The common conception of the cause of nepotism is favoritism. Which it is a lot of the time. What Austin Archer describes is more employers needing some second-hand validation in order to trust the person they’re going to hire. The trust issue is also pretty well known.
The trust issue means there’s a lack independent judgment. There aren’t enough good middlemen like Austen Heller and Kent Lansing.
I would guess that nepotism due to lack of independent judgment is more widespread than at least blatant favoritism, since blatant favoritism can be called out, and that overall it makes a bigger negative impact.
Do employers consciously choose the candidate whom they think is worse? I guess that most genuinely think whom they chose was more competent or is a better fit, but that they rationalize it or get their opinion second-hand.
This article suggests some solutions:
- Merit-Based Systems: Implementing transparent and merit-based selection processes to ensure that qualifications and abilities are the main criteria for employment and promotion.
- Anti-Nepotism Policies: Establishing clear policies and guidelines that explicitly prohibit the practice of nepotism in both public and private organizations.
- Public Awareness Campaigns: Raising awareness about the negative consequences of nepotism and promoting a culture of fairness and equal opportunity.
- Whistleblower Protection: Providing protection and incentives for individuals who expose cases of nepotism.
Those are good, but I guess hard to implement. The systems and policies could also become too bureaucratic. The best solution would be “improve independent judgment”. Though that’s hard to implement too since it means revolutionizing education.