Study Reveals Managers Favor Manipulative Employees to Advance Their Own Careers

A new study has uncovered a troubling trend in corporate behavior: bosses often favor manipulative employees when they believe such individuals can further their own career ambitions. This revelation challenges the notion that ruthless characters, like those seen in TV shows such as *Succession* and *Wall Street*, are merely fictional exaggerations. Researchers from the University of British Columbia found that managers with self-serving goals are more likely to gravitate toward candidates who exhibit dark personality traits, such as cunning or self-interest. This preference, however, comes with potential long-term risks for organizations, according to the study's lead authors.

Dr. Karl Aquino, co-author of the research, explained that the alignment between a manager's goals and an employee's personality plays a critical role in hiring decisions. 'If you have agentic or self-serving goals, hiring a dark personality candidate could actually be useful,' he said. 'If you have more communal goals, then you don't want to hire that person.' This dynamic suggests that corporate culture is not always aligned with ethical or collaborative values, but rather with pragmatic survival strategies.

While the short-term benefits of employing manipulative individuals may include increased efficiency or aggressive goal pursuit, the researchers warn of significant long-term costs. 'It's possible that it could be costly in the long run as they may do things that get the organization in trouble,' Dr. Aquino added. These risks include damaged reputations, internal conflicts, or legal issues, all of which could undermine a company's stability and morale.

The study drew on data from over 1,200 managers across multiple industries. In one experiment, participants were asked to evaluate fictional job candidates with identical qualifications but differing approaches to workplace scenarios. Manipulative or self-interested tactics were rated more positively by managers who prioritized personal advancement. Another experiment asked managers to reflect on their favorite and least favorite employees. Those focused on personal gain were significantly more likely to rate their preferred employees as having dark traits, reinforcing the idea that such personalities are seen as assets in certain contexts.

Despite their potential drawbacks, employees with dark personality traits remain prevalent in most industries. The researchers suggest this is because such individuals may be more willing to take on tasks others avoid, such as disciplinary actions or layoffs. 'Throughout history and in organizations, there are people who have to do dirty, bad things that a lot of people don't want to do,' Dr. Aquino explained. 'Perhaps dark personalities are better able to do those than those who lack these traits.' This perspective highlights the complex interplay between individual ethics and organizational needs.

The findings come amid broader research on dark personality traits in the workplace. A separate study from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign found that individuals with psychopathic tendencies are disproportionately drawn to certain careers. Researchers surveyed over 600 participants, asking about their interest in eight different career areas. The results revealed a clear pattern: those with psychopathic traits were more attracted to hands-on and practical roles, such as mechanics and engineers. This preference may stem from the need for power and status, according to lead author Yan Yi Lance Du. 'The need for power and status can be a fundamental drive behind the careers people pursue,' he noted.

These studies collectively paint a nuanced picture of how personality traits influence career choices and organizational dynamics. While manipulative or psychopathic individuals may offer short-term advantages, their presence often raises ethical and strategic concerns. As Dr. Aquino emphasized, the long-term consequences of favoring such employees can be profound, requiring organizations to balance immediate gains with sustainable leadership practices.

The prevalence of dark traits in the workforce underscores a deeper question: how do companies reconcile the demands of competition with the need for integrity? The answer may lie in redefining success to include not just profitability, but also trust, collaboration, and resilience. As these studies continue to unfold, they challenge leaders to reflect on the kind of culture they truly want to foster.

In the absence of clear ethical guidelines, the temptation to prioritize short-term wins over long-term stability remains strong. Yet, as history has shown, organizations that fail to address the risks of manipulative behavior often face costly repercussions. Whether in the boardroom or on the factory floor, the Gordon Gekko effect may be a double-edged sword, cutting both ways in the pursuit of power and profit.

The research also highlights the need for more comprehensive training and oversight in hiring practices. By identifying the biases that lead managers to favor manipulative employees, companies can take steps to mitigate the risks associated with such hires. This includes fostering cultures that reward collaboration, transparency, and accountability, even if it means sacrificing some immediate gains.

Ultimately, the study serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of unchecked ambition. While dark personalities may thrive in environments that prioritize self-interest, their presence can erode the very foundations of trust and teamwork that drive long-term success. As Dr. Aquino noted, the challenge for organizations is to recognize when the cost of short-term gains outweighs the value of a cohesive, ethical workforce.