Hi Reader, I’m glad you’re here.

One of the trickier parts of managing people is trying to be fair. We all want to be consistent, avoid playing favorites, and make decisions people can trust. Sounds simple enough, right?

Until two employees ask for the same Friday off.

And just like that, you're having a conversation about fairness.

"But you let Sarah take Friday off!"

Yes, you did. Sarah requested it three weeks ago, when coverage was available. The second request came yesterday, after two other employees had already scheduled time off.

Same request, different answer. But does that make the decision unfair?

Not necessarily. Somewhere along the way, we've gotten the idea that being a fair manager means treating everyone exactly the same. Same rules, same flexibility, same opportunities, same answers. It sounds reasonable, and it certainly seems easier to defend.

But fairness isn't about making every outcome identical. It's about making decisions using consistent, reasonable standards.

And sometimes those standards lead to different answers.

The Circumstances Matter

Think about how we apply workplace policies. Two employees have attendance issues. One has a repeated pattern of unexcused absences, while the other has a first-time issue with circumstances that need to be considered. The same policy applies, but that doesn't mean the response should automatically be identical.

Of course, policies and legal requirements matter, including situations involving protected leave or accommodations. But even when those aren't factors, managers still need to exercise judgment.

The better question isn't simply whether everyone received the same answer. It's whether we applied the same standards, considered the relevant circumstances, and made a decision we can reasonably support.

And this goes well beyond policies.

Consider two employees with very different levels of experience. One has been doing the job for years and consistently delivers good work. The other is relatively new and still figuring things out.

Giving both employees the exact same level of oversight might look consistent on paper, but it probably won't serve either of them particularly well. Your experienced employee may wonder why you've suddenly developed such an interest in their daily activities, while your newer employee may be wishing you'd check in a little more often.

Both employees should be held to the expectations of their roles. But how you support them in meeting those expectations can, and probably should, look different.

That's part of the judgment that comes with leading people.

Fair or Favorite?

Now, there's an important distinction between treating people differently for legitimate reasons and simply playing favorites.

Maybe you give a dependable employee more flexibility because they've demonstrated they can manage their work independently. That's a decision you can support.

But what if you give someone more opportunities because you enjoy working with them? Or overlook behavior from one employee that you'd address immediately with another?

That's where we need to be willing to examine our own reasoning.

We all have employees we naturally connect with more easily. That's human. The challenge is making sure those relationships aren't quietly influencing decisions about opportunities, accountability, or flexibility.

And while employees won't always know every factor behind a decision, they do notice patterns. When those patterns seem inconsistent or unexplained, trust can take a hit.

You don't owe the entire team an explanation of Sarah's personal circumstances, and sometimes confidentiality means you can't share much at all. But you can explain how decisions are generally made.

For example, "We consider staffing needs and the order requests are received" gives employees something useful to understand.

"Because that's what I decided" probably won't win you any points.

Even if you are, technically, the person who decided.

Try This Week

Think about a decision you're making that could leave someone asking, “Why do they get to do that, but I don't?”

Before you make the call, run through these three questions:

1. What's the standard?​
What expectation, policy, or criteria should guide this decision?

2. What actually makes these circumstances different?​
Focus on relevant facts, not assumptions or personal preferences.

3. Would I make the same decision for someone else in similar circumstances?​
If the answer is no, it's worth understanding why.

And once you've made the decision, communicate what you can about the reasoning. You won't always be able to explain every detail of your decision, but you should be able to explain the principles behind it. And if you're struggling to do that, it may be worth taking another look before moving forward.

The Bottom Line

Fairness doesn't mean everyone will get the same answer. And it certainly doesn't mean everyone will agree with the answer they get.

What people should be able to count on is that the standards don't change depending on who's asking, that circumstances are considered thoughtfully, and that decisions aren't based on personal preference.

You won't make everyone happy. If you've figured out how to make that happen, please share. Managers everywhere would like a word.

But you can build a team that trusts how decisions are made, even when the answers are different.

And that's a much better measure of fairness.

Sometimes It Helps to Talk It Through

Leadership doesn't always come with a clear answer. Sometimes you need a fresh perspective, a chance to work through your options, or a little practice before a conversation you've been putting off.

That's where I come in. Through leadership coaching, workshops, and manager development, I help managers navigate the real situations that come with leading people.

If you or your organization could use that kind of support, just reply to this email. I'd be happy to talk.

Kristine Dias Leadership Coach & Trainer | KMD Advisory LLC ​Website | LinkedIn​

Manager Minutes is a newsletter for leaders who want to get better at the human side of management, one issue at a time.