Pygmalion In Management

397 Words2 Pages
The Pygmalion effect was described by J. Sterling Livingston in the September/October, 1988 Harvard Business Review. "The way managers treat their subordinates is subtly influenced by what they expect of them," Livingston said in his article. The Pygmalion effect enables staff to excel in response to the manager’s message that they are capable of success and expected to succeed. The Pygmalion effect can also undermine staff performance when the subtle communication from the manager tells them the opposite. These cues are often subtle. When the supervisor holds positive expectations about people, she helps individuals improve their self-concept and thus, self-esteem. People believe they can succeed and contribute and their performance rises to the level of their own expectations. Some managers always treat their subordinates in a way that leads to superior performance. But most managers, unintentionally treat their subordinates in a way that leads to lower performance than they are capable of achieving. The way mangers treat their subordinates is subtly influenced by what they expect of them. If managers’ expectations are high, productivity is likely to be excellent. If their expectations are low, productivity is likely to be poor. It is as though there were a law that caused subordinates’ performance to rise or fall to meet managers’ expectations. When salespersons are treated by their managers as super people, they try to live up to that image and do what they know super salespersons are expected to do. But when the agents with poor productivity records are treated by their managers as not having “any chance” of success, this negative expectation also becomes a managerial self-fulfilling prophecy. Managers cannot avoid the depressing cycle of events that flow from low expectations merely by hiding their feeling from subordinates. If managers believe

More about Pygmalion In Management

Open Document