I’ve been thinking about writing about this for some time now.

First, because we’ve been hibernating in our homes or apartments for months.  And, all those jokes about wearing pajamas- or wearing nothing at all while we work- have more than a few grains of truth in them.

The second impetus arose more recently.  As I was preparing for Rosh Hashana and the 40 (or 52) days of introspection and reinvigorating our lives, I was obviously drawn to consider my mentors.  Those folks who helped make me who I am today.  My grandpa, Sol Kuchlik, A’H, who drilled me in math and brought me to museums and other places.  My 7th, 8th, and 9th grade teacher (she chose that on purpose to give me three years of mentorship!), Ms Katzman.  My first real employers- Harry Mazur, A’H, and Cary Rollner (A’H) of Arlee Cleaners- who taught me dry cleaning (and ChemE), marketing, customer service, and about life. Samuel Ruben, who paid my way through Brooklyn Poly by designating me the Samuel Ruben Scholar of Chemical Engineering- who taught me about business and innovation.  And, Arthur Lipper- who pushed me to be the best I could be, among other attributes.

But, today’s post is something I learned from Sue Katzman.  She is the reason I managed to graduate from my yeshiva at the top of my form and excel in education and beyond.  As I said- she kept me in line for 3 years- there was no escaping her influence.

And, what an influence it was.  One of the key things she stressed with me was the need to dress appropriately.  She quoted a study that showed students who dressed well outperformed those who were dungarees (you may know them as blue jeans) to class.  I never did find that reference, but one thing was for sure.  There was no way I was going to enter Ms. Katzman’s class without the appropriate attire.  She brooked no BS.

And, now, I know where the studies are.  Some were finished about 45 years ago.  OK.  Being the historian she was, I’m sure there were a study or more existing way back in the dark ages (the 1950s).  But, I never did find them.  (There was no Google or Bing and I had not learned of Current Contents until grad school.)

These new studies demonstrate that wearing a suit or blazer makes an employee more productive, a better negotiator, and a great conference attendee.

Drs. Michael Kraus and Wendy Mendes of Yale (School of Management) published their article in the Journal of Experimental Psychology (Sartorial symbols of social class elicit class-consistent behavioral and physiological responses: A dyadic approach) six years ago.  They included 128 male subjects (various socioeconomic groups) in role-playing (mock negotiations over the sale of a factory- one that did not exist) situation.

The buyers of the simulated factory were divided into one of three groups- the first wore business suits and dress shoes (upper class) ; the second came equipped with sweatpants, T shirts, and plastic sandals (lower class). The third group was neutral (they wore the clothes in which they arrived for the testing.)  The sellers in question were always neutrals- and no sellers were ever allowed to play the buyer in these negotiations.

For the negotiations, the “players” were informed of the fair market value for the hypothetical production facility, plus other information needed to place their opening bids and asking prices.  The “suits” didn’t yield any ground in the negotiations, maintaining their bids mighty close to their initial offers of $ 830K.   This was a dramatic difference from the sweatpant group that afforded bid prices of $ 2.8 million.  The neutrals were “in-between”, allowing their bids to creep up to $ 1.58 million.  Obviously, the changes among the participants were both internal and external.

The study that more matched the dictum provided by Miss Katzman can be found in the Social Pschological and Personality Science journal.  The researchers, Drs. Michael Slepian, Simon Gerber, Joshua Gold, and Abraham Turchick from Cal State Northridge (Slepian is now at Columbia) published their results as The Cognitive Consequences of Formal Clothing.

They effected a series of five tests that demonstrated that when we dress up, our thinking is more abstract and creative.  They employed 361 subjects who were requested to perform a variety of tasks.  In the course of these tests, they demonstrated that wearing the appropriate clothing has significant effects on our mental processing state.  88 of the 361 subjects were tested further- they demonstrated that the better clothed subjects understood the big picture more clearly; the lesser clothed individuals were more in tune with the mundane aspects of their tasks.

But, here’s the third reason why I am posting this.

Just recently, Ray Smith, reminded folks of these facts in the Wall Street Journal.  After all, the newspaper of business wants to make sure we effect the best business we can.   He quoted Adam Galinsky, PhD, who coined the term “enclothed cognition” back in 2012 (still after Ms. Katzman taught this maxim).  Except his research used “white lab coats”.  (And, as someone who wore a white lab coat for decades, I can assure you that OTHERS may perceive me differently, but that lab coat did nothing for my performance.  He obviously had better subjects than I.)

Hmm. They say that clothes don’t make the man. Or woman.

Ray Smith also quoted the Slepian et. al. study I mentioned above.  But, what I really thought was interesting was the idea of switching to casual clothes when our work is done.  Cathleen Swody (Thrive Leadership) was quoted as saying, “Putting on relaxation clothes or your ‘at home’ clothes, shifts your brain into ‘I can relax now…I don’t have to be operating this high cognitive level.”

Excuse me as I dumb down my day…