In the previous article “Leadership: answers to questions that no one asked”, I tried to shed some light on how companies deal with problems and “problem finders” – the people who point out problems. This article is about not wanting to see problems in the first place. A kind of “problem blindness” or “toxic positivity” that has unfortunately crept into many companies.
Toxic positivity is a growing problem in many companies that can jeopardize authentic problem solving and long-term prospects for success. The notion that only a positive attitude should ever be adopted leads, conversely, to a rejection of challenges and can compromise business goals in the long term. This article explores the origins of toxic positivity in organizations, its impact on business goals and how a balance between positivity and realism can lead to sustainable success. And most importantly, what leadership has to do with it.
Understanding toxic positivity
Definition and overview
Toxic positivity refers to the excessive and unreflected pursuit of a positive attitude in all situations. In a corporate context, this often becomes the (cultural) norm so that problems and negative emotions are suppressed rather than addressed. This can lead to real concerns not being raised and critical issues not being addressed. True to the motto: “I don’t want to hear about problems.”
Historical context
The concept of toxic positivity is closely linked to positive psychology and the self-help movement, which promote optimistic thinking. In the corporate context, however, this attitude can take on extreme forms in which critical problems are not acknowledged in order to maintain the image of a perfect, positive organization or, as described in the article “Leadership: Answers to questions no one asked”, to avoid appearing to be a nest-burner and thus jeopardizing one’s own career.
Difference to true positivity
True positivity is characterized by a balanced perspective that combines optimism with recognition of difficulties. In contrast, toxic positivity seeks to promote an unrealistic and distorted view of reality for various reasons, which can lead to ineffectiveness in the long term.
The origins of toxic positivity in companies – or: Toxic positive culture is strategy for breakfast
Cultural and organizational factors
A strong drive to promote an optimistic company culture can be the cause of toxic positivity. The desire to boost morale or avoid conflict often leads to real problems not being addressed. This pressure to remain positive at all times can significantly impair the organization’s problem-solving capabilities.
Under certain circumstances, however, CEOs and managing directors may not want employees to address problems out of pride or fear for their reputation. This raises the question of how well the leadership characteristics and the associated ability to admit and address one’s own mistakes are developed in the respective management. However, it would be too general to establish a monocausal link between a toxic, positive corporate culture and a person’s character traits. The reasons are often manifold.
Examples from the company’s history
There are numerous historical examples where toxic positivity has led to failure. A notable example from the technology sector is the dotcom bubble, where companies made unrealistic growth forecasts, ignoring the fact that their business models were not sustainable in the long term.
Effects on corporate goals
Masking real problems
Toxic positivity can hinder the perception and handling of real problems. When employees feel compelled to maintain a positive attitude, they are often reluctant to point out problems, which leads to a lack of problem awareness. Without adequately addressing these issues, they can escalate and damage the company. In the worst case, long-serving employees can also fall into a kind of self-suggestion and really no longer see problems – “problem blindness” is born.
Promotion of superficial solutions
An exclusive focus on positivity can also lead to a preference for superficial solutions. These may provide short-term relief (because, after all, you don’t have any problems, only “challenges”), but they do not eliminate the underlying causes of problems. This can result in a cycle of recurring, unresolved problems that accumulate in the worst-case scenario and then escalate completely later on. The infamous “bang” is the result.
Ignoring root causes
Denying underlying causes weakens the company in the long term. Without a thorough root cause analysis, the company remains in a state of complacency, hindering innovation and adaptability.
Case studies on harmful results
Failed projects due to toxic positivity
Projects that are carried out under the pressure of toxic positivity often fail. One example is a company that launched a large project without sound analysis simply because it wanted to create a positive atmosphere. Critical feedback was dismissed, which led to the project’s failure.
