Impression Management

Impression management is defined as the process by which an individual consciously or unconsciously influences, directs, and controls the impressions, perceptions, and evaluations that others form of them. This process, as a natural part of human interaction as a social being, is prominently observed not only in interpersonal relationships but especially in organizational settings. Individuals employ this process for various purposes such as increasing social and material gains, gaining personal respect and social approval, constructing a desired identity, validating themselves, or avoiding negative evaluations.

Selected Faces, a Visual Representing Managed Perceptions (Generated by Artificial Intelligence)

Definition

The concept of impression management has been defined in various ways by different researchers. A common thread among these definitions is that the process involves social interaction, an effort to create an image, and a purposeful attempt to influence others. Some definitions from the literature include:

• Leary and Kowalski (1990): The process by which an individual seeks to control the impressions others form of them.

• Goffman (1959): The way individuals present themselves to others in everyday situations, manage the impressions others form of them, and regulate what they can and cannot do while in the presence of others.

• Rosenfeld, Giacalone and Riordan: The methods individuals use with the aim of controlling the impressions others form of them.

• Kacmar and Carlson (1994): The efforts by which an individual consciously or unconsciously creates and displays a specific image to control how others perceive them.

• Bozeman and Kacmar (1997): A process in which individuals use verbal or nonverbal behaviors to achieve desired outcomes regarding their image.

These behaviors may include verbal actions such as personality description, reporting, apologizing, and flattery, as well as nonverbal communication elements such as clothing style, body language, facial expressions, and eye contact. Although the process is fundamentally aimed at personal gain, it does not always seek to create a positive image. In some cases, individuals may deliberately create a negative impression using tactics such as intimidation.

Historical Development

Research on the concept of impression management began simultaneously but independently in sociology and psychology during the 1950s and 1960s.

Sociological Foundations

The theoretical foundations of the concept were laid by sociologist Erving Goffman in his 1959 work, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Goffman likened social life to a theatrical stage, arguing that individuals are constantly performing roles to leave specific impressions on others. According to Goffman, individuals strive to create impressions that influence how others evaluate them.

Psychological Foundations

In psychology, Edward Jones highlighted in 1964 the necessity of understanding impression management dynamics to comprehend how individuals form perceptions of one another.

Transition to Organizational Context

Originally widely studied in laboratory-based experimental social psychology during the 1970s, the concept began to be examined in organizational and organizational behavior research from the mid-1980s onward. Today, impression management is recognized as a natural behavior commonly used in organizational life and a fundamental element of effective organizational communication.

Key Figures

Erving Goffman

Recognized as the founder of impression management theory, he was the first to systematically analyze self-presentation in social interactions through a dramaturgical approach. He examined how individuals present identities in social situations and how they manage these presentations.

Edward Jones

A pioneer in the psychological study of the topic, he, along with Thane S. Pittman, developed a classification of impression management tactics that became foundational for many subsequent studies: self-promotion, intimidation, exemplification, supplication, and ingratiation.

Theoretical Approaches and Models

Impression management has been conceptualized in the literature as a process, and various models have been developed to explain it.

Leary and Kowalski’s Two-Component Model

This model divides the process into two core components: impression motivation and impression construction. Motivation is influenced by factors such as the alignment of impressions with goals and the discrepancy between current and desired images; impression construction involves elements such as self-concept, role expectations, and social image.

Rosenfeld, Giacalone and Riordan’s Three-Component Model

This model adds the component of impression monitoring to Leary and Kowalski’s model. It treats awareness of how others perceive one’s image as a distinct stage in the process.

Martinko’s Process Model

This model defines impression management as a six-stage process: (1) Situation analysis, (2) Goal and priority determination, (3) Selection of tactics, (4) Performance of behaviors, (5) Evaluation of target reactions and outcomes, (6) Continuation or modification of goals or tactics.

Gardner and Martinko’s Interactive Model

This model reflects Goffman’s dramaturgical perspective, framing the process as a complex interaction among actor, audience (target), and environmental context. The personality traits, motivations, and cognitive processes of the actor and target, along with environmental factors such as organizational culture and job characteristics, determine which tactics are used and the success of the process.

Bozeman and Kacmar’s Cybernetic Model

This model explains the process as a feedback loop. The individual (actor) is motivated to engage in impression management when they perceive a discrepancy between their desired social identity and the feedback received from the target. The actor compares their current and desired images; if a difference exists, they develop and apply new tactics, then reassess the target’s response to adjust the process accordingly.

