There is nothing comical about the power of humor. Many of the greatest leaders in history are reported to have had a good sense of humor, even those that might have also had reportedly great flaws. For example, U.S. President Abraham Lincoln, who was believed to suffer from clinical depression, was known to have a keen wit. Possibly using humor as an antidote to his melancholy, Lincoln had no qualm about using self-deprecating remarks to ease tension and bond with others. U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower also understood the power of humor. Of it he said, “A sense of humor is part of the art of leadership, of getting along with people, of getting things done.” The strong connection between humor and leadership was confirmed in a 2012 study by the Bell Leadership Institute in Chapel Hill, NC. The study found that when employees were asked to describe the strengths and weaknesses of senior leadership in their organizations, sense of humor and work ethic were mentioned twice as much as any other phrases. In the study, they surveyed approximately 2,700 employees in a variety of workplace settings over a two-year period. The obvious conclusion is that humor is a vital tool of leadership.

While it’s been said that laughter is the best medicine, it turns out that hilarity has not only real curative power, but also a number of other functions as well. It can be used for good. Humor can help a person bond with another person, release tension, set a person at ease, attract a mate or entertain a child. It can also be used to shed light on social issues in order to bring about change. But humor can also be used negatively to put a rival in his place, to camouflage outright aggression or to express an otherwise unacceptable thought. In the form of satire, humor can be used to mock and ridicule social and political institutions and individuals in the public eye. Indeed, humor has as many functions and styles as there are knock-knock jokes and variations on the “why did the chicken cross the road?” joke. So the key to using humor as a tool for success is knowing when and how to use it.
Continue reading →

Past studies have repeatedly shown that people judge companies, in part, by the outward appearance of its employees. Likewise, employers evaluate employees, in part, on their ‘professionalism’ which includes appearance. Over the years, research has validated that there is a bias in favor of well-dressed, well-groomed, good-looking people. Indeed, for decades if not centuries, it has been widely understood that the visual aesthetic presented to others through appearance and apparel matters.

However, while business attire has been the de facto norm in corporate America for centuries, the hard-and-fast rules about corporate dress seem to be shifting. Younger generations now feel that a person should only be judged by their inner qualities, not their outward appearance. They argue that such things as casual clothing, tattoos, piercings, and unusual hair color don’t matter as long as an employee is intelligent, talented, skilled, and hard-working. They also think that how a person looks on the outside (hygiene, attire, appearance) won’t influence how that person is perceived by others. They ascribe to the wisdom that one shouldn’t judge a book by its cover and that one cannot tell a person’s character by his appearance.

That raises many questions about whether appearance still matters. Does employee business attire really matter for a company’s success? And does attire impact an individual’s success? In today’s changing work landscape, what constitutes professional versus unprofessional attire and appearance? Is there still a clear line between what is and isn’t deemed ‘professional appearance’? In today’s individualistic, casual culture, does the phrase ‘dress for success’ still have meaning?
Continue reading →