Fencing And Favoritism: The Silent Killers Of Organizational Excellence
Every organization dreams of growth. It recruits talented people, invests in systems, and develops strategies designed to outperform competitors. Yet many organizations fail not because of external pressures but because of internal practices that quietly undermine performance. Two of the most damaging are employee territorialism, commonly called “fencing”, and favoritism.
These behaviours rarely appear on risk registers, yet they can cripple even the most promising organizations.
Consider the experience of a new employee joining a company full of enthusiasm and fresh ideas. Instead of receiving support, they encounter invisible barriers. Critical information is withheld, key meetings happen without their knowledge, and colleagues guard knowledge and relationships as personal assets. Rather than being welcomed as contributors, newcomers are treated as threats. This is workplace fencing.
At its core, fencing is driven by insecurity. Some employees believe their relevance depends on controlling information, access, or influence. They view collaboration as a risk rather than an advantage. As a result, knowledge is hoarded, silos emerge, and teamwork gives way to rivalry.
The damage extends beyond individual frustration. Organizations lose the benefits of fresh perspectives, innovation slows, and decision-making becomes concentrated in a few hands. Instead of building collective strength, employees focus on protecting personal territory.
Equally destructive is the race for managerial favour. In many workplaces, employees spend more energy being noticed than producing results. Meetings become platforms for self-promotion. Credit is strategically claimed. Visibility outweighs value. Over time, performance is judged less by impact and more by proximity to power.
When this happens, merit suffers. Talented employees who focus on delivering results rather than cultivating visibility often find themselves overlooked. Promotions, opportunities, and recognition increasingly go to those skilled at office politics rather than those creating genuine value.
The consequences are predictable. Motivation declines, trust erodes, and resentment grows. Employees begin to question whether hard work truly matters.
What makes favoritism particularly dangerous is that it is often subtle. Managers may unconsciously favourindividuals who share their background, communication style, or personal interests. Opportunities flow repeatedly to familiar faces while equally capable employees remain unseen. Without deliberate safeguards, these biases become embedded in organizational culture.
For emerging organizations, the consequences can be severe. Unlike large corporations with extensive resources and layers of institutional support, growing organizations rely heavily on collaboration, agility, and innovation. Every employee matters. Every missed opportunity carries a cost.
When talented employees become frustrated by exclusion or favoritism, they leave. Their departure takes more than skills out the door. It takes institutional knowledge, creativity, relationships, and morale. For a young organization, repeated losses of this kind can derail growth entirely.
Many organizations with brilliant ideas and strong market opportunities have failed because internal politics overwhelmed collective purpose. Strategy becomes secondary to personal agendas. Creativity is suppressed. Employees play it safe instead of contributing bold ideas. Energy that should be directed toward customers and innovation is wasted on internal battles.
Perhaps the most troubling aspect of fencing and favoritism is that they often disguise themselves as loyalty.
Employees may claim they are protecting standards, preserving culture, or safeguarding relationships. In reality, they are often protecting their own status and influence. What appears to be dedication is frequently fear; fear of being replaced, overlooked, or outperformed. The antidote lies in leadership.
Organizations thrive when leaders make it clear that influence is earned through contribution, competence, and collaboration, not through political manoeuvring. Recognition systems must reward results, teamwork, and innovation rather than visibility alone. Promotion decisions should be transparent and based on measurable achievements.
Leaders must also create accountability. Employees should understand that withholding information, excluding colleagues, or engaging in favour-seeking behaviours will not be tolerated. When people see that performance truly matters, trust begins to grow.
Equally important is effective onboarding. New employees should not be left to navigate organizational politics alone. Structured mentorship, open communication, and deliberate inclusion help newcomers integrate quickly and contribute confidently.
Organizations must also celebrate collaboration as intentionally as they celebrate individual success. Success is not a limited resource. Helping a colleague succeed does not diminish personal value; it strengthens the organization as a whole.
The most successful workplaces are not those where employees compete for the boss’s attention. They are those where employees compete to generate the best ideas, solve the toughest problems, and create lasting value. In such environments, knowledge flows freely, talent is nurtured, and achievement becomes a shared pursuit.
Fencing and favoritism may appear harmless at first, but left unchecked they corrode morale, discourage innovation, and drive away talent. For emerging organizations especially, these practices can mean the difference between growth and decline.
The future belongs to organizations that choose openness over exclusion, merit over favoritism, and collaboration over rivalry. Leaders who build such cultures will not only retain their best people; they will create organizations capable of sustained excellence in an increasingly competitive world.