Brazilian polarization is no longer a noise of family group and began to guide trust, affinity and judgment in relationships. Neither escaped him. When and in promotion decisions, the cost is not only moral, it is economical: teams lose quality, decisions are biased and productivity does not grow.
Concrete evidence, with data from Brazil between 2002 and 2019: employers are about what would be expected in the same local market. Within the companies, who is from the party of the boss receives salary awards and rises faster, while affiliates. In numbers, comparing colleagues in the same firm and year, the Copartisan salary prize reaches 3.8% and, controlling the occupation, remains at 2.8%. There is an average penalty of 1.6% for those who are different party and clear advantage in promotions, both in the passage to administrative functions and in the jump to management positions. These findings are “by Emanuele Colonnelli, Valdemar Pinho Neto and Edoardo Teso at the American Economic Review.
As this result is reached: the authors connect rais (annual relationship of social information), data from and party affiliation of the (Superior Electoral Court) to measure how much entrepreneurs and workers align politically in the formal market. Measure this fit with an index of matching and compare billions of pairs worker/owner within very thin markets. They look at the dynamics with an event study: When the owner changes party, they increase signings and salary wage of the “new party” and fall those of the previous one, something difficult to attribute only to personal networks. Within the firm, compare colleagues in the same year and, when necessary, in the same function, so that prizes and penalties do not confuse with differences in office. To isolate discrimination, they experiment with real employers: Almost identical curricula receive only discrete signs of affiliation and the Copartisan are systematically better evaluated.
A crucial point of the research is to separate clientelism discrimination, take it there, give it here with the public power. If this were the engine, we would see the internal alignment grow when the owner’s party wins the local election or in sectors more dependent on public contracts. This is not what appears. From event study to curriculum experiment, the evidence indicates that with authorities when hiring and promoting.
This is efficiency, not only equity. Copartisans are, on average, negatively selected in education in management positions and firms with the largest fraction of aligned grow less than their peers. In a country that needs productivity increases, using the ballot box as HR filter is choosing to walk with the hand brake pulled. And it is not worth calling “cultural cohesion”. If you work to “my political side” were a benefit valued by the employee, the salary should be lower as compensation, as in fact, it usually occurs in non -profit organizations in which purpose alignment usually compensates for minor wages. In this evidence presented, what is seen is the reverse, a preference of the employer that is not linked to results.
This picture talks to affective polarization literature, when the opponent becomes “another moral” and party identity contaminates judgments far beyond politics. Party animosity, previously restricted to public themes, overflows for consumption, friendships and, like here, to team decisions. It is a deviation of perception and incentives that erod relationships and results.
The output undergoes process improvements. Blind screenings to party clues, structured interviews, observable criteria and regular audits that confront promotion and salary with performance. Politics takes place in the ballot box and debate, should not be a criterion in the payroll.
Gift Link: Did you like this text? Subscriber can release seven free hits from any link per day. Just click on F Blue below.
