5 Scientific Reasons You're a Bad Employee

Racism, much like that muttering hobo that has slept in the parking garage for the last five years, still lives in the workplace even if no one wants to acknowledge it. For instance, a study at the University of Chicago, analyzing five thousand resumes, determined that an applicant's name can determine whether or not they'll get a call back--that is, whether or not their name sounded white.

"Mr. Ulammabat, would you consider switching to 'Rick'?"
People sporting names like Kathleen or Pam got 50 percent more callbacks for interviews than people with names like Lakisha or Shaniqua. A follow up experiment by 20/20 found that when posting two identical resumes, one with a "white name" and one with a "black name," at a job website, the "white named resume" got contacted 17 percent more often than its black counterpart.
Well, you think, everyone knows that people who work in HR are jerks. After all, they consistently reject you from any jobs you apply to, just because you Photoshopped some boobs on the CEO that one time. But you're not racist, right? In fact, if you heard someone make so much as an offhand racial insult, you'd confront them and/or avoid them at all costs from that point forward. Right?

"...maybe I stop parking next to Bob."
Well, an experiment at York University showed that people vastly overestimate their reactions to racism, as long as they're not a member of the race being discriminated against. The experiment took 120 people (no minorities) and split them into two groups. Sixty of them were asked, as a hypothetical, would they be willing to partner up with a person after hearing them make racist comments. Only 10 to 20 percent said they would.
The other 60 subjects, meanwhile, were put in a waiting room along with two people in on the experiment--one white, one black. The black person got up and "accidentally" bumped the white person's knee before leaving the room. The white person would then turn to the subject and say a phrase like, "Typical, I hate it when black people do that," or in some cases, use an outright racial slur. When those subjects were then given the chance to partner up with the racist to complete a task... 63 percent did.
Instead of meeting the racism with fury, it was met with relative indifference. The attitude seemed to be, "I'm totally against racism in all circumstances, unless the person I'm working with hates black people."

"Why isn't Terrence laughing at Jen's Lil Kim impression? She said her black sorority sister thought it was funny."

How many subjects would you say you're an expert on? Well, you're safe in claiming at least one: yourself. After all, you have intimate knowledge of every one of your own secrets, shames, talents and failings. You spend every day with yourself. If a boss says you're incompetent, your first reaction will be to wonder what gave him this clearly false impression. Whether you say it out loud or not, a part of you is always thinking, He doesn't know me!
Well... science says otherwise.

We hope you like eating alone at lunch, Science.
Surveys asking people about how they compare with their peers have turned up a surprising result: Almost no one thinks that they're comparatively bad at anything. One study showed that 94 percent of college professors thought they did above average work. Another one involving students had 70 percent claiming to have above average leadership skills. That's physically impossible, obviously. Everyone can't be above average. The average wouldn't be average any more.

"Above average shape, yeah."
This trend exists in most areas of expertise, and it's caused by illusory superiority. If you're wondering how a person can screw up time and time again and still think they're better than those other "below average" folk, you can thank the infamous Dunning-Kruger effect, a catch-22 seemingly designed by Satan himself that makes incompetent people unable to judge their own incompetence because measuring competence is the thing they're least competent at.
Our delusions about ourselves are so bad that total strangers can take one look at us and gauge our own skills as effectively as we can. One study had people being recorded while reading some text, and then showed the resulting tape to a stranger. The stranger's assessment of the subjects IQ scores was just as good as the subject's self-ratings.
Meanwhile, research has also shown that we tend to overestimate our knowledge of a subject, while underestimating how much we'd benefit from studying it. Like the aforementioned employees trying to adjust to their new computers, we assume every subject is easy until we find out otherwise, at which point we immediately declare it impossible. It's amazing we ever even learned how to operate a broom.

"So ... now what?"
So, be honest:
When you read this article, did you honestly think it applied to you? Or were you spending the whole time thinking that it finally explained those other incompetent fools--you know, the ones you work with? If it's the latter, don't worry: They're thinking the same thing about you. It's science!

Science: Because suck it.
In case you now have it in your head that you need to leave your job, check out The 7 Ballsiest Ways Anyone Ever Quit Their Job. Or learn about how Daniel-san ruined our lives, in How 'The Karate Kid' Ruined The Modern World.
And stop by Linkstorm to see who thinks their a total Internet badass.
Cracked.com is looking for a lead PHP engineer to join our team of award-winning badasses. For more info, go here!
And don't forget to follow us on Facebook and Twitter to get sexy, sexy jokes sent straight to your news feed.
Do you have an idea in mind that would make a great article? Then sign up for our writers workshop! Know way too much about a random topic? Create a topic page and you could be on the front page of Cracked.com tomorrow!








