Perfectionism at Work: When High Standards Start to Cost You

Abstract

This article is about a question many conscientious people ask: is perfectionism at work a strength or a cost? Three pieces of research bear on it. A meta-analysis of 43 studies (Hill and Curran, 2016) found that striving for very high standards had small or no links with burnout, while worry about mistakes and about being judged had medium to large positive links. A meta-analysis of perfectionism in the workplace (Harari and colleagues, 2018) found consistent links with several factors that matter to organisations, but called the overall link with job performance inconclusive. A review of positive and negative forms of perfectionism (Stoeber and Otto, 2006) concluded that high personal standards are positive when people are not overly concerned about mistakes and about others' evaluations. These are associations in mixed groups, not in finance teams. The three steps at the end are practical readings, not tested methods, and this article is not medical advice.

The pack that was ready on Tuesday

The board pack was right on Tuesday. The totals tied to the ledger, and the variance notes were clear. It is now Thursday at nine in the evening, and you are reformatting the same three tables for the third time.

No one asked for this. You know that no one will notice. You also know that if one number in that pack is wrong, you will feel it for a week, so you keep going.

Perfectionism at work: strength or cost?

The research cited here does not give one answer. It splits perfectionism into parts, and the parts behave differently. One part is the drive to meet very high standards. The other is worry about mistakes and about what others will think. Burnout in these studies was measured with questionnaires, which is not a diagnosis. The studies were of mixed groups across work, sport and education, and none was limited to finance. The next three sections cover what each one found. None of them tested the three steps at the end.

What a meta-analysis of 43 studies found about burnout

Hill and Curran (2016) pooled 43 studies with 9,838 participants across work, sport and education. They separated two dimensions. Perfectionistic strivings, the drive for very high standards, had small negative or non-significant links with burnout. Perfectionistic concerns, worry about mistakes and about being judged, had medium or medium to large positive links.

The authors also controlled for the overlap between the two dimensions. When that was done, strivings on their own showed larger negative links with burnout. For the work domain, the authors note that strivings were sometimes less adaptive and concerns more maladaptive. They call for research on the mechanisms behind these links, for longitudinal designs and for interventions aimed at the concerns. This is summarised from the published abstract.

Read the Thursday-night formatting through this. The drive to get the pack right and the fear of being caught out are different things, and the meta-analysis links the second one with burnout much more than the first. This is an inference. The studies report associations in mixed groups, and they cannot tell you which one is driving you tonight.

What a meta-analysis of perfectionism in the workplace found

Harari and colleagues (2018) meta-analysed research on perfectionism and its work-related causes and outcomes. They report that perfectionism was consistently linked with several factors that matter to organisations. Its overall relationship with job performance, however, was inconclusive.

The authors describe perfectionism as multidimensional, with both benefits and costs for employees and for organisations. They propose directions for future research. This is summarised from the published abstract.

Read the idea that perfectionism makes you better at the job through this. The abstract calls the link with performance inconclusive, so it does not support that idea in either direction. This is an inference. The summary here is based on the abstract alone, and the full paper may hold detail that the abstract does not.

What a review of positive perfectionism found

Stoeber and Otto (2006) reviewed research on whether perfectionism can be positive. They compared two approaches. One separates perfectionistic strivings from perfectionistic concerns. The other sorts people into healthy perfectionists and unhealthy perfectionists.

The review found that strivings were linked with positive characteristics. Healthy perfectionists showed more positive characteristics than unhealthy perfectionists and than people who were not perfectionists. The authors conclude that self-oriented strivings are positive when people are not overly concerned about mistakes and about others' evaluations. They note open questions about the core facets, the positive effects and the developmental origins. This is summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.

Read your own standards through this. High standards on their own are not the problem in this review. The problem starts when each mistake feels like a verdict on you. This is an inference. The review is general, and it was not of finance staff.

Perfectionism at work: three steps

None of these is a tested method, and none was studied in finance teams. They combine what the research points to with ordinary practice. Where a step goes beyond the research, it says so.

1. Define "done" before you start. Write one line that says who reads the work, what decision it supports and what error would change that decision. For instance: "Board pack: three tables, variance notes above 5%, totals tie to the ledger. Done when those are true." Hill and Curran (2016) separated high standards from worry about mistakes, and a written definition of done keeps the standard while giving the worry a place to stop. This is an inference, and no study cited here tested this step.

2. Ask which one is running. When you reach for another check, ask yourself: am I improving this for the reader, or protecting myself from criticism? If it is the first, carry on. If it is the second, note the fear and stop. This is a judgement based on the split between strivings and concerns, and no study cited here tested asking this question.

3. Practise one deliberate "good enough" a week. Choose something low in stakes, such as an internal draft that only your team will see. Send it after two checks instead of three, and notice what actually happens. Stoeber and Otto (2006) describe high standards as positive when concern about mistakes is low, and this is a small way of testing your own concern against reality. This is a judgement, and no study cited here tested this step.

If you check the same figures again and again, Why You Keep Checking Your Work Over and Over is about that. If the fear is of telling your boss about an error, there is How to Tell Your Boss You Made a Mistake in the Numbers. If one comment keeps playing in your head, see How to Stop Replaying Criticism From Your Boss. And Month-End Close Stress: Why It Comes Home With You covers the weeks when this tends to get worse.

Questions People Ask

Is perfectionism a strength in finance?

The research cited here did not study finance. In the meta-analyses, high personal standards had small or no links with burnout, worry about mistakes had medium to large positive links, and the link between perfectionism and job performance was inconclusive. What that adds up to in your role depends on which part is driving you.

What is the difference between high standards and perfectionism?

In the research cited here, the drive for very high standards (strivings) is separated from worry about mistakes and about being judged (concerns). In the review by Stoeber and Otto, high standards were the positive form when people were not overly concerned about mistakes. These are research definitions, not a diagnosis.

Does perfectionism lead to burnout?

The meta-analysis found links between worry about mistakes and burnout. The abstract reports associations, and it does not claim that perfectionism causes burnout. Burnout in Finance: Why High Performers Hit the Wall looks at the wider picture.

Can coaching help with perfectionism?

Coaching is educational support for work patterns. It can help you notice when a standard has turned into a fear, and plan small changes. It is not treatment. No study cited here tested coaching.

When it is more than high standards

High standards are one thing. It is more when fear of mistakes stops you from finishing work, when you cannot sleep, when you feel persistently low or anxious, or when you notice physical symptoms. In those cases talk to your doctor, your occupational health service or a qualified mental health professional. This article is not medical advice. Coaching is educational support for work patterns. It is not treatment and not a substitute for it.

Sources

• Harari, D., Swider, B. W., Steed, L. B., & Breidenthal, A. P. (2018). Is perfect good? A meta-analysis of perfectionism in the workplace. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103(10), 1121–1144. DOI: 10.1037/apl0000324 (Summarised from the published abstract.)

• Hill, A. P., & Curran, T. (2016). Multidimensional perfectionism and burnout: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 20(3), 269–288. DOI: 10.1177/1088868315596286 (Summarised from the published abstract.)

• Stoeber, J., & Otto, K. (2006). Positive conceptions of perfectionism: Approaches, evidence, challenges. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(4), 295–319. DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_2 (Summarised from the published abstract and a repository page.)