Following is the summary of a recent MSPB report on real and perceived favoritism in the federal workplace.
The Merit System Principles (MSPs) promote an effective Federal workforce free of Prohibited PersonnelPractices (PPPs). Summarized under nine aspirational goals, the MSPs serve as the foundation of Federalemployment policy and practice, workplace fairness, and the Federal Government’s ability to effectivelyaccomplish its goals. As codified at 5 U.S.C. § 2301(b)(1), the first merit system principle demandsthat Federal employees be recruited “from all segments of society” and selected and advanced “solelyon the basis of relative ability, knowledge, and skills, after fair and open competition.” Further, under5 U.S.C. § 2301(b)(8)(A), Federal employees are to be protected against “personal favoritism.”
The Merit System Principles guide Federal supervisors to base their workforce decisions (e.g., hiring,promoting, giving awards, and distributing assignments) on objective criteria, such as assessments ofability or performance, rather than personal feelings and/or relationships, lest they be viewed as practicingpersonal favoritism. In brief, “personal favoritism” occurs when a supervisor or selecting official grants anadvantage to one employee or applicant but not another similarly situated employee or applicant basedon friendship or other affinity rather than a legitimate merit-based reason. Favoritism is distinct fromdiscrimination on legally protected bases and is frequently more difficult to clearly identify when it isoccurring given the absence of visible cues on which the preference is made. However, like discrimination,favoritism is contrary to the ideals of the Federal merit systems.
This report summarizes the findings of MSPB’s research into employee perspectives regarding the extentto which they believe that favoritism occurs within the Federal merit systems and its potential effects. Theresults of our surveys and in-depth discussions with groups of employees indicate that the majority ofFederal employees believe that discrimination based on the legally protected classes of race/ethnicity, sexand age has decreased over the past 15 years. However, many employees remain unconvinced that theyare treated fairly in all aspects of their careers. In particular, a significant percentage of Federal employeesbelieve that personal favoritism undermines merit-based decision making.
Eliminating perceptions of favoritism has proven extremely challenging. Supervisors and employees oftenhave conflicting opinions as to the influence of favoritism on the supervisor’s decisions, which may resultfrom their differing perspectives or due to differential access to varying types and amounts of informationabout their supervisors’ decisions.
Therefore, the purpose of this report is to reduce the likelihood that favoritism is occurring (or believedto be occurring) by providing recommendations for strengthening supervisory and managerial practiceswhile also identifying steps that employees can take to improve their understanding of the merit systemsand their ability to advance within them.
Findings
The workplace is a complex social environment. Multiple parties view situations from different perspectivesand interpret actions based on their own experiences and expectations. Supervision is a demanding rolethat requires a careful balancing of responsibilities to ensure the effective and efficient management ofemployees while accomplishing the organization’s mission. As part of their critical role, supervisors mustallocate work responsibilities and limited resources according to necessarily subjective evaluations. In anideal world, the supervisor’s actions are truly merit-based, and this is readily apparent to all observers,including employees and human resources management (HRM) staff.
Unfortunately, the typical work environment features ambiguity that precludes full confidence in supervisorsmaking merit-based decisions. For example, supervisors may be unable to exercise adequate transparencyso others feel confident in the propriety of these decisions. On other occasions, supervisors may intend toabide by the MSPs, but lack the knowledge, experience or tools to make merit-based decisions or may beinadvertently influenced by nonmerit factors due to a lack of awareness. And finally, not all supervisorsfully embrace the merit system principles and seek to circumvent them by intentionally favoring someemployees based on factors unrelated to merit.
According to MSPB survey results, about one in four Federal employees believe that their supervisorpractices favoritism and over half suspect that other supervisors in their organization practice favoritism.
Three out of ten HRM employees agreed that favoritism occurs in the organizations that they service.
Although virtually every interaction between a supervisor and employee can involve perceptions offavoritism, employees were most likely to report witnessing favoritism through social interactions (27percent agreed their supervisor demonstrated favoritism through social interactions). Almost as frequentwere perceptions of favoritism regarding traditional benefits that supervisors may bestow upon employees:
* desirable work assignments (26 percent), awards (23 percent), performance appraisal ratings (21 percent),
* promotions (21 percent), and acting supervisor opportunities (21 percent).
Employees may also suspect favoritism when they are not selected for promotions within their organizations,particularly if they do not receive feedback when they were not selected. Honest feedback from the selectingofficial can serve two vital purposes: 1) to help employees improve their readiness for future opportunitiesand 2) to provide transparency to decrease perceptions of favoritism.