Examples include, among others:
- WorldCom and Bernard Ebbers
WorldCom, once the second largest US telecommunications company, got into difficulties under CEO Bernard Ebbers. In order to keep the share price artificially high, he falsified accounting entries instead of solving the problems. This led to bankruptcy and his conviction for fraud. - Lehman Brothers and Richard Fuld
Despite warning signs, Lehman CEO Richard Fuld opted for risky investments in mortgage securities. He failed to recognize the dangers, which contributed to the collapse of the bank and the global financial crisis. - Toys “R” Us and Dave Brandon
Under CEO Dave Brandon, Toys “R” Us ignored the changes in the retail sector. Instead of investing in e-commerce, cost-cutting and store closures were prioritized. The lack of adaptation led to bankruptcy. - Parmalat
Parmalat’s financial directors concealed high debts for years. When the truth came to light, the company collapsed. - Twitter/X and Elon Musk
Elon Musk wanted to turn Twitter into a subscription service with Twitter Blue (today: X Premium) and promised himself 10 billion dollars by 2028. The employees who warned against this were fired. In the end (Nov. 2024), 1% of the user base and 1.4 million dollars and lots of other problems emerged.
Long-term damage to the company’s image
Toxic positivity can cause lasting damage to a company’s reputation. If a company constantly ignores problems, customers and partners lose trust. This has long-term negative effects on brand perception and market success. Because one thing is clear, customers are not stupid. They recognize when processes are not running smoothly and promises are made that cannot be kept.
Employee perspectives
Voices of employees who experience toxic positivity
Employees who experience toxic positivity report feeling isolated. Their concerns are seen as negative, troublemakers or even complainers, leading to a drop in engagement and increased turnover. In an environment where only positivity and constant “sunshine” is expected, they feel unheard and unsupported, or in the worst case even marginalized and bullied as a nest-burner.
How realists are perceived as pessimists
In an organization that promotes toxic positivity, realists who point out problems and offer constructive criticism are often labeled as pessimists. This misperception prevents the organization from benefiting from valuable feedback and drives employees first to internal resignation and then to real resignation.
Leadership: The role of management in promoting realism
Training and development programs
Management must actively promote a culture of realism. Training and development programs that emphasize dealing with difficult issues and constructive criticism help to create an open and solution-oriented work environment. This is anything but easy. Criticism hurts and sometimes there are employees who nag to be seen. However, good leaders can distinguish between these employees and see real help when this turns a corner. But not only that. Good leaders don’t feel offended by criticism, but are able to put their ego aside and bring criticism back to the factual level – even if it is not formulated constructively at first glance.
Encouraging constructive criticism
Managers should create an environment in which (constructive) criticism is welcome. It is important that employees learn to address problems openly without fear of negative consequences – whether from superiors or team members. This promotes an effective problem-solving and innovation culture. After all, it is often the employees who have recognized the signs of the times long before the management. Just like animals – even if the comparison is a little apt – employees sense impending earthquakes much earlier than the boardroom.
It is the task of good leaders to find a channel or outlet for this criticism.
Reconciling positivity and realism
Strategies for effective problem solving
Positivity and realism can be reconciled through concrete strategies. Open communication, continuous improvement and data-driven decisions are approaches that help to promote a balanced view and find long-term solutions. In addition to the above-mentioned ability of leaders to accept criticism, this also includes the know-how to be able to read data and derive actions from it.
It is always said that managers don’t need to know everything, as there are specialists in the team for that. However, as a generalist, a manager must have enough specialist knowledge to be able to ask the right questions and assess the scope of the problems in their department.
The importance of open communication
Open communication – including mutual trust – is of central importance. Companies need to create secure and transparent communication channels where employees can freely express their thoughts and concerns. This helps to identify problems at an early stage and resolve them more quickly. What is important to mention at this point is that often employees can name the problem, but not the solution on an ad-hoc basis. A point that is discussed in more detail in the article “Leadership: answers to questions that no one has asked”. In today’s working world, career advice is often given that employees should never offer problems, but always solutions. Sometimes, however, and this is crucial, employees can only name the problem. Be it because they don’t have all the information at their hierarchical level or because they can’t find the solution themselves. It is then the task of the line manager to gather the relevant information and work out a solution. Holding employees accountable then almost borders on a refusal to work on the part of the line manager.
Tools and techniques for problem solving
Root cause analysis
Root cause analysis is an essential tool for identifying the underlying problems. A sustainable solution can only be found if the actual causes are recognized and addressed. A “shoo shoo whitewash” leads in the long term to a downward spiral of problems and a domino effect. However, this requires the aforementioned will and the corresponding know-how of the manager – aka leader.
Problem-solving framework
In addition to trust and psychological security, which enable employees to address problems openly, a clear framework is also needed to communicate these concerns in a structured manner.
