Curiosity may kill a cat, but that doesn't mean that curiosity is necessarily fatal to an employee's career success. By improving their political skills and expressing their curiosity in a constructive way, employees can contribute to the success of the organization without burdening themselves.
In recent years, workplace curiosity has been seen as one of the most important, transformative, and valuable traits a leader should have. Research has shown that curiosity can promote a sense of psychological safety, problem-solving and innovation. Another study found that employees with curiosity — those who like to find new solutions to complex problems, who are eager to learn, who seek information and develop new strategies — are more likely to be seen by leaders as competent, creative, and high-performing. It's no surprise, then, that businesses of all kinds have been working hard to nurture and encourage curiosity in their employees.
However, some researchers argue thatCuriosity can be a double-edged sword。For example, curious people may satisfy their curiosity by taking unnecessary risks. Similarly, some managers may prefer their employees to follow pre-established plans or scenarios rather than questioning or even rewriting them. In fact, it's true that managers may not like employees who are too curious, and they will perceive such employees as rule-breakers and breakers – in line with the admonition expressed by the proverb "curiosity kills cats".
Recently, we conducted a series of studies to understand how curiosity can lead to different responses in the workplace in a variety of different situations, with a focus on:Learn about political skills(refers to the ability of managers to obtain power, establish a power base, and use power in an organization).Whether skilled employees are better able to express their curiosity in a way that is more preferred and accepted by organizational leaders.
In our first study, we collected data from more than 900 leaders and employees from three different companies in three different industries, including human resources, sales and service, and manufacturing. We asked employees to indicate the level of curiosity they expressed in their work (e.g., whether they searched for as much information as possible before understanding complex issues). We also measure their political skills by asking them about their ability to socialize, influence others, express sincerity and social awareness, among other things.
In a separate questionnaire, their supervisor rated how fond they were of the employee and indicated whether they thought the employee was showing signs of disobedience (e.g., arrogance, rudeness, etc.). We also controlled for the potential impact of factors such as the gender of leaders and employees, the length of work relationships, employees' perceptions of psychological safety, and their task performance.
In all three samples, we find,Curious employees are seen by their leaders as disobedient and, in turn, less likeable. However, curious employees with political skills are not seen that way.
To better understand the importance of political skills, we conducted a second study to see if the curiosity of politically skilled employees was more likely to be perceived as constructive. Specifically, we invited 400 MBA students (each of whom manages at least three employees) to participate in a ** experiment. In our experiment, guided by previous research, we simulated the curiosity and political skills of a fictional employee (Alex). For example, the inquisitive Alex is described as a person who spends a lot of time gathering information to solve difficult problems at work, and he will continue to delve into the same problem until it is solved;Alex, who has political skills, is described as someone who knows people very well, he knows how to present himself to others, is able to communicate with people, seems genuine, and he also spends a lot of time networking at work.
Again, we find outThe curiosity of employees with poor political skills is not only more likely to be seen as disobedient(Same as what we found in the first study);We also found thatTheir behavior is less likely to be seen as constructive or helpful in improving organizational efficiency.
Based on these findings, we would like to look at:Whether a leader has a constructive view of their employees' curiosity may be a driving factor in their perception of their employees. So, in the third study, we conducted another ** experiment, where we asked 528 employees at two large companies (an information technology company and a management consulting firm) to read different contextual material that contained both scenarios in which Alex showed constructive curiosity and in which he exhibited non-constructive curiosity. In our context, constructive curiosity involves seeking information, knowledge, or learning by asking many inspiring questions that are not easy to answer;Unconstructive curiosity involves seeking information, knowledge, or learning by asking a large number of easy-to-answer questions. As we might expect, when Alex shows more constructive curiosity, people don't perceive Alex's lack of obedience, and it's more flattering for him to do so.
Let's tackle the obvious question:When leaders perceive their employees' curiosity as disobedient, is it the employee's fault or the leader's fault?We believe that there are problems on both sides and that both should be warned.
On the one hand,Leaders of organizations should be cautious when assessing curiosity in the workplace. If employees show curiosity in a constructive way, then their leaders shouldn't punish them because it's unwise and unfair. Therefore, leaders should ask themselves if there are certain biases in their minds – including various unconscious biases – that may lead them to misunderstand employees who actively seek information, knowledge, or take the initiative to learn that they are genuinely trying to make the workplace better.
On the other hand,When an employee's curiosity isn't constructive, leaders may have more reason to discourage it. Considering that politically skilled employees are good at expressing curiosity and not being seen as disobedient, curious employees should ask themselves if they also have good political skills. If they do not possess good political skills, they should be more careful to express their curiosity or should seek to improve their political skills through training, role-playing, career guidance, practice, and other self-development related to the development of political skills. In addition, our research shows that it is particularly useful to try to express your curiosity in a constructive way, and that means asking the right questions at the right time.
Curiosity may kill a cat, but that doesn't mean that curiosity is necessarily fatal to an employee's career success. By improving their political skills and expressing their curiosity in a constructive way, employees can contribute to the success of the organization without burdening themselves.
Keywords:Workplace
Mark C. PollinoBolino), Phillip S. ThompsonThompson), Kalan Norris, Shu-Tsen Kuo|Wen.
Mark C. Pollino is the David L. Bolen Professor at the University of Oklahoma's Price School of Business. His research focuses on understanding how an organization can motivate employees to do more without compromising their personal well-being. Philip S. Thompson is an assistant professor of management and organizational behavior at the Pamplin School of Business at Virginia Tech. His research examines a variety of organizational behavior themes, including how curiosity and gender affect employees' job performance. Karan Norris is a postdoctoral associate in the Department of Work and Organization at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota. His primary research focus is on diversity and inclusion, with a particular emphasis on studying differences within ethnicity to better understand the nuanced experiences of racially and ethnically diverse employees. Shusen Guo is a Ph.D. candidate in Organizational Behavior at the Pamplin School of Business at Virginia Tech. Her research examines how employees strategically achieve their work goals.
Zhang Zhentao|Translated by Zhou Qiang|Redaction.
It's so hard to convince others, how do masters do it?
Can the strategic advice provided by AI make the company more profitable?