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.
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.