The Subtle Psychological Power of Workplace Fashion

A blog post that merges the Devil Wears Prada with Behavioural Science

The clothes people wear hold an often underestimated power to shape how others perceive them through subtle, psychological influences. Organisational research reveals how our work attire activates biases and impacts impressions of competence, status, and identity.

Let's explore the key theories and studies that demonstrate how clothing choices unconsciously sway judgments, despite having little true bearing on skill.

The Symbolic Value of Dress

According to organisational researchers Rafaeli and Pratt (1993), the colors, fabrics, and styles employees wear conveys symbolic meaning beyond fashion choices. Work attire sends messages that others subconsciously interpret to influence perceptions and actions.

This builds on Erving Goffman’s identity theories and dramaturgical perspective. Goffman argued that identity and interactions are heavily shaped by symbolic “costumes” and props we use to control outward impressions (1959). Work clothes function as identity symbols that others read through a lexical lens.

For example, formal professional suits may increase perceived authority and competence versus casual, relaxed attire that can falsely imply lower ambition or abilities. Luxury or tailored fabrics can convey higher socioeconomic status and confidence. Bold, bright colors symbolize power whereas dull hues imply meekness (Rafaeli & Pratt, 1993).

According to Rafaeli and Pratt, work attire conveys multidimensional meanings that shape others’ perceptions of status, knowledge, skill, and organizational belonging - often with little true merit.

Beyond just clothing, even small accessories and symbols on work attire activate biases. Items like lanyards, badge stars, and pins carry symbolic meaning about competence, status, and goals (Rafaeli & Pratt, 1993).

For example, an engineer with more badge stars may be perceived as more experienced and authoritative, leading others to give them more respect and deference. However, these impressions may have little merit or relation to actual capabilities.

Even small accessories can greatly sway others’ perceptions of knowledge and skills. Those wearing symbolic items may also change behaviors if they internalise assumed traits associated with the accessories’ implied meanings.

Casual Clothing and the Weekend Mentality

Today's increasingly relaxed dress codes raise questions around how casual clothing affects focus and drive. Organisational researcher Courtney Colbert (2014) found that casual clothing alone didn't directly lower productivity for employees. I personally binned the blue suit and brown shoes some time ago, in favour of Converse, chino’s and blazer. This upon reflection deeper reflects my role as a change agent in my organisation.

However, shifting into a weekend mentality when dressing down on "casual Fridays" did reduce motivation and attention at work. This aligns with motivation theories indicating that ambient factors like clothing can stimulate attitudes and goal achievement behaviours, albeit indirectly (Peterson, 2007). This “reduction in motivation” may also be balanced out by an increase in enjoyment of being with work colleagues for one day. In a world where corporations are trying to get people back into the office, this might be a good trade off.

So while casual work clothes may not harm performance on their own, they usher in a distracting relaxed mood by week's end at odds with work mentalities.

Identity Theories on Attire and Perceived Competence

According to identity theories, people internalise perceived social and cultural meanings about attire when constructing self-concepts (Ashforth & Mael, 1989). When work clothes conflict with internalised identities, it sparks an identity crisis.

Pratt, Rockmann, and Kaufmann (2006) revealed this in a study of medical residents. Surgeons who saw themselves as highly skilled felt undermined dressed in unprofessional scrubs doing administrative work. Radiology trainees wore white coats before treating any patients.

The mismatch between perceived identities and work attire caused distress. Surgeons added formal accessories to reinforce competence, while radiologists stopped wearing physician coats to resolve the identity contradiction.

This highlights how work attire activates identity biases. When clothes poorly align with perceived competence, it threatens professional credibility and forces resolution to restore identity integrity.

Gender and Motivation Theories on Work Attire

Research also reveals that clothing norms and expectations around attire can differ by gender due to motivational biases. Motivation theories state that incentives like appropriate work clothes can enhance drive and goal achievement (Peterson, 2007).

But stereotypes that women should display caregiving traits versus men projecting expertise can motivate clothing choices that inadvertently undermine perceptions of competence and status. However, adapting attire to role expectations can also motivate higher performance (Ebrahimi, 1999).

Organisational justice requires recognising that men and women face different attire biases and motivations. Work clothes interact with gender identity theories in nuanced ways that require careful consideration.

Key Lessons on Work Attire Perception Biases

In summary, key learnings on work attire's influence reveal that clothing:

- Carries potent identity symbolism that sways impressions of competence and goals.

- Activates identity biases when at odds with perceived selves and skills.

- Motivates behaviours aligned with appearance-driven role expectations.

- When timed with a Friday, encourages weekend mentalities that undermine focus during casual dress (but may improve perceptions of being in the office).

By recognising these subtle psychological forces, we can mitigate the potent biases activated by work attire. Instead of judging books by their covers, we can focus on meaningful performance indicators over appearances alone.

Next time you evaluate someone, pause and ask if your impressions come from their abilities or the mental shortcuts of their clothes. Work attire has hidden powers, but awareness can help overcome its biases.

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 20-39.

Colbert, C. (2014). The Impact of Work Attire on Employee Behavior (Doctoral dissertation, Argosy University, Phoenix, AZ).

Ebrahimi, B. P. (1999). Managerial motivation and gender roles: A study of females and males in Hong Kong. Women in Management Review, 14(2), 44-53.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.

Peterson, T. (2007). Motivation: How to increase project team performance. Project Management. Retrieved from

Pratt, M. G., Rockmann, K. W., & Kaufmann, J. B. (2006). Constructing professional identity: The role of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 235-262.

Rafaeli, A., & Pratt, M. G. (1993). Tailored meanings: On the meaning and impact of organizational dress. Academy of Management Review, 18(1), 32-55.