Jeffrey Pfeffer, one of the most influential scholars on power in organisations, noted that flattery is nearly always well received, even when it is excessive or transparently insincere. At first glance, this seems irrational. Why would leaders, supposedly skilled at judgment, accept praise they surely recognise as exaggerated? Yet human psychology and organisational politics make flattery a surprisingly effective, if ethically ambiguous, tool.
We see this dynamic not only in workplaces but also in the public arena. Switch on the television and watch political interviews, diplomatic exchanges, or even corporate media appearances. Flattery is often on full display, strategically deployed to stroke egos, smooth negotiations, or curry favour. It may look cynical, but it works. The question is: at what cost?
From an organisational psychology perspective, flattery appeals to two deep human needs:
Pfeffer (2010) argues that these mechanisms are part of why politics is an unavoidable reality in organisations. If power is concentrated at the top, those lower in the hierarchy will use influence tactics, including flattery, to gain scarce resources or favour.
But there are hidden consequences, both for individuals and for organisations:
Consider high-profile corporate scandals, from Enron to Theranos. These organisations were marked by cultures where leaders were surrounded by sycophants rather than challengers. The power of flattery, unchecked, insulated decision-makers from reality, with disastrous results.
On the political stage, diplomatic theatre often involves overt compliments between rivals. While tactful in the short term, such exchanges can leave citizens sceptical, eroding public trust in leadership. The parallel in workplaces is clear: when employees witness insincere flattery rewarded, morale suffers.
The Stoic philosopher Epictetus advised, “Be not diverted by their praise, but look to your own actions, if you would be praised.” In other words, leaders should cultivate a kind of philosophical armour against flattery. By grounding their sense of self in virtue and integrity rather than external validation, they reduce the risk of being misled by insincere voices.
While Pfeffer is correct that flattery “works,” its effectiveness comes with a cost. Organisations that reward sycophancy over honesty risk strategic blindness, disengagement, and even reputational collapse. For employees, the pressure to engage in such politics can be corrosive to authenticity and wellbeing.
The challenge for modern workplaces is not to eradicate politics, it cannot be done, but to create cultures where influence is based on contribution and candour rather than empty praise. Psychological safety, fairness, and open communication provide healthier alternatives.
📖 References