Can Impression Management Do More Harm Than Good?
“No you don't get a second chance to make a first impression That all I often heard my mother say Cause its nice to be nice and so easy to be kind”
First Impressions by Olivia Douglas (Click here for the song)
What is impression management?
“Much of the existing literature assumes that impression management is inherently self-serving, inauthentic, or even manipulative, casting it as a behaviour that should be viewed with suspicion, or even discouraged by managers”
David Long
Psychologists have been fascinated by impression management for a long time: why people engage in it, its impact on interpersonal relationships, career success, and many other outcomes in the workplace.
Jones and Pittman (1982) identified five common impression management tactics.
Much of the organisational-based research has focused on how impression management tactics can help employees achieve their career goals, like performance evaluation, promotion, sales and even job security. Increasingly, the focus is broadening to include the negative impact of impression management on employees, their colleagues and the organisations in which they work.
What is the impact of impression management on employee wellbeing?
“In general, people experience discomfort, in the form of anxiety, when they are (1) motivated to make a good impression and (2) unsure whether they will make the desired impression successfully”
Gino, F., Sezer, O., & Huang, L.
Although impression management can help people develop a positive social image and enhance self-esteem, researchers have also linked it to poorer wellbeing, including anxiety, psychological pressure, loneliness, reduced life satisfaction, and poorer physical and mental health. Researchers have found that impression management often requires employees to behave in a manner that does not always reflect their genuine thoughts, attitudes, or feelings, and maintaining this gap can require considerable self-control, psychological effort, and accompanying feelings of inauthenticity.
Suppressing disagreements and doing favours to gain approval has been found to consume psychological resources, create resentment among colleagues, and leave less energy for other tasks and relationships, potentially contributing to harmful workplace behaviour.
Another challenge, identified in the literature, is the limited control people have over how others perceive them. Even considerable effort cannot guarantee that behaviour will be interpreted as intended or that a favourable impression will endure. This uncertainty can contribute to anxiety and a diminished sense of control.
The anxiety associated with impression management has been found to deplete working memory and impair information processing, while concealing these motives can also be cognitively demanding. Together, these effects may impair perspective taking and performance during interpersonal interactions, meaning that catering can sometimes undermine the very impression a person is trying to create.
Sadly, studies have also found that people who consistently present themselves as highly competent may receive less support from colleagues and friends, further contributing to feelings of loneliness and lower life satisfaction.
The unintended consequences of impression management
Impression management can influence not only how employees are perceived but also how leaders respond to them. Research suggests that leaders may interpret impression management as insincere, boastful, or self-serving, particularly when employees use multiple tactics or appear overly concerned with presenting themselves favourably.
Employees who genuinely adjust their feelings to meet workplace expectations may be perceived differently from those who simply suppress their emotions or put on an outward display. However, neither approach guarantees a positive response. Researchers have found that even well-intentioned efforts to demonstrate commitment can be interpreted as calculated or excessive.
When leaders attribute deceptive or self-serving motives to employees, the consequences can be more serious than a damaged impression. Research has linked these dynamics to abusive supervision, highlighting how misunderstandings and negative attributions can contribute to harmful workplace interactions. This does not mean impression management inevitably leads to abusive leadership, but it illustrates how attempts to influence others’ perceptions can have unintended consequences.
Can Impression Management Be Sincere?
In his research into impression management, David Long aimed to understand why some interpersonal behaviours lead to favourable impressions. He called this model The Beacon Effect because a beacon sheds light for others, and it enables them to see what they can achieve.
David Long found that when people feel heard, valued and capable, they are more likely to experience connection and autonomy. As a result, appropriate impression management can contribute to positive workplace relationships, job satisfaction and wellbeing. However, these behaviours need to be genuine, consistent and recognisable to have the intended effect. Simply appearing supportive is not enough if the underlying intention is to pressure, deceive or manipulate others.
An interesting aspect of Long's work is the suggestion that impression management may be less necessary when people are genuinely curious, enthusiastic and engaged in learning. When attention is focused on the subject, the task or the other person, rather than on how one is being perceived, connection can develop more naturally. What is particularly delightful about this perspective is that favourable impressions can emerge through respectful, supportive relationships rather than calculated self-presentation. In this way, behaviours that support others' psychological needs can positively influence how a person is perceived while preserving both the recipient's wellbeing and the authenticity of the interaction.
Emotional Intelligence and Impression Management
Unsurprisingly, studies have demonstrated that those with higher emotional intelligence tend to choose more appropriate impression management tactics and adjust how frequently and strongly they use them, reducing the effort required to maintain a desired image. These employees don’t rely heavily on self-promotion or ingratiation; rather, they use their emotional awareness to build genuine working relationships and demonstrate their capabilities in ways that are both effective and authentic.
Peacocks and impression management
“The question arises of how an individual determines when impression management is necessary, or even desirable, and whether it helps to create the desired response in others.”
Preti BT
Like a peacock displaying its colourful plumage, regular readers know that we all engage in impression management to some extent, presenting ourselves in ways that influence how others see us. As Preti (2026) explored in her autoethnography of a medical education conference, this can be as ordinary as putting on lipstick or dressing well to feel confident and make a good impression. These everyday choices are a natural part of professional life. The challenge is recognising when presenting our best selves becomes an exhausting performance, rather than an authentic expression of who we are.
References:
Chen, Y., & Chu, T. Y. (2022). The way you make me abuse: Impression management matters. Evidence-based HRM: A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship, 10(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1108/EBHRM-04-2021-0059
Gino, F., Sezer, O., & Huang, L. (2020). To be or not to be your authentic self? Catering to others’ preferences hinders performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 158, 83–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.11.001
Klotz, A. C., He, W., Yam, K. C., Bolino, M. C., Wei, W., & Houston, L., III. (2018). Good actors but bad apples: Deviant consequences of daily impression management at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(10), 1145–1154. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000335
Long, D. (2026). The Beacon Effect: A model of humanistic impression management. Organizational Psychology Review. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/20413866261483690
Markowitz, D. M., Kouchaki, M., Gino, F., Hancock, J. T., & Boyd, R. L. (2022). Authentic first impressions relate to interpersonal, social, and entrepreneurial success. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14, 107–116.
Ni, H., Li, Y., Zeng, Y., & Duan, J. (2023). The double-edged sword effect of employee impression management and counterproductive work behavior: From the perspective of self-control resource theory. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, Article 1053784. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1053784
Preti, B. T. (2026). As the lipstick rubs off: An autoethnography of impression management in a medical education conference. Canadian Medical Education Journal, 17(1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.36834/hprhrb83
Wang, W., Zhou, K., Yu, Z., & Li, J. (2020). The cost of impression management to life satisfaction: Sense of control and loneliness as mediators. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 13, 407–417. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S238344
Comments