Handling Favouritism and Perceived Bias: Safeguarding Trust in Teams

Few things damage trust in Indian workplaces as quickly as favouritism — or even the perception of it. Whether it is related to proximity to the boss, background, tenure, or personal rapport, perceived bias creates silent disengagement long before formal complaints surface.

In many organisations, managers may not intend to be biased, yet inconsistent decisions and opaque processes create exactly that impression. This article explains how HR can identify, address, and prevent favouritism while protecting trust and managerial credibility.

Why Favouritism Is a Sensitive Issue in India

Favouritism in Indian organisations is often intertwined with:

• Hierarchy and deference to authority

• Long-standing relationships and loyalty

• Family, community, or regional familiarity

• Informal access to decision-makers

Because of this, employees hesitate to speak up, fearing backlash or being labelled “political”.

How Perceived Bias Manifests at Work

Common indicators include:

• Repeated allocation of opportunities to the same individuals

• Unequal flexibility or leniency

• Selective access to information

• Uneven performance feedback

• Promotions or rewards without clear rationale

Perception matters as much as intent.

The HR Responsibility: Process Over Personality

HR’s role is not to question personal relationships, but to ensure decisions are defensible.

Key HR actions include:

• Defining clear criteria for decisions

• Ensuring consistency across teams

• Making decision rationale visible

• Auditing patterns over time

• Supporting managers in fair decision-making

Strong processes reduce dependence on personal discretion.

Addressing Perception Without Accusation

When bias is perceived, HR should:

• Listen without dismissing concerns

• Examine data and patterns calmly

• Discuss behaviours and outcomes, not motives

• Guide managers on corrective actions

• Communicate changes transparently where appropriate

Defensiveness escalates the issue; clarity resolves it.

Building Fairness Into Everyday Management

HR can embed fairness by:

• Standardising performance reviews

• Using diverse panels for promotions

• Rotating high-visibility assignments

• Training managers on unconscious bias

• Monitoring grievance themes discreetly

Fairness must be systematic, not personality-dependent.

When Escalation Is Necessary

Formal intervention is required when:

• Bias is repeated despite feedback

• There is evidence of discrimination

• Complaints involve protected categories

• Retaliation is suspected

In such cases, HR must act firmly and document outcomes.

Conclusion

In Indian workplaces, favouritism rarely announces itself openly. It operates quietly through patterns, access, and silence. HR’s effectiveness lies in creating systems where fairness is visible, decisions are explainable, and trust is protected — even when relationships exist.

Trust survives not because bias never occurs, but because it is addressed transparently and consistently.

HR Checklist: Preventing and Addressing Favouritism

🗹 Define objective criteria for key decisions
🗹 Monitor patterns across teams and time
🗹 Ensure consistency in flexibility and rewards
🗹 Make decision rationale visible where possible
🗹 Train managers on unconscious bias
🗹 Provide safe channels for concerns
🗹 Intervene early when perceptions arise
🗹 Escalate formally when fairness is compromised

Favouritism Scenarios and HR Safeguards

Conclusion--

Effective labour law compliance depends on how well HR operations, payroll, and business processes work together. When compliance is embedded into everyday workflows, organisations reduce risk, improve accuracy, and build sustainable governance systems. HR teams that prioritise integration over isolation are better positioned to manage compliance confidently and consistently.