Everyone has known 'sharks' in their work, you know those unscrupulous people who address others with contempt and even nastiness. But is this the best solution to climb the social ladder?
You know the ruthless world of work? Some people think that being rude, selfish and manipulative helps a career, but a study by two experts from the famous American University of Berkeley proves the opposite.
This singular research has looked at individuals with selfish, combative and manipulative personalities, from their studies to where they have made a career.
In the Bekerley News, it is mentioned that the researchers conducted two studies of people who performed personality assessments as undergraduates at three different universities. Ten years later, they questioned these same people about their power and rank in the hierarchy of their workplace. They also met their colleagues. Overall, specialists have found that people who score high for unpleasant traits are no more likely to achieve power than those who are generous, trustworthy, and generally kind.
And the results are clear: being a "shark" did not make them move forward.
“I was surprised at the consistency of the results. No matter the individual or the context, the obnoxious people did not have an advantage in the competition for power, even in the most ruthless and doggy organizational cultures. -eat-dog '(Editor's note: American expression which translates:' dogs eat dogs'), "said Cameron Anderson, professor at Berkeley Haas, who co-wrote the study with Oliver P. John, professor of psychology at UC Berkeley, Daron L. Sharps, doctoral student at Berkeley Haas, and Christopher J. Soto, associate professor at Colby College.
The article was published August 31 in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
"Any increase in power they get by being intimidating is offset by their poor interpersonal relationships," the study's authors explain.
Additionally, the researchers found that extroverts were more likely to advance within their organizations, due to their sociability, energy, and self-confidence. These results are confirmed by previous research.
"The bad news is that organizations often hand over leadership to nasty people rather than nice people," Anderson said. "In other words, they allow 'sharks' to take power at the same rate as anyone else, even though the latter when in power can cause serious damage to the organization of the world. 'business".
Exclude aggression
But how do you define a 'shark'? The participants in this research had all completed the 'Big Five Inventory' (BFI). It is an assessment based on the consensus of psychologists on the five fundamental dimensions of the personality: openness to experience, awareness, extroversion, neurosis and friendliness. It was developed by Anderson co-author John, who runs the Berkeley Personality Lab.
"Unpleasant people tend to be hostile and abusive towards others, to deceive and manipulate others for their own gain, and to ignore the concerns or well-being of others," say the specialists.
The second study asks about the four main ways people gain power: through dominant-aggressive behavior, or by using fear and intimidation – through political behavior, or by creating alliances with influential people – through community behavior, or helping others – and through competent behavior, or being good at one's job.
Researchers say that while disagreeable people tend to adopt dominant behavior, their lack of sociability negates any advantage their aggressiveness gives them.
“Strong alliances are generally important for gaining power in all walks of life,” said Cameron Anderson. "Nasty politicians may have a harder time maintaining the necessary alliances because of their toxic behavior."