Impact of Stereotyping
The use of stereotypes prevents us from getting to know one another and interacting effectively
based on individuating information. Stereotyping is an error that all the organizations want to
avoid. But it is hard to change individual’s personality and mindset to uproot stereotyping. So
unfortunately, in workplaces it is a very common bias. Our chosen organization Hifs Agro Foods
is no exception.
Though the company, Hifs Agro Foods discourage the employees to perform any type of
stereotyping, there are some acute pieces of stereotyping evidence while recruiting or working in
the team.
 Ageism: Despite considering the skillset of a person while recruiting for a position, there
are times when the company prefers young individual to older one. When, two candidates
of the same skill level apply for a position and one is older than the other, the company
prefers the younger one as they think he/she has more potential and much more to offer
than the older one. In the past, the company has seen enough older employees to struggle
with gadgets. As a result, they now post them in such positions where they need the least
gadget engagement. In this way, the older employees are stereotyped as less skilled in
technological gadgets.
 Stereotyping based on gender: The male-female worker ratio in the company is almost
50:50. The gender roles are never considered for recruitment or salary increment,
whereas for promotional activities, women are preferred.
But for some managerial positions, the company prefers men to women. In this way,
sometimes, women are considered to possess less eligibility.
 Stereotyping based on culture: While recruiting the company doesn’t discriminate
based on cultural differences. There are tribal employees along with the Bengali
employees. And they are not stereotyped for their differences.
 Stereotyping based on religion: There are employees from every religion in the
company as they only consider the skillset of an individual while recruiting.
 Stereotyping based on economic class: The case of discrimination by class has never
occurred nor even filed as a complaint in the company. The company has such policies
that, if the employees complain now, the company will obviously take that into serious
consideration.
 Stereotyping between the team members: In the factory, the works are divided into
teams such as production, packaging, etc. Teams are normally formed based on the
worker’s skillset. The factor of diversity is never considered during formation, it’s all
about who can work better or not. One policy the company follows is that the decision of
the team leader is final. So, if any conflict within teams occurs due to stereotyping or
other issues, it is supposed to be resolved by the team leader. Yet, if the team leader fails
to do that, management helps them solve it, but it is marked as a bad track record for the
team leader. The management has the least interest to interfere in team conflicts. On the
other hand, if the conflict happens with the team leader, and the team member complains
to the management over the leader, the management again tries to solve this but here, the
bad track is marked against that team member because the company thinks if a member
can’t cope up with the decisions his leader makes, he isn’t a good fit for the company.
Thus, going over to reporting boss to complain about something is highly discouraged.
On the other hand, in managerial positions, all the tasks are performed individually and
unless it’s a specialized project or something, there are never any team tasks.
In the past, there have been some issues with fake discrimination filing to demean the accused
one’s reputation. Because of the existing stereotyping, it led to conflicts between the employees
which provoked them to take such unethical actions against their own peers. Those fake
discrimination cases had created quite severe company politics. Those obviously decreased
productivity and might have decreased some other one’s commitment.