Many failures in life are caused by self-sabotage of
one’s own abilities and skills. The concept of self-handicapping is a
self-imposed strategy of avoiding evaluations of performance by developing strategies
to implement barriers (Jones & Berglas, 1978). These barriers are created
in order to protect short-term self-esteem but damages long-term proper
evaluations of self. Who can blame themselves when there are millions of
reasons to fail?
Employees may be self-handicapping when they are
capable of completing projects but fail to do so because of poor choices. For
example, an important project that does not get enough attention due to
distracting work events may be self-imposed if this employee has chosen to
engage and focus on these side projects. There are many legitimate excuses why some
project was not completed effectively but self-handicapping may be the root
when these excuses are within the employee’s control.
Self-handicapping often occurs when employees are
unsure of their abilities to perform the tasks set in front of them (McCrea, et.
al. 2008). This unsure perception leads this person to inadvertently develop
strategies that offer readymade excuses when failures do occur in order to
avoid criticalness. The whole strategy
is designed to protect a person’s self-esteem from proper self-evaluation and
correction.
The saddest part about self-handicapping is that
employees may be completely capable of finishing satisfactory projects that
benefit the organization or themselves. However, when such handicapping does
occur the employee themselves are often unaware of what they are doing or why
they are doing it. In order to change the way employees perform it is necessary
to change the way they view themselves.
Who is most likely to
self-handicap? Employees who are more likely to evaluate themselves negatively
are also more likely to self-handicap (Spalding & Hardin, 1999). In most
cases this is an automatic cognition process as part of quick heuristics learned
over one’s lifetime. Counter information is either ignored or not forthcoming
thereby limiting critical thinking.
Four studies conducted by Mccrea & Flamm (2012) evaluated
college students for self-handicapping traits and behaviors. Each of the four
studies had different criteria and focused on a particular aspect of
self-handicapping between genders. Independent judges were used to help code
thoughts as participates engaged in the process of self-evaluation.
Participants were unaware that the tests focused on self-handicapping
strategies and were told the research was on intelligence.
Results:
-Threatening tasks with public evaluation combined
with individual personality traits led to downward thought projection
(prefactuals).
-The downward prefactuals helped participants
identify possible excuses.
-The identified excuses primed individual behavior.
-Cognitive load helped people not to think about
negative prefactuals and therefore improved performance.
-The determining of possible reasons for failure may
be a result of unconscious strategies that produce anxiety.
-Upward prefactuals (positive thoughts) may limit
the impact of self-handicapping thinking on performance.
The study helps managers and business leaders
understand that handicapping behavior may be unknown to their employees. Such
behavior is often automatic and outside of the employees awareness. However,
cognitive load and positive thinking may have some level of impact on the
overall performance and minimizing the impact of self-handicapping behavior. Helping
employees understand how their thoughts are leading to negative outcomes may
help them gain greater awareness of their performance outcomes.
Jones, E.
& Berglas, S. (1978). Control of attributions about the self through
self-handicapping strategies: the appeal of alcohol and the role of
underachievement. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 200-206.
Mccrea, S.
& Flamm, A. (2012). Dysfunctional anticipatory thoughts and the
self-handicapping strategy. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 42, 72-81.
McCrea, S., et. al. (2008). The worker scale:
developing a measure to explain gender differences in behavioral
self-handicapping. Journal of Research
and Personality, 42.