Likely causes of perceived favoritism include:
1. Intentional favoritism, where the supervisor intends to make decisions based on personalconnections rather than merit;
2. Unintentional favoritism, where the supervisor’s decisions have been influenced by interpersonalrelationships without the supervisor’s conscious awareness or a lack of knowledge or tools to helpthe supervisor make merit-based decisions; and
3. A misperception by employees, such as when professional relationships exist that do not conflictwith the merit systems, or when a mentor or supervisor provides more opportunities to those whodemonstrate the ability and motivation to take on new roles.
Regardless of the underlying reasons, perceptions of workplace favoritism can have harmful consequences for employees and the organization, to include—
* Decreased employee satisfaction and engagement;
* Decreased capability to recruit and retain highly qualified employees;
* Increased conflict between employees and between employees and management; and
Decreased agency performance.
Recommendations
To achieve the goals of fair and effective management of the Federal workforce, organizations must establish clear expectations for supervisors, ranging from first-line supervisors to top executives. Supervisors must be aware of employees’ perceptions and exercise sound judgment when making a variety of decisions such as selections, work assignments, training, performance management, and providing workplace flexibilities. In addition, selecting officials greatly influence hiring actions through a myriad of determinations regarding the recruitment and hiring process. Those with the responsibility for making these decisions must recognize the potential cumulative effect of their actions—not only on their direct reports and those not selected for vacancies—but also those at a greater distance who hear of decisions made by supervisors within their organizations.
In order to foster the respect of their employees and maintain the integrity of the Federal merit systems—both of which have substantial impact on outcomes for individuals and organizations—supervisors need to hold themselves accountable (and be held accountable by their agency leadership) for making the best possible decisions. This can be accomplished through the following strategies.
Agency leaders should:* Communicate strong support of the MSPs and avoidance of the PPPs.
* Select supervisors based on their ability and willingness to manage employees fairly and effectively.
* Provide supervisors with the necessary training so they understand—not only the content of the merit system principles and the prohibited personnel practices—but also practical examples of actions that might be perceived as favoritism.
* Hold supervisors accountable for violating the prohibited personnel practices.
* Provide employees with information regarding the merit system principles and prohibited personnel practices and their relevance to decisions made within the organization.
Supervisors should:
* Honor the spirit and intent of the merit system principles and strive to avoid any actions that might cause employees to suspect a violation of a prohibited personnel practice.
* Make appropriate use of management flexibilities and seek the advice of HRM experts when needed.
* Make decisions (e.g., regarding selections for promotions, career-enhancing work assignments, training opportunities, and awards) that are objective and based on work-related criteria, rather than relying upon more subjective feelings.
* Assess the needs of the work group in terms of competencies and actively strive to fill these gaps through selection and/or training.
* Document decisions carefully and exercise transparency, whenever possible, such as by providing feedback to employees.
* Rotate acting supervisor responsibilities among those who are qualified and interested as this is a key developmental opportunity.
* Treat all employees with respect.
* Facilitate two-way discussions with all employees.
* Maintain awareness of employees’ abilities, goals and interests and distribute opportunities in a manner that considers both employee and organizational needs.
* Exercise supervisory duties with care, such as by providing ongoing feedback to employees regarding
their performance.
Human resources management staff should:
* Appropriately advise supervisors to support the merit system principles and avoid prohibited personnel practices.
* Work with supervisors to identify job-related criteria and incorporate these into all of the steps of the recruitment, selection and performance management processes.
* Take appropriate action when they witness violations of the merit system principles and prohibited personnel practices.
Employees should:
* Seek honest feedback and strive to improve in preparation for future opportunities.
* Understand that there may be alternative explanations for decisions that may appear to involve personal favoritism.
* Consider options (e.g., discussing with the supervisor how to achieve a more favorable outcome in the future, seeking employment elsewhere or filing a complaint with the Office of Special Counsel) when they suspect personal favoritism is occurring to determine what would be the best course of action.
Given responsibilities for test security and confidentiality, supervisors cannot always exercise the level of transparency that applicants and employees might want regarding certain human resources management processes, such as selections, performance appraisals, and disciplinary actions. However, organizations owe it to themselves, their employees, and the public to strive to achieve the highest levels of fairness, efficiency and effectiveness. By working together to eradicate actual and perceived favoritism, agencyleaders, supervisors, HRM staff and employees can foster a Federal workplace that successfully embodiesthe ideals of the merit system principles.
