A study conducted by researchers from Canada and Chile suggests that some workplace generosity is actually a form of "competitive altruism." Published in the journal Frontiers in Psychology,the research indicates that acts like bringing in treats or offering favors can be strategic moves used to gain influence and status.

Advertisement

How Frontiers in Psychology defines "competitive altruism" in the office

According to the report, competitive altruism is a tactic where individuals quietly compete for goodwill and social standing by appearing exceptionally helpful . Rather than being purely selfless, these prosocial behaviors act as a form of professional advertisement, signaling to the rest of the office that the individual is reliable, likable, and deserving of support.

The researchers argue that this is a low-risk competitive strategy. Because the behavior mimics ordinary kindness, it allows a person to pursue self-interested career goals—such as securing allies or improving their standing with leadership—without appearing overtly aggressive or calculating. As the Frontiers in Psychology study notes, these gestures can create a sense of obligation in others, effectively shifting the social hierarchy in the benefactor's favor.

Why one-third of participants viewed office treats as strategic tools

To test this theory, the academics surveyed more than 100 women, nearly all of whom reported encountering colleagues who used generosity to outdo others. The study identified five specific tactics used to manipulate professional perceptions, with the most prevalent being the use of food and gifts. Specifically, one-third of the participants stated they had experienced colleagues offering snacks or baked goods in a manner that seemed designed to win favor rathr than express genuine care.

Beyond food, the study highlighted other methods of "performed" kindness:

  • Performed Warmth: Approximately 25 percent of participants reported seeing friendliness that felt like a public act rather than a sincere emotion.
  • Supervisory Favoritism: Offering targeted help to managers to gain a competitive advantage.
  • Selective Kindness: Using friendly behavior to build exclusive bonds with some female colleagues while intentionally isolating others.

    • The 15 percent who noticed warmth targeted at male colleagues

    The research highlights a gendered dimension to these interactions, noting that 15 percent of participants observed warmth being directed specifically toward men in the workplace. This suggests that competitive altruism may be used not just for peer status, but as a tool to navigate traditional power structures where men often hold more senior positions.

    This behavior is often reinforced by societal expectations. The researchers point out that women are frequently expected to be the "warm" and "attentive" members of a team. By leaning into these stereotypes, some employees can mask a strategic agenda behind a facade of traditional femininity, making their competitive moves less visible to those around them.

    Linking high altruism scores to Machiavellianism and deception

    One of the most striking findings in the report is the psychological profile of those who score high on the competitive altruism scale.. According to the researchers, these individuals rated themselves as more manipulative, deceptive, and "fake" than other women of their own age. This suggests that the behavior is not driven by a high level of empathy, but rather by a calculated approach to social interaction.

    The study concludes that these traits are more closely linked to Machiavellianism—a personality trait characterized by the manipulation of others for personal gain—and lower levels of agreeableness. In this context, a tray of cupcakes is less an act of care and more a tool for managing the social hierarchy of the office.

    Whether these patterns persist among male employees

    While the study provides a detailed look at the experiences of over 100 women, it leaves a significant gap regarding the behavior of men. it remains unknown if men utilize "competitive altruism" in the same way, or if their methods of strategic reputation building differ because they are not under the same social pressure to be "warm" or "nurturing." Furthermore, the study relies heavily on the perceptions of the participants; it does not provide a way to verify the internal intent of the "kind" colleagues being described.