Jokes aside
On why humor is a leadership tool, not a personality accessory. And on how I spent several months running a comedy act instead of managing a team.
In my first year as a manager, I was the comedian. Every meeting had a punchline. Every hard conversation had a joke that defused the tension before it even had a chance to do its useful work. Every piece of feedback arrived wrapped in humor, which meant it arrived soft, ambiguous, and largely ignored.
I was genuinely funny. At least I thought so. Until my own manager pulled me aside and asked a quiet, devastating question: when did my team stop taking my decisions seriously? The answer was somewhere around the time I stopped treating decision-making as a serious act.
The "funny" science
Gorenz and Schwarz (2026) ran six experiments with over 1,300 participants to test when and how humor strengthens — or undermines — leadership authority. Treger, Sprecher, and Erber (2013) examined the mechanisms by which shared laughter builds liking and closeness in new social interactions. Together, they offer a precise and somewhat uncomfortable picture of what actually happens in the other person's mind when a leader tries to be funny.
Joking apart
The human brain loves surprises. But only the kind it can immediately understand. This is what psychologists call processing fluency — the ease with which the brain processes incoming information. When a joke surprises and simultaneously clicks into place, the brain interprets that as pleasure. Not because you're witty. Because the listener felt smart — they got the punchline before anyone explained it to them.
Gorenz and Schwarz (2026) demonstrated this in a series of experiments. In one, participants heard the same jokes recorded at different audio quality levels. Those who heard the clearer recordings rated the jokes as funnier — identical content, different processing ease. In another experiment, memes with sharp, legible text scored higher than identical memes with blurred or hard-to-read captions. The implication is almost brutal in its simplicity: a joke you can't hear isn't funny. A joke that requires explanation is already dead.
For leaders, this has direct and actionable consequences. Complex allusions, inside references understood by only part of the room, humor that requires context the listener doesn't have — none of this builds authority. All of it erodes it. Failed humor doesn't leave a neutral trace. It reduces perceived competence, decreases likeability, and depletes the leader's social capital (Gorenz & Schwarz, 2026).
A failed joke doesn't land neutrally. It reduces perceived competence, decreases likeability, and depletes the social capital you've been building for months.
And what happens when humor works? Treger, Sprecher, and Erber (2013) studied pairs of strangers who interacted in either humorous or neutral conditions. The result: shared laughter led to greater liking, greater closeness, and — crucially — greater perceived reciprocal liking. That last piece matters most. Humor doesn't operate directly. It operates through a reciprocity loop: you laugh at my joke → I believe you like me → I like you more. The mechanism is elegantly circular, and it's why environments without humor tend to also be environments without trust.
On a serious note
Understanding the fluency mechanism is only half the picture. The other half is knowing when humor doesn't work — or when it works in precisely the wrong direction.
1. When humor replaces a decision
This was my original sin. Humor as a defense mechanism — instead of delivering a difficult truth, I dissolved the tension with a joke. Short-term, it works. Long-term, it teaches people that hard conversations with you don't end in conclusions. They end in laughter. And that there's no point bringing serious problems your way.
Jocko Willink, former Navy SEAL and leadership author, puts it plainly: a leader who can't sit with discomfort isn't a leader — they're an impresario. Discomfort is data. Defusing it with humor is deleting the message before you read it.
2. When humor is aggressive — even when it doesn't look like it
Gorenz and Schwarz (2026) ran an experiment with nicknames. Managers who assigned demeaning nicknames to subordinates — even officially "playful" ones — were rated lower on both competence and likeability than those who didn't. Critically: easy processing of an aggressive joke does not make it acceptable. Fluency amplifies the emotional effect of humor — both positive and negative.
A well-crafted insult is still an insult.
3. When you joke downward in a power hierarchy
Power asymmetry fundamentally changes how humor lands. What reads as a joke between peers becomes a status communication between manager and report. And even if everyone laughs — at least those present, those who must — the question is: are they laughing because it's funny, or because not laughing would be awkward?
Landing a joke
None of this is an argument for abandoning humor. If you have a natural sense of humor, that's an asset, not a liability. The research is unambiguous: leaders whose humor lands are better liked, more influential, and more positively evaluated by their teams. The key is understanding the mechanism — not surrendering the tool.
Gorenz and Schwarz (2026) offer three practical recommendations:
First: don't hide the joke. Mumbling, jargon, convoluted syntax — all of these increase processing difficulty and kill the effect. Speak clearly, speak simply, make the punchline audible from the moment it lands.
Second: use rhyme and alliteration. This isn't poetic advice. It's experimental finding: phrases that rhyme or alliterate are processed more easily, and are therefore rated as wittier and more accurate. "Clear skies ahead, cloudy thinking gets you dead" works better than the same idea expressed in three explanatory sentences.
Third: build on shared knowledge. The most effective jokes activate something the listener already knows — a shared history, a common experience, a reference that belongs to both of you. This is the material that humor is made of when it's meant to connect rather than divide.
Treger, Sprecher, and Erber (2013) confirmed something most of us sense intuitively: laughter brings people closer. But not because it's pleasant. Because when someone laughs at your joke, you interpret it as a signal that they like you — and that makes you like them more. It's a reciprocity loop. Which is why environments without humor tend to be environments without trust. Not the other way around.
Humor as a leadership tool isn't about being liked. It's about creating the conditions in which people want to work together, want to share difficult information, and want to stay in relationship even when things get hard. Shared laughter isn't a break from the work. It's the act of building social capital — one of the few organizational assets that can't be reduced to a PowerPoint slide or modeled in a spreadsheet.
Back to my first year as a manager. If I'd known then what I know now, I'd still be funny. But I'd be funny less often, more slowly, and with considerably more precision. Instead of using humor to neutralize discomfort — I'd use it to build contact. Instead of trying to be funny — I'd aim to be precise.
The difference is small in words. In consequences, it's enormous.
References
Gorenz, M., & Schwarz, N. (2026). Leaders, don't let your jokes fall flat. Harvard Business Review. Advance online publication.
Treger, S., Sprecher, S., & Erber, R. (2013). Laughing and liking: Exploring the interpersonal effects of humor use in initial social interactions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 43(6), 532–543. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1962
Opening times
Monday - Friday 9 -17
Address
Shrewsbury
United Kingdom
Contact
07925603011
jan@baldconsulting.co.uk