Have you ever rolled your eyes at a coworker praising “synergistic leadership” or “growth-hacking paradigms”? Well, science is officially on your side.
A new Cornell University study reveals that employees who are genuinely impressed by empty corporate buzzwords aren’t just annoying — they actually lack essential analytical thinking skills and struggle to make practical decisions.
Published in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, the research highlights the hidden dangers of the modern office environment, where using buzzwords to sound smart is often structurally protected and rewarded.
“Corporate bullshit is a specific style of communication that uses confusing, abstract buzzwords in a functionally misleading way,” explained Shane Littrell, a cognitive psychologist and postdoctoral researcher at Cornell. “Unlike technical jargon, which can sometimes make office communication a little easier, corporate bullshit confuses rather than clarifies. It may sound impressive, but it is semantically empty.”
The corporate bullshit generator
To test the true impact of this language, Littrell developed a tool called the Corporate Bullshit Receptivity Scale (CBSR). He built a computer program that churned out meaningless but impressive-sounding sentences, such as “We will actualise a renewed level of cradle-to-grave credentialing” and “By getting our friends in the tent with our best practices, we will pressure-test a renewed level of adaptive coherence.”
He then asked more than 1,000 office workers to rate the “business savvy” of these computer-generated statements alongside actual quotes from Fortune 500 leaders.
Across four distinct studies utilising established cognitive tests, the results revealed a troubling paradox:
- Lower cognitive skills: Workers who were more susceptible to the corporate BS scored lower on tests measuring analytic thinking, cognitive reflection, and fluid intelligence.
- Poor decision-making: These same highly receptive employees scored significantly worse on tests measuring effective workplace decision-making.
- Blind loyalty: Ironically, the workers who fell for the nonsense were also more likely to rate their supervisors as charismatic and “visionary”.
A “clogged toilet of inefficiency”
The findings suggest that employees most inspired by “visionary” jargon are least equipped to make practical, effective business decisions for their companies. Littrell pointed out that while ambitious employees use this jargon to appear more competent and climb the corporate ladder, the ultimate structural effect is highly damaging.
“This creates a concerning cycle,” Littrell noted. “Employees who are more likely to fall for corporate bullshit may help elevate the types of dysfunctional leaders who are more likely to use it, creating a sort of negative feedback loop. Rather than a ‘rising tide lifting all boats,’ a higher level of corporate BS in an organisation acts more like a clogged toilet of inefficiency.”
When this rhetoric goes unchecked, it can cause real financial and reputational damage. Littrell pointed to a notorious 2014 memo from a former Microsoft Devices Group executive. The email opened with 10 paragraphs of dense jargon — including phrases like “appropriate financial envelope” — before finally burying the real news in the 11th paragraph: 12,500 employees were going to lose their jobs.
To combat this, Littrell advises everyone to slow down when encountering heavy organisational messaging.
“Most of us, in the right situation, can get taken in by language that sounds sophisticated but isn’t,” Littrell said. “Because when a message leans heavily on buzzwords and jargon, it’s often a red flag that you’re being steered by rhetoric instead of reality.”
