Casual clothes, casual attitudes,
casual profits?
By Hollie Allen
All across America, corporations are dressing down. The suit
has become a fossil, food for the moth. There is no longer a need, or desire,
to be restrained by uncomfortable coats, confining pantyhose, or bothersome
ties. The movement toward creativity and away from conformity is now widespread
within the business community. Companies encourage their employees to be freer
in dress for the sake of productivity within the office. In theory, this sounds
wonderful, but people are discovering that casual clothes may be an excuse for
a casual attitude that may, in turn, impact the bottom line.
The origin of business casual is credited to Levi Strauss and to the "dot.com
boom" by American Business Fashions. The emergent codes have grown and
spread internationally, making the entire world more comfortable at work.
Before companies are able to install the "business casual" policy,
they must first define it. The term “business casual” is synonymous
with dress casual, relaxed business, and the like. The terms are as diverse
as the definitions. In most arenas, business casual means khakis, polos or button-down
shirts, and loafers. The ties and slacks are saved for meetings, presentations,
or formal work affairs. For women, it provides an opportunity to wear pants
versus skirts or to wear sweater sets instead of Oxfords. Business casual is
exactly that: Casual. The rigidity of past dress codes that dictated even the
color one could wear has sunk into the black hole of the past.
Business casual looks good on paper and sounds even better to the purse. No
more expensive suits. No more designer ties and endless pairs of stockings.
No more cookie-cutter employees. According to CEOs and public relation firms,
this concept was meant to inspire, to encourage creativity and boost morale,
to increase productivity and company loyalty, all the while fighting off boredom
and the likelihood of falling into a rut. According to a Gallop poll taken in
2001, 87% of all American companies have adopted dress down policies, and a
third of the nation's companies allow casual dress on a daily basis.
But Dr. Jeffery L. Magee, a business psychologist and consultant, says the idea
is a failure in his book Dressing for Success: Borrow From Your Father. Not
only does casual dress decrease productivity and destroy morale, according to
Magee, but also it increases absenteeism and flirtations. Magee's research finds
that mannerly behavior, ethical decisions, and loyalty to companies have decreased
across the board. On the flip side, Dr. Magee's study, published in 1999, has
shown an increase in compromising ethical situations, gutter language and conversation,
and a dramatic rise in complaints to human resources departments. Business casual
has created a "Me-ism" and has begun to tear down the dependence of
team within corporations.
Despite such findings, companies continue to make the move to dressing down.
They continue to believe that comfort paves the way to success. IBM, Coca-Cola,
United Parcel Services, and General Motors, just to name a few, are some of
the top corporations in America where ties are no longer the status quo. To
further this idea of casual, Hewlett Packard has even implemented a "first
name" policy where everyone in the company is referred to by first name
only, even the CEO.
The debate on business casual is a hot one. On the surface, it seems to be all
the rage, but corporations hide the effects well within their building walls.
Bottom line: Money talks, and if casual clothing has brought about a casual
attitude within the workplace, there ultimately may well be a rise in suit sales.
###
Copyright © 2002 by Hollie Allen. All rights reserved.
The Magazine’s writers welcome your feedback. Please be sure to reference the specific article in your response.
Return to top Return to Issue Four contents Return to Main Page