Cronyism is a good word too! It's telling that the article didn't refer to it. Nor did it explain its harmful consequences, or strategies on how to contain it.

Cronyism is a good word too! It's telling that the article didn't refer to it. Nor did it explain its harmful consequences, or strategies on how to contain it. I think if the author was direct instead of elliptical, his article would have antagonized half of the audience he seeks to gain clout with. A clear delineation between good hires and cronies would probably rankle the manager types (of which I'm one) that perceive any negativity as cutting criticism.