When Favoritism Turns Your Team Against You
It's natural to feel more connected to some employees than others. Here's how to ensure you aren't letting favoritism make your team resent you.
Now is the time to get a jump start on your 2026 strategic planning. That way, you go into the holidays with clarity and peace of mind.
If you’re a CEO, let’s set up a 30-minute call to discuss. I am happy to talk through your strategic objectives for next year what challenges/opportunities you’re facing.
You never want to take the metaphor of “leader as parent” too far, because it starts to feel patronizing.
That said… there are some similarities.
One of them is that as a parent, you can’t play favorites, or even appear to. Part of being a good mom or dad is making sure you devote equal time and attention to each child.
When leading a team, you face a similar challenge. Favoring one employee over others for factors unrelated to their performance creates havoc on a team.
But a LOT of leaders still do it. A study by Georgetown University's McDonough School of Business found that 84 percent of surveyed executives saw favoritism at work in their own organizations. Almost a quarter (23 percent) even acknowledged practicing it themselves.
The perception of favoritism goes beyond who gets raises, bonuses, and promotions. How many times have you seen a CEO and one of his or her executives totally attached at the hip, to the exclusion of other execs on the team? How many times have you worked for a manager who gave information to one or two of your colleagues while leaving everyone else in the dark?
If you’ve got a hybrid-remote team, this dynamic can become even more pronounced as remote employees feel left out of informal conversations and impromptu meetings that naturally happen in the office.
In these examples, attention from the leader and special access to information gives a higher status to some members of the team, creating an in-group and an out-group. Like clockwork, that kicks off a threat response in the out-group employees, which in turn leads to disengagement, resentment, and low performance.
It also hurts, literally. Neuroscience research shows that social exclusion activates the same pain centers in our brains as physical injury.
Here are three things to consider as you examine whether you are unconsciously showing favoritism as a leader.
1. Accept that you have natural inclinations toward some of your employees.
Whether it's someone you have worked with for a decade or someone whose personality simply clicks with yours, it is natural to be biased toward certain members of your team. We're hardwired for these preferences. Psychologists call it “affinity bias,” and it's one of the most common unconscious biases in the workplace. Those strong relationships are great, but you are responsible for leading every team member. Clear out time to spend with each person who reports to you, getting to know their personalities, strengths, and quirks.
2. Don't confuse building a high-performing team with favoritism.
You will naturally have a mix of A, B, and C players on any team. It's your job as a manager to retain the As, grow the Bs, and work with the Cs to either improve performance or find a position that fits them better. There's a big difference between:
(a) smartly tailoring your approach to these performance categories, and
(b) showing careless favoritism based on personality, assumptions or other factors.
Each team member should be given access to the same essential resources and information as everyone else, but also evaluated by and rewarded for the actual value they bring to the team.
Think of it like a coach who gives different training regimens to different athletes based on their skills and potential, while ensuring everyone gets equal access to facilities and coaching time.
3. Expectation-setting is the perfect antidote to favoritism.
One way to ensure that you're treating employees fairly across the board is to sit with them individually at the beginning of the quarter and come up with the key metrics and goals they will be assessed on.
Document these conversations and make them visible to the broader team when appropriate. That transparency builds trust and reduces speculation about hidden agendas. If both you and the employee are on the same page about these expectations, you'll have a solid foundation for the feedback and coaching you give them. At the same time, they will be less likely to feel that any promotions, bonuses or opportunities you give out are rooted in favoritism or office politics.
Along similar lines, practice process fairness. As this must-read HBR article explains, process fairness is the practice of explaining the process—the inputs, options, and reasoning—behind key decisions. If you tell your team explicitly why you made certain decisions affecting them, they will be less likely to speculate about whether you’re playing favorites, even if they still disagree with your decision.
This week, think about how you work with your team. Are you showing undue preferential treatment to some? Neglecting others?
Ask yourself: If I tracked my calendar, would I see roughly equal face time with each direct report? Do I share important updates with everyone simultaneously, or do some people hear things first?
The members of your team will never exist on a completely level playing field, but it's your duty to make each of them feel they are getting the attention, opportunity, and leadership they deserve.
Joel I love how you've tackled such a universal leadership challenge with both empathy and practical solutions. The neuroscience backing about social exclusion triggering actual pain centers really drives home why this matters beyond just "office politics."
An additional dynamic I've observed is that favouritism often becomes self-reinforcing because the "favoured" employees start performing better simply due to increased access and confidence, which then validates the leader's initial bias. It creates a dangerous feedback loop where the leader thinks, "See, I was right to invest more in Sarah. Look how much better she's doing than the others."
The real tragedy is that the "out-group" employees often have untapped potential that never gets discovered because they're operating from a threat state. When people feel excluded, their cognitive resources get hijacked by survival mode, literally making them less creative and productive.
If I may, one writing tip that I think would make this better is to reorder the solutions. Your three solutions are solid, but consider reordering them. Start with #3 (expectation-setting) because it's the most actionable and gives readers an immediate win. Then move to #1 (accepting natural inclinations) as the mindset shift, and finish with #2 (performance vs. favouritism) as the deeper strategic thinking. This creates a progression from "what to do Monday morning" to "how to think differently long-term."
In my experience as a newsletter ghostwriter for C-suite executives, this structure is great because it gives busy leaders immediate momentum with something they can implement right away, then builds their understanding progressively. It reduces the overwhelm that often keeps people from acting on good advice, increasing the likelihood they'll actually apply your insights.
Good piece overall. Thank you so much for sharing.