Impression Management Tactics

The behaviors individuals use to create desired impressions are termed impression management tactics. These tactics are generally classified into two main categories:

Proactive (Self-Promoting) Tactics

These tactics are proactive and used by individuals to create or enhance a positive identity. The primary goal is to be perceived as likable, competent, committed, or intimidating. Major proactive tactics include:

Ingratiation

The individual engages in behaviors such as praise, flattery, agreement, and helpful acts to appear likable and gain others’ approval. This tactic is frequently used by subordinates to influence superiors. However, its perceived insincerity carries the risk of the “ingratiator’s dilemma.”

Self-Promotion

The individual highlights their achievements, abilities, and positive qualities to be perceived as competent, knowledgeable, and skilled. The goal is to gain respect rather than affection. Overuse of this tactic may lead others to view the individual as arrogant or self-centered.

Exemplification

The individual strives to create the impression of being morally committed, honest, self-sacrificing, disciplined, and dedicated to their work. Behaviors such as arriving early and leaving late exemplify this tactic. Those who use it risk being perceived as hypocritical.

Intimidation

The individual seeks to influence others and compel them to behave in desired ways by appearing threatening, harsh, or frightening. This tactic is typically used by those in positions of power and can generate fear and insecurity within organizations.

Supplication

The individual attempts to gain help or support by appearing needy and weak, thereby eliciting sympathy or compassion from others. While effective in the short term, it may lead to long-term loss of credibility.

Defensive Tactics

These tactics are reactive and used after a negative event threatens an individual’s social image, with the aim of preserving, repairing, or avoiding responsibility for the damage. Major defensive tactics include:

Accounts

The individual provides justifications to reduce or eliminate responsibility for a negative situation. Forms include claiming innocence, making excuses, or attempting to justify the behavior.

Apologies

The individual accepts responsibility for the negative situation, expresses regret, and attempts to rectify the situation.

Denials

The individual denies that the negative event occurred or that they were involved in it.

Self-Handicapping

The individual protects themselves from potential failure by creating or claiming obstacles that could negatively affect their performance in advance.

Application Areas and Outcomes

Impression management has a broad range of applications, particularly in organizational life. Major application areas include:

• Hiring Processes: Candidates and interviewers consciously use impression management tactics during job interviews to leave positive impressions.

• Performance Appraisals: The impression management tactics used by employees can influence managers’ performance evaluations. Studies have shown that employees who use ingratiation tactics are often evaluated more positively by their superiors.

• Career Advancement and Promotion: Individuals use impression management to obtain promotions, better assignments, or progress in their careers.

• Leadership and Leader-Member Interaction: Subordinates may engage in impression management behaviors toward leaders to become part of their inner circle and gain greater resources and support.

• Interorganizational Relationships: Organizations also apply impression management at the institutional level to influence customers, competitors, and the public.

The outcomes of the process vary depending on the tactic used, the context, and individual characteristics. Positive outcomes include job satisfaction, higher performance ratings, promotion, and salary increases, while negative outcomes include being perceived as insincere, arrogant, or dishonest, loss of trust, and damaged relationships with coworkers.

Factors Influencing Tactical Choice

The choice of impression management tactic by individuals depends on various factors. These include:

Individual Factors

Personality Traits

An individual’s personality structure is a key determinant of tactic selection. Individuals with high self-monitoring ability are more successful in adapting tactics to situational demands. Those with high self-esteem tend to prefer assertive tactics such as self-promotion, while those with low self-esteem prefer defensive tactics such as supplication or self-handicapping. Individuals with high self-efficacy are more likely to use proactive tactics like initiative-taking and self-promotion and avoid tactics like self-pity.

Situational and Environmental Factors

Organizational Culture and Climate

An organization’s values, norms, and policies determine which tactics are acceptable or effective. For example, in organizations that prioritize creativity, proactive tactics are more common, whereas in highly formal organizations, ingratiation is more frequently observed.

Target Characteristics

The status, power, familiarity, and expectations of the target directly influence the choice of tactic.

Task Characteristics

The routine or ambiguous nature of a task also affects tactic selection. As task ambiguity increases, employees are observed to rely more heavily on ingratiation behaviors.

Demographic Factors

Gender

Research indicates possible gender-based differences in tactic use. Some findings show that male teachers prefer tactics such as self-promotion and intimidation more than female teachers.

Professional Experience

Newly hired employees tend to use different tactics to adapt and create positive impressions, while experienced employees toward the end of their careers use different tactics to strengthen social bonds and serve as role models for younger colleagues.