From Science Daily: This just in: Political correctness pumps up productivity on the job.
Political correctness, loathed by some as censorship awash in leftist philosophy, actually boosts the creativity of mixed-sex work teams, according to new research published in Administrative Science Quarterly.
I can’t begin to tell you how thoroughly unsurprised I am to read that.
Of course it does. Why? Because the absence of “political correctness” equals the presence of political putdowns and sneers, and what does that do? It distracts the people subject to them, and diverts their energy to being annoyed and defensive and resentful. That is useful to no one.
Ok I’m opining before reading the whole article. Maybe that’s not it at all. Maybe I’m jumping to conclusions. Maybe it’s something else that I couldn’t have expected.
“Our work challenges the widespread assumption that true creativity requires a kind of anarchy in which people are permitted to speak their minds, whatever the consequence,” said Jack Goncalo associate professor of Organizational Behavior at the Cornell ILR School and lead author of the study.
Still not surprised.
These results highlight a paradoxical consequence: A term that has been used to undermine expectations to censor offensive language as a threat to free speech actually provides a foundation upon which diverse work groups can freely exchange creative ideas.
“Political correctness facilitates idea expression by reducing the uncertainty that people tend to experience while interacting with the opposite sex,” Goncalo said. “The PC norm, by establishing a clear guideline for how to behave appropriately in mixed-sex groups, made both men and women more comfortable sharing their creative ideas.”
That is somewhat different. It reduces the uncertainty, as opposed to the hostility.
Ok, so the reduction in hostility is an excellent side effect. (But actually this is just a report on a forthcoming article, so I’m going to guess there’s more to it than just a reduction in uncertainty. My bet is that knowing for certain that men would be sneering at women in these mixed groups would not be great for productivity.)
I can’t imagine this would not be a universal finding regardless of the comparator. Race, ethnicity, gender identity, sexual preference…the whole megillah.
When you treat people like … well … like humans, they tend to like it better than when you don’t.
What leftist rot! Next you’ll be claiming that students perform better in school when they don’t spend half their days stuffed in a locker!
I’d imagine that much of the uncertainty being reduced is uncertainty about whether or not the other person is potentially hostile. When you put exploitative, domineering, intimidating, and/or degrading behaviors on the banned list, it reduces both actual hostility and the uncertainty surrounding it. I’d say neither is really a side effect, but that both effects are undeniably entangled.
Yup, that’s what I was thinking.
Well, who would have thought that treating everyone as equally valuable tends to result in them making equally valuable contributions to the work in hand?
The linked story, and everything said here, implies an agreed definition for “political correctness”.
Could somebody please post the memo I missed?
Pierce R. Butler #6
I have a much better idea. Why don’t you tell us what constitutes political correctness. If you’re not trolling, you should be able to do it, it’s really not that hard.
Off topic but empowering.
http://mic.com/articles/104228/teen-artist-reimagines-america-s-superhoes-wearing-muslim-hijab
Who’d have thunk that manners (excluding the sort used to distinguish class or simply oppress) have a positive benefit? Astonishing.
No, sorry, I refuse to consider hijab “empowering.” Inclusion of Muslims is empowering, yes, but hijab itself, no.
moarsciencepls @ # 7: Why don’t you tell us what constitutes political correctness.
In this context, I’d say “no perceptible sexism” – but that wouldn’t get very far in most other situations. Such as the study summarized in the OP here, or the HR policies of the organizations where this idea was implemented.
Without a clear definition, just imagine the tantrums MRAs, racists, et al, would throw at such a rule.
I’ve never seen “PC” as anything except a general expectation that people would use basic manners and be considerate of what they say that might offend people from other groups. The reaction against it always seemed to take something fairly simple to understand (‘sexist and racist jokes are a bad idea at work’) and pretend it was some kind of horrific censorship.
There is something to be said for deciding that work is NOT a time for uncensored expression. It is a place for work. If everybody present does not feel comfortable, work will not go well. It is not oppression and censorship that you cannot hit on female coworkers.
Rebranding common courtesy as political correctness may well be the most brilliantly successful innovation in the history of bigotry. It just makes it sound like such an imposition to be polite and act like a professional.
Pierce R. Butler @11:
They’ll throw tantrums at any rule. Trying to please them is a fool’s game.
What does this have to do with Sam Harris?
@Decker, 8
1) The current Ms. Marvel is a Muslim with a… hijab-inspired* costume.
2) Dear Glod, the comments! “Yep, a racist femifascist.” FFS, these people are incapable of seeing anything inclusive as anything other than evil, are they? It’s fan art, you losers! And, ok, sure, we can talk about whether the hijab is empowering, and I’d have to agree with Ophelia on that, but it’s a “draw yourself” challenge… if that’s a part of her identity, she’s hardly going to draw herself without it.
3) Apparently my first point is mentioned in the article… I need to read more closely.
*Though I doubt any fundamentalist Muslim would be particularly impressed with it.
I don’t think most MRAs would be impressed with this. The problem, you see, lies with this part:
The MRAs would (probably already have) argue that they are even more creative if they don’t have to work in a mixed sex (gender?) work team where wimminz cooties might affect their manly menz skillz at fixing things, and presumably, grunting….
Sam Harris please note
Let me make a prediction – Harris was referring to political correctness *run amok* – of course he is fine with good political correctness. And can the true Scotsman please stand up?
@15 Enlightment Liberal
https://proxy.freethought.online/butterfliesandwheels/2014/11/please-send-linksstories-to-sam-harris/
I think it goes beyond a reduction in uncertainty to an increase in personal safety. Who the heck can relax and focus when they don’t know when they might be grabbed at work (twice, at major companies), stalked by your supervisor outside of work, or made fun of publically (uncountable number of times), or derided by HR when complaints are brought (yup, mm-hmm), or just generally treated with disrespect without any recourse. This was 1980-2000ish. It’s improved a lot recently. Trying to get work done when you are stragegizing around constant sexism is counterproductive for the business. They are paying you to do unnecessary work. Unfortunately, the disrespect that this encouraged in your coworkers allowed them to waste paid work time stragegizing their harassment of you, since I discovered that the harassers saw their ability to harass as a game where they could “win” by unsettling me or driving me out. How could such an atmosphere possibly benefit a company? Political correctness benefits everyone the same way that rules in any situation (games, sports, education) benefits everyone. If anything is allowed, bad behavior always wins.
@dshetty
Thanks. Ugg. >< Why do you do this to me Sam?