toxic positivity

Fri 13 December 2024
In many organizations, confidence often indicates strong leadership. Managers who display a strong sense of assurance and decisiveness are recognized for their strong encouragement and serve as an inspiration for their team. Although confidence in leadership is motivating, it becomes detrimental once it evolves to overconfidence which can significantly impact decision-making and organizational success. Learning to recognize and manage overconfidence is essential for management success. 

Overconfidence Bias

Overconfidence is a cognitive bias discussing how people tend to overestimate their abilities or the accuracy of their predictions. The National Bureau of Economic Research published a study exemplifying the overconfidence bias. This study revealed that financial executives only saw actual market returns fall within their expected confidence interval 38% of the time. This large discrepancy highlights how overconfidence presents in management, leading to flawed decision-making. 

Overconfident managers will often underestimate the risks associated with their decisions and ignore contradictory evidence to their beliefs. This exclusion of important information creates an illusion of control and a false sense of stability. Managers may believe that their expertise on a subject matter or past successes exempt them from facing significant challenges, leading to unrealistic project timeline estimates, exceeding budgets, and encountering unanticipated challenges. These unplanned issues can become incredibly damaging within complex organizations when there are high stakes and slim margins of error. 

Overconfidence vs. Optimism

While optimism and overconfidence may sound similar, the two concepts are distinct and have opposite effects. Optimism is characterized by possessing a positive outlook, which can motivate teams and rally a community. Overconfidence is an inflated sense of certainty that leads individuals to disregard contradictory evidence and discredit potential risks. When considering the two concepts, optimism can coexist with realism as managers can be positive yet skeptical. On the other hand, overconfidence often leads to misjudgments. 

The Cost of Overconfidence

The repercussions managers experience due to overconfidence are far-reaching and can lead to:
  1. Project Failures
Determining unrealistic budgets or timelines can disrupt promising initiatives. Managers who overestimate their team's abilities or efficiency may put excessive pressure that they are realistically unable to perform. This can lead to a cycle of missed deadlines or increased costs, ultimately leading to a loss of stakeholder confidence. 

2. Poor Decision-Making
Ignoring alternative solutions can reduce innovation and can result in suboptimal outcomes. Failure to consider dissenting information and solely relying on a manager's previous experience can exclude important information in the decision-making process. This closed-minded approach can leave the organization vulnerable to risks that may have been avoided with a broader perspective. 

3. Erosion of Trust 
Persistent overconfidence that leads to multiple failed projects can destroy a mangers credibility. Not only can this reduce trust, but a team's morale may suffer from the continued failure to meet expectations. Over time, low morale can result in higher turnover rates as team members seek out environments with more achievable goals. 

Strategies to Circumvent Overconfidence 

  1. Seek Multiple Perspectives
Reach out to gain an external perspective to help counterbalance internal biases. Eliciting guidance from consultants, peer mentors, or even team members can provide a unique perspective. Incorporating various insights works to challenge assumptions and highlights areas of overconfidence. When gathering these perspectives, make sure to include diverse viewpoints. Individuals from different backgrounds, expertise, or organizational levels can help uncover hidden assumptions. Consider anonymous feedback mechanisms to encourage honest input. 

2. Solicit Disconfirming Feedback 
Actively seek out information that contradicts initial beliefs. While this may be uncomfortable, it's essential to identify blind spots in judgments and improve strategies. If struggling to find disconfirming feedback, put a team member in charge of seeking out contradictory information. Tasking a team member with this role can help prevent bias while sourcing the information. Furthermore, establishing “devil’s advocate” meetings that encourage team members to critique proposed ideas can make it easier to identify potential flaws in plans. Encouraging open conversation and critical perspectives can add value to the decision-making process. 

3. Consider Consequences 
When evaluating decisions, it is important to consider the consequences of each solution. Planning for each scenario and evaluating each on a case-by-case basis can work to remove initial biases. Incorporate quantitative tools such as cost-benefit analysis to objectively evaluate options. Additionally, dedicate time to review the long-term implications of decisions to ensure alignment with team and organizational goals. 

4. Utilize Decision-Making Framework
Structured decision-making processes, such as SWOT analysis, can help mitigate overconfidence by ensuring consistent factors are evaluated on the same criteria. Consider documenting the decision-making process for transparency and to use it for future decisions. 

5. Create a Culture of Openness
Create an environment that empowers team members to voice concerns and challenge ideas. Building a space that fosters psychological safety is crucial for gaining diverse perspectives and challenging overconfidence bias. Regularly reinforce the importance of constructive feedback and encourage team members to respectfully question assumptions. Leaders must set the tone by modeling openness and encouraging discussions. 


Overconfidence bias is a challenge that many managers face, but actively implementing strategies to prevent this bias can ensure strong leadership capabilities. By understanding the root causes of this bias, and adopting strategies to counteract it, managers can make more informed decisions and enhance their organization. Cultivating an open environment, seeking diverse perspectives, and embracing uncertainty will lead to stronger, more effective leadership. 