Various formats are available for this purpose:
Meetings – both as a team and in 1:1 discussions
Written communication – via emails, chat messages or documented reports
A tried and tested method can be to present problems in writing in a structured form – for example, in a short report of at least a quarter to half a DIN A4 page. This helps to clearly identify the problem and develop initial solutions.
Established processes from the agile way of working, such as regular retrospectives or quarterly workshops, also provide a fixed framework for systematically analyzing challenges and solving them as a team. Even if agile methods are not ideal for every organization, the idea of fixed reflection formats can provide valuable impetus.
Ultimately, however, it remains crucial that an environment of trust is created – a genuine safe space in which employees can be sure that their concerns will be heard and taken seriously.
The psychology behind denying problems
Cognitive dissonance in the corporate culture
Employees can face cognitive dissonance in a toxic corporate culture. The pressure to remain positive while problems are visible leads to these problems being downplayed or denied in order to reduce internal tension.
Psychological safety in the workplace
Psychological safety is a prerequisite for dealing effectively with problems – but also for good performance in general. In a safe environment, employees can voice their concerns without fear of negative consequences. This promotes an open, solution-oriented culture.
Advantages of direct problem solving
Improved decision-making
Dealing with problems directly improves decision-making. Organizations that tackle difficulties proactively make informed, well-founded decisions that lead to long-term success. Proactive action can also create a competitive advantage over the competition.
Increased innovation and creativity
When problems are addressed openly, this promotes creativity and innovation. Employees feel more confident and are more willing to develop new ideas if their concerns are taken seriously. Here, too, it is important to find a healthy balance between innovation and jumping from hype to hype.
Prevention of toxic positivity
Guidelines and practices
Organizations should develop policies and practices that promote a realistic and healthy culture. Regular feedback and training on conflict resolution are crucial to avoid toxic positivity.
Management approaches
Managers play a key role in preventing toxic positivity. They should set an example of open communication and realism through their own behavior to promote a culture of transparency and problem solving.
Conclusion: The way forward
Combating toxic positivity requires a conscious effort to establish a culture of realism. Companies that tackle their problems head-on can not only improve their decision-making processes, but also increase their innovative strength and ensure long-term success. However, this requires employees who have internalized leadership – with all its implications – and who can put their egos aside and are willing to challenge and encourage their “subordinates” and create a space that benefits both people and the company.
Frequently asked questions (FAQs)
1. How can I recognize toxic positivity in my company?
Toxic positivity often manifests itself in the fact that critical voices are suppressed, problems are not allowed to be addressed and negative emotions are considered “unprofessional”. If only positive reports are welcome in meetings and constructive criticism is dismissed as destructive, this is a warning signal.
2. Isn't it good to create a positive working environment?
Yes, a positive work environment is important – but it should be based on honesty and openness. Toxic positivity leads to problems being ignored, which is harmful in the long run. Instead, companies should foster a culture that recognizes both successes and challenges.
3. How can I as a manager take action against toxic positivity?
Managers should:
- Establish an open feedback culture (e.g. regular meetings for honest discussions)
- Allow self-criticism and admit your own mistakes
- Putting your own ego aside – even as management
- Encourage employees to address uncomfortable topics
- Encourage critical thinking by discussing alternative perspectives
- Create a technical form or channel to communicate uncomfortable topics at a suitable time and in a suitable form.
4. What is the difference between toxic and healthy positivity?
Healthy positivity means staying motivated and solution-oriented without suppressing reality. Toxic positivity, on the other hand, ignores or suppresses challenges and conveys the false message that negative thinking is bad per se.
5. Can toxic positivity slow down a company's innovative strength?
Yes, absolutely. If employees are not allowed to ask critical questions for fear of negative feedback, there is a lack of real discussion and new ideas. Innovation often arises from challenges – toxic positivity prevents this process.
6. What first steps can my company take to reduce toxic positivity?
- Promoting honest communication
- Creating psychological safety so that employees can express criticism without fear (save space)
- See mistakes as a learning opportunity and not as a flaw
- Welcoming critical thinking and constructive dissent
- Shape the wording in companies so that words such as problems or competition are not replaced with weakened synonyms such as “challenges” and “competitors”. As we all know, thoughts shape reality.
