Workers Who Love 'Synergizing Paradigms' Might Be Bad at Their Jobs (cornell.edu)
- Reference: 0180926370
- News link: https://it.slashdot.org/story/26/03/08/0216238/workers-who-love-synergizing-paradigms-might-be-bad-at-their-jobs
- Source link: https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2026/03/workers-who-love-synergizing-paradigms-might-be-bad-their-jobs
> Published [2]in the journal Personality and Individual Differences , research by cognitive psychologist Shane Littrell introduces the Corporate Bullshit Receptivity Scale (CBSR), a tool designed to measure susceptibility to impressive-but-empty organizational rhetoric... Corporate BS seems to be ubiquitous - but Littrell wondered if it is actually harmful. To test this, he created a "corporate bullshit generator" that churns out meaningless but impressive-sounding sentences like, "We will actualize a renewed level of cradle-to-grave credentialing" and "By getting our friends in the tent with our best practices, we will pressure-test a renewed level of adaptive coherence." He then asked more than 1,000 office workers to rate the "business savvy" of these computer-generated BS statements alongside real quotes from Fortune 500 leaders...
>
> The results revealed a troubling paradox. Workers who were more susceptible to corporate BS rated their supervisors as more charismatic and "visionary," but also displayed lower scores on a portion of the study that tested analytic thinking, cognitive reflection and fluid intelligence. Those more receptive to corporate BS also scored significantly worse on a test of effective workplace decision-making. The study found that being more receptive to corporate bullshit was also positively linked to job satisfaction and feeling inspired by company mission statements. Moreover, those who were more likely to fall for corporate BS were also more likely to spread it.
>
> Essentially, the employees most excited and inspired by "visionary" corporate jargon may be the least equipped to make effective, practical business decisions for their companies.
[1] https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2026/03/workers-who-love-synergizing-paradigms-might-be-bad-their-jobs
[2] https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0191886926000620?via%3Dihub
"Dumb people suck at their Job" (Score:2)
News at 10
Awesomely Shitty. (Score:2)
Depends on the job.
I mean hell, some people get paid to Generate Bullshit. To measure how receptive people are to it in a non-olfactory way.
Sometimes you gotta be downright shitty at the job, to be the best at it.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh you want to go down this road?
“You know, the new thing is magnets. So instead of using hydraulic that can be hit by lightning and it’s fine. You take a little glass of water, you drop it on magnets, I don’t know what’s going to happen,” Trump said.
“So, you know, the elevators come up in the new carriers—I think I’m going to change it, by the way—they have magnets. Every tractor has hydraulic, every excavator, every excavating machine of any kind has h
Re: Kamala Harris (Score:1)
Every time Trump speaks, he speaks rather concretely. He doesnâ(TM)t always get the facts perfect but the guy is a concrete thinker who got his start literally building buildings. His words reflect a desire to build a specific thing or do a specific thing.
in contrast, Kamala Harris, always spoke in the most vague platitudes and generalities. Her words belied a desire to never commit herself to any position or concrete plan of action. Partially because she was a politician, and partially because
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, he's concretely incoherent, wrong on the fact, obviously uneducated and clueless.
Re: (Score:2)
.....also he did not "get his start" building buildings. He "got his start" with a generational wealth transfer that started with his grandfather's whore house. Do you only consume fox news type media? Do you also believe the elmo musk PR-generated origina story? Yeah, of course you do.
There are people who love to (Score:2)
Be bossed around. In the corporate world, theyre the ones that worship the all-powerful visionary leader and blindly buy into the corporate gibberish. In politics, theyre the ones that feel more secure when being led around by a dictator or monarch, and hide behind whatever national slogan is in vogue. There are lots of people who genuinely find it comforting. Most of these people are also objectively dumber than the oneswho like to think for themselves, so its no surprise that theyre the less competent one
Re: (Score:2)
Its not so much they like being bossed around, they're just too stupid to see through the firehose of gibberish. Remember that buzzword bullshit is spoken by and designed to fool, idiots, it doesn't work against people with any reasonable IQ but given the average IQ is only 100 there are plenty of idiots around.
