When evaluating job applicants who graduated from a «top five» school, companies «attributed superior cognitive, cultural, and moral qualities to candidates who had been admitted to such an institution,
regardless of their actual performance» after they were actually hired.
Not exact matches
I don't mean run it in the red — I mean pay yourself a huge salary, reward yourself with a gigantic bonus
regardless of actual company
performance, and issue a special class
of shares that only you own that gives you ten times the dividends the other shareholders receive.
But only one type
of scholarship — the merit - based one — led to improvements in
actual performance,
regardless of how gifted the students in the need - based group were.
Or do citizens base their evaluations instead on such indicators as the racial or class makeup
of schools,
regardless of their relationship with
actual school
performance?
The
actual fund managers, fund family management, underlying investments held, management fee, and
performance are usually the same
regardless of the share class.
It makes it clear that the determining prerequisite is that there is a perceived conflict
of interest,
regardless of whether an
actual lack
of impartial
performance occurred: «the concept
of a conflict
of interest does not relate only to a situation in which a public official has a private interest which has actually influenced the impartial and objective
performance of his official duties -LRB-...) but also to a situation in which the interest identified may, in the eyes
of the public, appear to influence the impartial and objective
performance of his official duties» (emphasis added).