Political disagreements at work are known to cause co-worker tension, and a new study from Perceptyx, a global leader in employee listening and actioning for a better workplace, has uncovered new, farther-reaching implications.
The survey of 2,300 workers found that about nine in ten have experienced some form of conflict with co-workers, but one in three have specifically experienced recent conflict that began as a political disagreement. These political disputes have a far more negative effect on workers. For instance, compared to workers who encounter general conflict, those who have experienced a political altercation are more than five times as likely to say their productivity is impacted, nearly five times as likely to say their mental health is impacted, and more than three times as likely to say their physical health is impacted.
What’s more, four in five employees who have faced political conflict at work are actively job-seeking—that makes them nearly twice as likely to quit as other employees. The problem is worse for desk-bound workers, who are twice as likely as their deskless counterparts to have experienced a politics-fueled conflict in the past three months.
Younger generations experience more political conflict in the workplace.
- Gen Z is most likely to have had a political disagreement at work, twice as likely as Gen X or baby boomers.
- Gen Z is the generation that is most likely to have experienced bias, prejudice, or discrimination in the workplace because of political beliefs, five times more likely than baby boomers.
- Gen Z is also more likely to consider looking for a new job because of coworkers’ political beliefs.
“Younger employees feel a strong alignment between political beliefs and personal identity, and that carries over into the workplace,” says Emily Killham, senior director and head of the Center for Workforce Transformation at Perceptyx. “Gen Z employees are the only generation where a majority thought discussing politics in the workplace should be discouraged, though they are not necessarily more likely to have done so.”
When an employee feels a conflict has been fully resolved, they are half as likely to plan to quit. However, if there is any lingering tension at all, they are just as likely to plan to quit, as if the argument hadn’t been resolved at all. Even when there hasn’t been an overt conflict, political differences have an impact: one in five workers overall say they have experienced bias, prejudice, or discrimination because of their political beliefs, and 30% feel just discussing politics at work could have a negative impact on their career opportunities. These effects are mitigated when organizations focus on creating a culture of belonging and psychological safety.
“While the issue of political diversity can be tricky to navigate, organizations that don’t tackle this challenge risk losing top talent,” Killham says. “When reducing the negative impact of political conversations in the workplace, organizations must take a three-pronged approach. They must foster a culture of psychological safety so employees know they can respectfully express opinions that differ from coworkers or their manager without harming their careers. They must grow inclusive leaders by helping them develop inclusive leadership skills that value diverse perspectives.”
Killham says that it’s important for political differences—and other diversity of thought—to be part of an organization’s DEIB strategy. As three in 10 say they share political beliefs with their managers, it’s clear that this is important, she explains, because it changes the focus from the conflict itself to the importance of creating space for different viewpoints.
“Today’s diverse workforces mean it’s likely inevitable that politics will be discussed in the workplace,” says Killham. “Organizations must proactively create safe environments that foster a culture of respect and constructive conversations rather than waiting for conflicts to arise.”
