irresponsible because the workplace calls him so to such an extent that he wonders if he should endeavour to complete his tasks efficiently? Another one may be, what is the positive role of nepotism? Well, ideally, if the manager's friends and/or family hired are loyal people, the manager has a core leadership which they can trust and depend on. Even if some person in this leadership is creating an uncomfortable environment or situations for the other coworkers, at least the manager may rest easy in either the fallacy or reality of a cushioned seat in case she is rocked off- "you push me, my minions will push you back." This way, she does not have to wonder even if she acts fair-minded when dealing with her staff since it does not effect her or her position in the slightest. An ideal setting for the lazy, self-centered minded.
So, in short, since I am considering this situation from many angles, I can at least understand why a normal, self-comforting person would prefer a nepotistic managerial style- it makes their job easier!