“Perhaps in future it would be better if all involved accepted the age
old adage that private parties are just that.” So wrote Nathaniel
Rothschild in his now infamous letter to the Times newspaper about
George Osborne, the shadow chancellor. Rothschild’s letter was short,
sharp, punishment, meted out because Osborne broke one of high society’s
unwritten rules.

Unwritten rules surround us, some we are aware of and others we are not,
because they are unconscious. In both cases there are consequences for
breaking these rules. For example, stereotypes are powerful sources of
unwritten rules. When you think of a leader what sort of person springs
to mind? For most of us the answer will be a man, especially a tall man.
Take the workplace. Recent research by the Cranfield School of
Management showed that women held just 12 per cent of board seats at
FTSE 100 companies. Meanwhile, Psychologists have found that tall men
earn more than their shorter counterparts - a man who is 6 feet tall
earns, on average, nearly $166,000 more during a 30-year career than a
man who is 5 feet 5 inches.

This is because women, and short men, break our unwritten rules. We
expect our leaders to show signs of ’strength’ such as a large stature
and a deep voice. However, these examples show that unwritten rules can
be neither fair nor helpful. Importantly, we can also fall foul of our
own rules. Take Warren Harding who was president of the United States
from 1921-1923. In his book ‘Blink’, Malcolm Gladwell draws on evidence
describing Harding as “Looking like a President”; his biographer wrote
that his “lusty black eyebrows contrasted with his steel-grey hair to
give the effect of force, his massive shoulders and bronzed complexion
gave the effect of health.” In essence, this was a man who appealed
directly to out unwritten rules about what a leader should look like.
Unfortunately for the American electorate, Harding has also been
described as “one of the worst presidents in American history”. His
limited intellect and unclear direction meant that he was, in many
respects, an ineffectual leader. The voters’ unwritten rules blinded
them to the rather disappointing reality.

This poses a real problem for organisations that can’t (or won’t)
challenge and change these types of unwritten rules. The result is
talent management, promotions, and hiring processes which play to
stereotypes, hunches, and ‘intuition’, favouring those who meet the
rules but not the real needs. The result, like Harding, can be someone
who looks like they can do a job which, in reality, is beyond them,
whilst those who are capable are either frustrated bystanders or are
busy succeeding elsewhere. In the current climate who can afford that?