People who are used to social struggle instead of cooperation choose the bad guys, — research

A study conducted by American sociologists has shown that people who perceive society as a mere environment fierce competition, they often prefer antagonistic leaders.

At the same time, people who are more inclined to cooperative relationships are more likely to consider such leaders ineffective. The researchers surveyed more than 2,000 participants about coercive behaviors — such as threats or blaming others for problems — and noted that reactions to such behaviors were not universal, but instead depended on the worldview of the observer. 

These results show that people who view the world as an environment of ruthless, competitive struggle, evaluate antagonistic leaders as more competent and effective compared to those who believe that members of society are not so separated from each other.

PhD student at Columbia Business School in New York, co-author of the study Christine Nguyen with a colleague, social psychologist at Columbia University Business School Daniel Ames to test this hypothesis surveyed 2065 US residents, asking them to take part in seven different tests. The study defined antagonistic behavior as mean, cruel, and intimidating behavior, as opposed to friendly and helpful behavior. Each survey included 10 attitudinal questions asking participants to indicate their level of agreement with various statements.

Options included responses from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. In another survey, participants were asked to assess the impact of behaviors such as threats, blaming others, or aggressive behavior. Response options ranged from “will significantly impair their ability to deliver results” to “will significantly enhance their ability to deliver results.”

Another survey asked participants to express their own reactions to hypothetical images of workplaces run by people with varying degrees of antagonistic behavior. Finally, the last survey asked participants to evaluate real business leaders, including Tim Cook of Apple and Bob Iger of Walt Disney. Participants had to answer whether they believed that one or the other CEO used antagonistic behavior for the sake of career growth. 

Across all surveys, people who viewed the world as competitive were more likely to view antagonistic leaders as competent. In other words, those who were more convinced of society’s inherent cruelty were more likely to see antagonistic actions as positive or effective. When people with this mindset were asked to evaluate CEOs, they assumed that leaders use confrontational tactics to help them succeed in their careers.

Previous research has shown that people’s perceptions of behavior are partly influenced by factors such as their job and location. To help people thrive and find fulfillment in their work, we need to understand not only how and why managers behave the way they do, but also how and why people perceive managers the way they do.

Leaders need to recognize that people judge them not only by their outward behavior, but also by their beliefs. While a leader may believe that his or her leadership style is evaluated in isolation from the workplace, the study looks at its impact in a broader context.

Meanwhile, the authors of the study warn that since it involved only US residents, it may not be relevant on a global scale. Nevertheless, Nguyen and Ames hope that their work will inspire people to think about how they perceive the leaders around them, and leaders to think about how they perceive their influence.

The results of the study are published in the journal Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Source: LiveScience