Re: (Score:2)
There’s a very emotional aspect to it. There are large numbers of people who genuinely feel comforted when there’s a big, strong (usually paternal) leader to tell them what to do. Just do what I tell you, and everything will be ok, the world is complicated and scary and I’ll deal with all that hard and difficult stuff, just blame the designated scapegoat for all your troubles and you won’t need to think. It’ll all be ok. I’ll protect you. Just do what I say. I’m the
Seriously? (Score:2)
> "Employees who are impressed by vague corporate-speak like 'synergistic leadership,' or 'growth-hacking paradigms' may struggle with practical decision-making, a new Cornell study reveals."
Please tell me something that I didn't already know.
Might be bad at their jobs... (Score:2)
OK, they might be bad at what they do, but the people who speak like this tend to get ahead and end up the big money-makers in the company.
Wow, who knew... (Score:2)
... that incompetents cover up their incompetence with fancy words and general buzzword bullshit in an attempt to sound like they have their finger on the pulse. Anyone who has worked in any reasonably sized company will have met plenty of these people.
Re: (Score:2)
Usually as their bosses. Senior management being corporate politicians and bullshitters themselves, seem to be attracted to subordinates that copy them. People wonder why so many companies seem to be badly run. It is because management is made of people who talk a good game not people who really know what they are doing.
First nomination for the 2026 DBSITW Awards. (Score:3)
First nomination for the 2026 Do Bears S*** In The Woods Awards.
Watch the entertaining satire "Visioneers" instead (Score:2)
... of reading that boring state-the-obvious study: [1]Visioneers [imdb.com] - it's such a good depiction of corporate madness.
[1] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0833557/
Yeah using words you don't understand (Score:2)
And using them in meaningless contexts indicates that you don't really know what you're doing. So no shit you're bad at your job.
We learned that recently from the president of the United States. Who is currently speaking at the level of an 8-year-old. Seriously no shit Google it.
Bingo! (Score:2)
n/t
Study design? (Score:2)
I'm...curious...about the justification for treating authentic corporate buzzwords as a meaningfully distinct sample from the synthetic ones as part of the study design.
The hypothesis that corporate buzzwords generated by actual 'leaders' are better than the synthetic ones that are merely syntactically correct seems plausible enough to serve as a basis for further inquiry; but far, far, from being the sort of thing you can treat as a given for the purpose of testing something else.
bullshit. (Score:3)
Workers who can't spot obvious bullshit aren't so good at not producing obvious bullshit?
Well perhaps this is one of the cases where what feels obvious to me aligns with reality. Still worth looking because not all results are as expected.
The approach to corporobs never ceased to amaze me. Upper management would spew it, and when people got a chance to push back they'd spew more, and either keep going until the person got fed up talking to a recording or they just shut down the conversation. In both cases they appeared to believe that they had actually convinced someone.
Re: (Score:3)
It's actually difficult to glean any point you're making.
The latter paragraph seems to be off on a tangent about pushback when the article is about yes-men that gleefully promote every blingy idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes the last paragraph is a tangent. Quite a lot of people seem to deeply believe in the power of corporate BS, and seem to genuinely think that if they browbeat people into not pushing back, or refuse to continue speaking then they have somehow won the argument and the victim now buys the line of BS.
Re: bullshit. (Score:2)
The corporate wording on so many things is infuriating. So many words to say nothing of value and so many people nod along as though there's some deep meaning to it. On the other hand so many both do it and seem to glean something from it it's probably just me being a bit too dense to understand it.
Re:bullshit. happens! (Score:2)
Which reminds me of the risk of talking in masking terms....
> In the beginning was the Plan.
> And then came the Assumptions.
> And the Assumptions were without form.
> And darkness was upon the face of the Workers.
> And they spoke among themselves, saying, "It is a crock of shit, and it stinketh."
> And the workers went unto their Supervisors and said, "It is a pail of dung, and none may abide the odour thereof."
> And the Supervisors went unto their Managers, saying, "It is a container of excrement, and it is very strong, such that none may abide by it."
> And the Managers went unto their Directors, saying, "It is a vessel of fertiliser, and none may abide its strength."
> And the Directors spoke amongst themselves, saying one to another, "It contains that which aids plant growth, and it is very strong."
> And the Directors then went onto the Vice Presidents, saying unto them, "It promotes growth and is very powerful."
> And the Vice Presidents went unto the President, saying unto him, "This new plan will actively promote the growth and vigour of the company; with powerful effects."
> And the President looked upon the Plan, and saw that it was good.
> And the Plan became Policy.
> This is How Shit Happens.