Swearing boss study finds profanity divides workers by personality and country

A new swearing boss study suggests managers who use profanity can lose approval from many employees while gaining it from a narrower group of workers. The findings matter for workplaces because the same language from a supervisor may read as candid to one employee and hostile or unprofessional to another.

Alexandros Psychogios and Dritjon Gruda wrote in The Conversation that their research examined 5,660 employees across 19 countries. The study, published in Personality and Individual Differences, found that employees were generally less satisfied with supervisors who swore often.

The researchers said the pattern was not uniform. Employees who described themselves as having stronger psychopathic and Machiavellian traits reported higher satisfaction with a leader as that leader's profanity increased. Psychogios and Gruda linked that response to emotional detachment and a greater willingness to ignore social norms.

Workers with stronger narcissistic traits responded differently, according to the researchers. They showed little change in satisfaction when leaders used more profanity, suggesting the language neither won them over nor strongly put them off.

Should bosses swear at work?

The study does not say that every leader must avoid swearing in every setting. It does suggest that swearing is a risky management habit because employee reaction depends on personality and national context, not only on the words used.

For managers, the practical point is that profanity is not a reliable shortcut to authenticity or energy. Psychogios and Gruda said leaders should understand their audience rather than assume one communication style will work across a team.

How country differences changed the results

The researchers found that national income equality shaped how much personality mattered. In more equal societies, including Sweden and Austria, differences between employees were more visible: one worker might see profanity as approachable, while another might see it as poor leadership.

In less equal societies, including South Africa and Mexico, the study found that those personality differences became much less pronounced. Employees there generally reacted negatively to supervisors who used profanity, according to Psychogios and Gruda.

The researchers pointed to earlier work on economic inequality to explain that pattern. In societies with greater inequality, people may pay closer attention to rank and status, so a manager's swearing can be interpreted less as informality and more as dominance.

What the study means for workplace communication

The findings help explain why advice about leadership language can conflict. Calls for leaders to be more authentic may make sense in some teams, while expectations of restraint and professionalism may carry more weight in others.

The safest reading of the research is that frequent profanity is unlikely to be a broadly effective management strategy. According to the study, many employees reported lower satisfaction with sweary supervisors, even though a subset responded more favorably.

For leaders, the issue is less about whether a single swear word will damage a team and more about repeated communication habits. The research indicates that managers who know their teams and the wider cultural setting are better placed to judge how their language will land.

This story draws on original reporting from Phys.org.