Research by cognitive psychologist Shane Littrell at Cornell University has introduced the Corporate Bullshit Receptivity Scale, a tool designed to measure susceptibility to impressive-but-empty organisational rhetoric. The findings, published on March 8 in the journal Personality and Individual Differences, reveal something that has long frustrated office workers: those most impressed by corporate buzzwords tend to be among the least effective decision-makers.
Corporate bullshit is a specific style of communication that uses confusing, abstract buzzwords in a functionally misleading way. Unlike technical jargon, which can sometimes make office communication easier, corporate bullshit confuses rather than clarifies. It may sound impressive, but it is semantically empty.
The Research Method
To test this, Littrell created a corporate bullshit generator that churns out meaningless but impressive-sounding sentences like, "We will actualize 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 real quotes from Fortune 500 leaders.
Divided into four distinct studies, the research verified the scale as a statistically reliable measure of individual differences in receptivity to corporate bullshit, then, through use of established cognitive tests, made connections between receptivity to BS and analytic thinking skills known to be essential to workplace performance.
A Troubling Paradox
The results exposed a troubling mismatch. Workers who were more susceptible to corporate BS rated their supervisors as more charismatic and visionary, but also displayed lower scores on a portion of the study that tested analytic thinking, cognitive reflection and fluid intelligence. Those more receptive to corporate BS also scored significantly worse on a test of effective workplace decision-making.
Even more striking, being more receptive to corporate bullshit was positively linked to job satisfaction and feeling inspired by company mission statements. In other words, the employees most pleased with their workplace were often those least equipped to think critically about it.
A Self-Perpetuating Cycle
The research identifies a self-reinforcing problem. Those who were more likely to fall for corporate BS were also more likely to spread it. 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 organization acts more like a clogged toilet of inefficiency.
This dynamic reflects a broader organisational reality. Companies are under pressure to simplify internal messaging, especially as distributed workforces make misunderstandings more costly. Research on organisational communication increasingly points to trust, comprehension, and collaboration as competitive assets, not just cultural ideals.
What This Means for Organisations
The implications for hiring and promotion decisions are significant. This study highlights a potential disconnect between the type of employees who are often praised for their visionary and charismatic leadership, and those who may be better equipped to make sound, analytical business decisions. As corporate buzzwords and mission statements become increasingly ubiquitous, this research suggests that companies should be wary of prioritising style over substance when evaluating talent.
Related research reinforces this concern. A University of Florida study found that jargon might actually be impeding information flow across teams. Older workers had a harder time processing jargon, but were more likely to intend to ask for more information to clarify the message. Younger employees were less likely to seek and share information when confused by jargon.
The evidence points toward a pragmatic conclusion: clarity is not merely a communication preference but an operational advantage. The more useful takeaway is not ridicule but that organisations should reward precision, evidence, and understandable communication over verbal theatre. For managers tasked with building effective teams and making sound decisions, the message from research is becoming clear. Plain language works.
Read the full study: The Corporate Bullshit Receptivity Scale: Development, validation, and associations with workplace outcomes (ResearchGate)