Fri 18 April 2025
At first glance, a culture built on positivity seems like a dream. Uplifting messages, cheerful attitudes, and constant encouragement are all hallmarks of a "healthy" work environment. But what happens when positivity becomes mandatory—when it overshadows reality and invalidates the honest struggles employees face? That’s when positivity becomes toxic.

Toxic positivity is the subtle, yet damaging practice of demanding optimism at all costs. In this kind of culture, employees may feel they are not allowed to express disappointment, frustration, or doubt without being labeled “negative” or “unmotivated.” Over time, it leads to emotional shutdown, superficial conversations, and a lack of real feedback—all under the illusion of morale.

Take, for example, a mid-sized marketing tech company that has experienced rapid growth during the pandemic and was celebrated for its “can-do” attitude and upbeat culture. “We only want positive energy here” became a catchphrase repeated in all-hands meetings and internal Slack channels.

But as the company hit a plateau and began facing delivery delays and client churn, employees started to feel a disconnect. Team members who voiced concerns about deadlines were told to “trust the process.” Junior staff who asked for clearer priorities were reminded to “stay positive.” Over time, employee engagement scores fell and levels of burnout rose. And trust in leadership began to erode.

Why This Matters: The Hidden Consequences of Toxic Positivity

While leaders may adopt positivity as a well-intentioned morale booster, its overuse can undermine team performance, trust, and retention. When people feel they cannot express what’s really going on, innovation stalls, accountability slips, and emotional fatigue sets in. Employees don’t want to work in environments where emotions are filtered and struggles are ignored—they want to feel heard and valued for the full range of their experiences.

Moreover, research shows that psychologically safe workplaces—where employees can voice concerns without fear—outperform those where only agreeable input is welcome. In short, a culture that denies problems denies progress. For companies navigating uncertainty or change, addressing issues with realism and empathy isn’t just important—it’s essential for long-term success.

Leading with Authenticity

Fixing toxic positivity doesn’t mean abandoning optimism. It means rebalancing it with emotional authenticity. The marketing tech company began this shift by implementing three key strategies:

  1. Executive Mastermind Groups
Recognizing that leaders need space to process difficult decisions before delivering them with clarity and compassion, the company instituted quarterly executive mastermind groups. These confidential peer sessions gave senior leaders a space to discuss challenges openly, get advice on how to deliver hard news with empathy, and reflect on how to model vulnerability without losing authority.

One CFO shared, “Being able to talk through layoffs with other executives before I spoke to the team helped me center the message in care and transparency, rather than panic or forced positivity.”
To rebuild psychological safety, the company launched an anonymous feedback platform and encouraged managers to hold monthly “Open Reality” sessions—non-judgmental, structured conversations where employees could discuss what wasn’t working and where they needed more support. This initiative helped surface actionable insights and fostered trust, as employees saw their concerns acknowledged and addressed.

3. Modeling Honest Optimism
Executives stopped ending every company meeting with “everything’s great” and began adopting a new mantra: “It’s okay to not be okay—but we’ll face it together.” By sharing challenges alongside successes, leaders signaled that being real was not only allowed, but valued. This shift helped employees see that optimism wasn’t about pretending, but about committing to progress, even when it’s tough.

How to Implement This Change: A Practical Guide for Leaders

Transforming a culture of toxic positivity doesn’t happen overnight—but it starts with intentional shifts in how leadership communicates and creates space for others to do the same. Here's how business leaders can begin:

  1. Audit the Current Culture
Use employee surveys, listening sessions, or facilitated focus groups to ask tough questions: Do people feel safe speaking up? Are concerns being brushed aside in favor of “staying positive”? Identify areas where feedback is absent or glossed over.

2. Reframe Leadership Messaging
Instead of over-relying on optimistic language, aim for a tone that balances encouragement with honesty. Phrases like “We’re facing a challenge, and we’re working through it together” are more grounding than “Everything’s going to be fine!”

3. Build Support Systems
Set up mastermind groups or peer circles for executives and managers to talk candidly, vent in a healthy space, and get advice on how to communicate tough news with empathy. When leaders feel supported, they’re better able to support others.

4. Train Managers in Psychological Safety
Provide training on active listening, validating emotions, and managing conflict without avoidance. Give middle managers the tools to foster authenticity in 1:1s and team check-ins—without defaulting to forced optimism.

5. Celebrate Transparency
Reward transparency. When an employee voices a hard truth or surfaces a risk, acknowledge it publicly as a courageous and constructive act. This shows that the company values integrity as much as performance.

A strong company culture doesn’t shy away from the hard stuff—it meets it head-on with honesty, empathy, and shared resolve. The marketing tech company’s journey shows that when leaders move from toxic positivity to genuine optimism, they unlock not just morale, but meaning. By embracing reality and building space for honest dialogue, businesses create the kind of trust that fuels resilience, and results.