I daresay #4 explains the majority of Cracked comments.
ReplyI can say this doesn't apply to me because I'm a cashier.
ReplyOn multi-tasking, I hate "Time Management". It's the most stupid thing office type jobs push at you. Yes, the reason I am behind in my work is that I can't manage my time. Not that you expect one person to do three peoples jobs and interrupt my work to make something else a priority every twenty minutes!
ReplyAnd sometimes the updates are actually worse and slower than old systems.
ReplyOur newer main access suite of programs is way more slow and buggy than our old single program that had more functionality.
And our old scanning program allows multiple scans of data and faster filing than the new one which only allows single scans and routing.
I'm with you! Our new system means we can no longer scan a persons details into the computer but have to manually enter it. It takes at least 10 minutes longer.
#3 I would say it's not from the fact that people don't like new things, but it's more, people have to learn how to use the new tech WHILE having all of their work done still, so not only are they trying to figure it out, but they have to get their regular amount of work done, because bosses/managers/supervisors don't want to let people learn how to use the equipment before starting work again.
ReplyMost "Multi-taskers" rush their work = half-ass effort. And are metal breakdowns/anxiety attacks waiting to happen. However, some people (like chefs/culinary artists/stock brokers) can somehow do that crap with proficiency (or that's just the result of passion towards your career) Me, I'd melt down in screaming stress!
ReplyThis reminds me of the Office.
ReplyI read the article fully expecting it to relate to me, and hoping it would help me not be terrible at everything ever...
Replyi thought the article was interesting, but not applicable to everyone, especially not all readers. maybe humans weren't made for multitasking, but that depends on your definition. i charge anyone who argues against the ability to multitask to hold a service industry job. the best servers are the ones who can keep an eye on multiple tables, remember the five tasks they have to do immediately, calm down a frustrated coworker, take criticism from the manager, and still remain focused on which button orders the right menu option. or look at teachers: grading papers while keeping an eye on 30+ students as they do an exam. on another related note, the argument focuses on ability to do multiple things at the same performance level as the other tasks done individually. this does not include the ability to focus on multiple things in rapid succession, which is what most "heavy multitaskers" are actually doing.
Replyalso, on the topic of overrating oneself: the statistic did not include the number of people who underestimate themselves or any research backing that.
on the topic of racism: everyone has something against someone. preconceptions are how we protect ourselves. it's what you use that information for, and how much you really buy into it. and it's not only skin color, but culture as well. people, in general, are much more receptive to someone they can relate to, someone they respect and are respected by, regardless of skin color.
I despise people who announce what great multitaskers that they are. When I hear someone say something along those lines about themselves I know to be careful about everything they tell or give me. These people are ALWAYS f*****g up. Why? Because human beings can't multitask. These assholes rate right up there with the walking disaster areas who consider themselves "big idea" people who can't be bothered with mundane attention to detail.
Reply#2 was filled with bad logic.
ReplyAnd the final paragraph was even WORSE. It essentially said, "30-40% of people overrate themselves. Therefore, so must you!"
While it's true that far too few people work on introspection and things along those lines, it's entirely possible to rate yourself as above average and for it to be true. The question is not whether you rate yourself as such, but whether you're capable of accepting the alternative.
It could also come from a low opinion of people in general. You think you're above average because you rate the average so low.
Tomato tomahto. Either way, people have a tendency to rate themselves above average-- whether it comes from inflated self worth or low opinion of people in general is irrelevant.
>Read the first page of the article
Reply>First two have horribly misinterpretted scientific studies
Yeah, this'll be a GREAT article! I mean, who doesn't love writers BSing their way through things?
I don't think that guessing that a person's I.Q was the same as they guessed is science. I.Q is all nonsense anyway.
ReplyWell, it's certainly effective at measuring how good they do on an IQ test.
Are we just assuming everyone who reads Cracked is doing so from their cubicle?
ReplyYeah. Mostly because we ARE.
My mom can have a conversation on the phone and with her kids at the same time. But that's probably from decades of being the emergency contact of the entire freaking town, and having five kids.
ReplyHave you ever been on the other end of that phone? I HATE talking to parents because they are always saying something to their kids at the same time.
@iDrum: Congratulations! You can hit a drum in time (that's kind of part of the deal when you're a drummer) and walk at the same time, without getting lost. We're all so very proud of you.
ReplyAny mention of racism on Cracked does not address hostility towards any of the other ethnic groups (ESPECIALLY not white people, but you already know that).
Replywell this is a little awkward, i have actually everything up that they described in the article: facebook, tower defense, plenty of tabs open, and im currently on the phone. I need to get a new job
Replyyou job sounds pretty sweet actually.
Based on this article, I am awesome at work. Damn. I rock.
ReplyNice article.
Reply