The need to ingratiate themselves with the boss hurts their self-esteem and makes them resentful, find Gareth Keeves, James Westphal and Michael McDonal

Keeves, Gareth

McDonald, Michael

Westphal, James

LSE Research Online

1/20/2017Office politics: When managers flatter the CEO, butundermine him with journalistsblogs.lse.ac.uk /businessreview/2017/01/20/office-politics-when-managers-flatter-the-ceo-but-undermine-him-with-journalists/Top managers of large companies are often called upon by journalists and other market observers to comment ontheir CEO’s leadership and strategy. Negative commentary is seen as particularly credible, and can significantlyinfluence the tone of the subsequent press coverage about the CEO. However, should negative commentary frominsiders be treated as an objective source of information about the chief executive?Our recent research offers caution – we identify an important internal political factor that can distort evaluations ofthe CEO, ironically causing managers to make negative comments about him/her to journalists, despite themanagers being positive to their boss’s face.There is continued pressure on top managers to build and maintain their relationship with the CEO. Ingratiation hasbeen shown to be a particularly common way that they achieve this; managers may flatter the boss withcompliments, or they may agree with his/her opinions in order to strengthen their relationship. However, while thesecomments may increase the CEO’s liking of the manager, we suggest why it may cause the manager to startresenting the boss.Resentment is a feeling derived from perceived unfairness in social exchanges – if we think someone is benefitingat our expense, we start to resent that person. While the CEO may enjoy the ingratiation – almost everyone likesbeing flattered – the experience is less pleasant for the manager undertaking the ingratiation. Indeed, we findevidence that ingratiation poses a threat to the managers’ positive self-regard, and that they attribute the cause ofthis esteem-threatening behavior to the CEO, causing them to start resenting him/her.We suggest three interrelated reasons why ingratiation may threaten the managers’ positive self-regard, leadingthem to resent the CEO:First, exaggerated praise and agreement often involves some degree of dissimulation or deceit, violating1/4ideals of authenticity in interpersonal relationships.Second, ingratiation is an act of submission that implicitly acknowledges dependence on the boss.Finally, most people have a desire to succeed based on talent or hard work, rather than for political reasons.Thus, given most people have a desire to view themselves as an authentic, independent person who succeeds byvirtue of talent and hard work, we suggest that ingratiating the boss risks damaging the managers’ positive self-regard, leading them to resent him/her.Resentment is a particularly insidious emotion, associated with thoughts and feelings about the ways in which theresented person may lose their benefits. Resentment is also associated with schadenfreude – pleasurable feelingsfrom causing harm to the resented person.One opportunity that the managers have to bring harm to the CEO is by making negative comments about him/herin their communications with journalists. Indeed, there are strong parallels between the manager’s ingratiation andthis form of harm: just as ingratiation affirms the CEO’s leadership capabilities and strategic judgment, negativestatements to journalists about his/her leadership disconfirm these capabilities. In addition, to the extent thatmanagers perceive ingratiation and the pleasure it brings the CEO to be undeserved, they may feel particularsatisfaction at the thought of the his/her displeasure upon receiving less-than-positive press coverage.What is of course interesting with these findings is that the CEO may be completely unaware of the weakenedsupport from management. Journalists typically withhold source names, so the CEO may have a hard timeidentifying the source of the negative commentary – why would they question the loyalty of managers who aresaying nice things to their face?This problem may well extend far beyond the immediate impact of the negative commentary from journalists that weexamine. While positive communication such as flattery tend to be relatively overt, resentment lies below thesurface, and social undermining occurs behind the scenes. As such, a chief executive may overestimate the supportof the top managers – one day those very same managers who he/she thought were being supportive, agreeing forexample with strategic decisions, may suddenly be advocating for the boss’s replacement.We also find some remarkable parallels in the differences in how ingratiation impacts the social relations of the CEOas compared to the ingratiating managers. Not only are the ingratiating managers likely to develop a morefavourable relationship with the boss, but the CEO is also more likely to recommend the managers for prestigiousboard positions, furthering their broader reputation. In comparison, resentment may damage the CEO’s relationshipwith the ingratiation managers, and their social undermining of their boss with journalists is likely to damage theCEO’s reputation with the broader business community.This all goes to show that politics inside organizations can influence external reputations. Negative commentaryfrom a company insider – something that on the face of it seems a pretty objective source of information – can bedistorted by the manager’s resentment towards the CEO. Compliments from top managers may bring bad news forthe CEO!♣♣♣Notes:This blog post is based on the authors’ paper Those Closest Wield the Sharpest Knife. How IngratiationLeads to Resentment and Social Undermining of the CEO, in Administrative Science Quarterly, January2017 The post gives the views of its author, not the position of LSE Business Review or the London School ofEconomics.Featured image credit: In the shadows, by ☻ , under a CC-BY-SA-2.0 licence2/4Featured image credit: In the shadows, by ☻ , under a CC-BY-SA-2.0 licence3/4Featured image credit: In the shadows, by ☻ , under a CC-BY-SA-2.0 licenceBefore commenting, please read our Comment Policy.Gareth Keeves is a doctoral candidate in strategy at the Ross School of Business, University ofMichigan. His current research interests include impression management and impressionformation in the context of corporate leadership.  James Westphal is the Donald C. Cook Professor of Business Administration, Professor ofStrategy, and Chair of Strategy at the Ross School of Business, University of Michigan. His currentresearch interests include corporate governance, symbolic and institutional processes, socialinfluence, and corporate elites. He received his Ph.D. in organization behavior from NorthwesternUniversity. Michael McDonald is an associate professor in the Department of Management at the Universityof Texas at San Antonio. His research focuses on the social networks of executive leaders andhow they influence organizational-level outcomes, including organizational strategy andperformance. He also studies factors that influence the effectiveness of boards of directors. Hereceived his Ph.D. in management from the University of Texas at Austin.    Copyright © 2015 London School of Economics4/4

Office politics: When managers flatter the CEO, but undermine him with journalists

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

LSE Research Online