(A) and (I) Substitutions
I am back to the question of deciding on a just and effective hiring policy; namely to evaluate the practice of employing relatives, friends, and political associates to managerial positions, an accepted form of staffing that is common in many developing countries.
Western managers and consultants tend to recommend this practice be discontinued because it staffs the organization with incompetent people.
I have a commentary on the subject.
It is a common practice, mostly in developing countries, for a reason: there is no managerial sophistication. No job descriptions, no Key Performance Indicators by which people are monitored for their performance, no 360-performance appraisals, no tight budget controls.
Instead, the salient question/factor when deciding on a hiring policy in these countries is related to trust. Who is it that you can trust?
Trust becomes the key to decision making here and replaces managerial staffing and controls.
Removing trust as a determining factor in hiring and promoting without substituting it with professional controls leaves managers feeling vulnerable. How can I turn my back without feeling exposed?
Obviously the best policy is to satisfy both worlds, professional staffing and personal security.
In my consulting experience, I find that once the company learns about professional staffing and has performance controls in place, the practice of hiring by blood lines becomes minimal.
A company needs to regulate interdependence. If it can not do it by (A-Administration) it has to do it by (I-Integration). Removing the (I) without developing the (A) leaves the company vulnerable.
Ichak Kalderon Adizes