Fri 18 April 2025
Reorgs, layoffs, RIFs, corporate restructuring, mergers and acquisitions, business transformation. 

These terms have become the vernacular of business today - but what do they really mean? What are the implications of making these changes? And most importantly, how can we do them right?

At its core, corporate change stems from a realization: the current path isn’t working. A new direction is needed. This applies to both big businesses and small businesses - no organization is immune.

Companies pursue change for many reasons:
  • They see an opportunity in which they feel if they don’t act now, they will miss it.
  • Profitability is declining and a change needs to be made.
  • Acquiring another company for their clients or technology opens a door to taking over a new market.
  • Expenses pile up and implementing a new technology will have a major impact on their bottom line.

These are all valid reasons for making a change. If these changes aren’t made, companies run the risk of going out of business or becoming obsolete.

There is also the human side of change. This includes people getting moved around into different departments, people learning new technologies and adjusting the way they work, people getting fired, and those who are left having to pick up the slack for those who vacated.

Without clarity, the natural result of this is fear. Employees fear:
  • Will new technology replace my job?
  • Will these new tariffs impact the economy to cause the company to lose sales/profitability and force layoffs?
  • Will my increased workload lead to burnout? 
  • Will the merger/acquisition create a scenario where I’m competing with someone for a single position?
  • Will this new, experimental/unproven business unit fail and risk my job security? 

Fear creates disengagement and reduced productivity. Instead of people focusing on their jobs, they begin to focus on beefing up their resumes. They’ll start wondering if they are going to be fired next, and making personal/life/family plans in a stressed-out manner because they are uncertain of their livelihoods.

To implement change successfully - where the team can innovate, profits rise, and confidence can grow - organizations need to build a CLEAR vision that drives execution.

Clear is the most critical word in this statement because that is where most companies drop the ball.

Clear means that people:
  • Understand why a decision was made
  • Know why they are left to do the work they are doing
  • Sees the company’s plans for growth 
  • Know what their success metrics are
  • Know what success will lead to
  • Understands that more change will follow if metrics aren’t hit

A litmus test for knowing whether or not your organization did a good job of implementing change is if every employee at the company can go home to their family and say “The company has made some positive changes to the organization and I am excited about my role in this organization moving forward.”

Not just say it to their boss. Say it—and mean it—to their family.

What are common pitfalls companies pursue when trying to create a clear vision that drives execution?
  1. Toxic positivity - A leader who avoids hard truths erodes trust. Employees can handle the truth, because the mythical worst case scenario employees make up in their minds is oftentimes far worse than the actual worst case scenario. But if corporate leadership can’t be honest about the state of the business, employees will make up their own story as to why the changes are happening.
  2. Transparency without context - Being open with financials or goals is helpful—but transparency alone isn't enough. Not every employee understands the implications of “two down quarters.” For some businesses, this means no holiday bonuses. For others, it means layoffs. As leaders, we must connect the dots.
  3. Making abrupt decisions - Some companies are aware of the impending big decisions they will have to make and treat them like a game of “chicken” to see if the business turns around in time. Some companies are not aware of a major economic/business shakeup and they make decisions abruptly. Either way, making abrupt decisions is difficult on every employee impacted by the change. 
  4. Not getting stakeholder buy-in - Many companies think that just because the C-suite team understands a decision then all of the employees will fall in line and understand as well. For better or worse, objectivity diminishes the higher anyone goes in any organizational hierarchy. This means that people will tell their boss whatever they want to hear to save their jobs. Employees won’t challenge decisions they don’t understand—they’ll quietly disengage instead.

So how do we build a clear vision that drives execution?
  1. Be transparent - Yes, some employees may leave when faced with uncomfortable truths. That’s okay. Often, they’re the most risk-averse or easily disengaged. Transparency builds trust with those who stay—and they’ll work harder for a company they believe is honest.
  2. Provide context - Don’t just share the “what” - share the “why”. Define your success metrics and the timeline for evaluating the change. Share also the ramifications that success/failure will have on the business and everyone involved. This will build trust from the employees and motivate them to do their best to execute the new plan.
  3. Give a timeline for change - Use a pilot team to test the changes and use case studies and results to bolster the reason for change. But also give people a timeline in which they can make an adjustment. Some people are laggards while others have legitimate concerns about the change. Hear out the concerns and allow the laggards to adjust to the change on the timeline you laid out for them.
  4. Have the team repeat back to leadership why the change is being made - Ask teams to repeat back the “why” behind the change. Let middle managers explain it in their own words to leadership. This equips them to handle pushback from their teams—and prevents the dreaded line: "I don’t know why we’re doing this, but it’s the new way now."

If upper managers, middle managers, and individual contributors can all communicate why a change decision was made, the company is much more likely to pass the litmus test of every employee going back to their families and saying “The company has made some positive changes to the organization and I am excited about my role in this organization moving forward.” If an organization does these 4 things, they will be well on their way to building a clear vision that drives execution.


Privacy Policy