Organizational Behavior · UNC Kenan-Flagler

Good intentions are cheap. Acting on them is hard.

Most managers want to listen, treat people fairly, and support equity, and still fall short. I study why, and what organizations can change so that people act on the intentions they already have.

About

I'm an organizational behavior scholar at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's Kenan-Flagler Business School, where I study why good intentions so often fail to become good outcomes.

Before academia I spent four years in the Israeli Air Force and three practicing law in Israel. I earned my Ph.D. at the University of Maryland, was a postdoctoral scholar at New York University's Stern School of Business, and joined the faculty in 2018. My work appears in Academy of Management Journal, Organization Science, Journal of Applied Psychology, Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes (OBHDP), and Personnel Psychology. I've written about this work for managers in Harvard Business Review, MIT Sloan Management Review, and the Wall Street Journal, and other authors have discussed it in popular books. I'm an Associate Editor at OBHDP.

Elad Sherf speaking on a panel.
Research

Barriers between good intentions and action.

Stream 01

Voice & Feedback

Why managers resist learning from the people around them, and why employees stay silent even when they have something worth saying.

Explore this stream →
Stream 02

Fairness & Justice

Why managers who mean to be fair still treat people unfairly, and why employees can reach opposite judgments of the same decision.

Explore this stream →
Stream 03

Allyship at Work

Why people hold back from supporting colleagues who face disadvantage, and which kinds of support are likely to help.

Explore this stream →
Stream 01

Voice & Feedback

Most managers know they should ask for input, yet many don't, or dismiss what they hear. Employees have a parallel problem: someone who speaks up freely may still keep an important concern to themselves, so more chances to talk do not guarantee that managers hear what they need to.

Recent publications See all publications →

Sherf, Lee & McElroy · 2026 · Academy of Management Annals

Hesitating in the face of conflicting goals is different from retreating.

When people want two things that conflict, such as raising a problem with a senior leader and staying in her good graces, they may neither push ahead nor back off. They hesitate, weigh the risks, and look for a safer route, a response psychologists call inhibition. Most organizational researchers leave inhibition out or lump it in with avoidance; we argue that an employee who goes quiet may be balancing competing goals, not acting out of fear.

Anseel & Sherf · 2025 · Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior

Twenty-five years of feedback research, and still no simple rules.

Researchers use the word "feedback" for everything from an annual rating to an ongoing conversation, then draw general rules as if these were one thing. So advice like "make feedback specific" seems to help in some settings and to get in the way of learning a new task in others. We did find one consistent lesson: people tend to resist less when feedback becomes a two-way conversation about the task.

Sherf, Croitoru & McElroy · 2024 · Personnel Psychology

Asking for feedback and monitoring for it are not the same behavior.

People gather feedback at work by asking for it directly and by monitoring others for cues. People who expect the answer to be useful tend to ask more, and that expectation predicts asking more strongly than fear of looking incompetent does; that fear goes with less asking but not less monitoring. Asking, more than monitoring, goes with better job performance.

Sherf, Parke & Isaakyan · 2021 · Academy of Management Journal

Speaking up and staying silent are not opposites.

How often people speak up and how often they stay silent are only loosely related, so the same employee can do plenty of both. People who believe their input will change something tend to speak up more, and people who feel safe tend to stay silent less. Making it safe to talk may not be enough: people also need to see that speaking up changes something. And silence, more than a lack of voice, goes with burnout.

Sherf & Morrison · 2020 · Journal of Applied Psychology

Confidence can make feedback seem unnecessary.

You'd expect confident people to ask for feedback freely, since criticism threatens them less. But confident people who don't stop to consider how others see their work tend to see little value in outside input, and ask for less of it. Taking the other person's perspective removes that blind spot.

Stream 02

Fairness & Justice

How fairly managers treat people affects how employees feel and act, yet many employees still report unfair treatment. Part of the reason is time: managers under heavy workloads tend to put technical work first and treat people less fairly, unless the organization rewards fairness too. Part is perception: people judge the same decision differently depending on the motive they see behind it and on what they believe about how people get ahead.

Recent publications See all publications →

Lee, Badura, Baker & Sherf · 2024 · Journal of Applied Psychology

Believing others get away with wrongdoing predicts misconduct more consistently than believing you will.

Employees who believe the organization lets others off the hook, what we call contextual impunity, tend to report more misconduct of their own. That belief predicts misconduct more consistently than expecting to escape punishment personally. Employees hold it more strongly under leaders focused narrowly on results and less strongly under ethical leaders.

Tedder-King & Sherf · 2024 · Academy of Management Journal

Whether a correction for bias looks fair depends on what observers believe about success.

When a manager adjusts a reward to offset a barrier that women face, observers split. Those who believe that structural factors such as discrimination affect who gets ahead tend to call the adjustment fair, and those who doubt it tend to call it unfair. Skeptics respond to concrete evidence: when the barrier was as tangible as safety gear designed for men's bodies, they too rated the adjustment as fairer.

★ 2025 Saroj Parasuraman Award

To, Sherf & Kouchaki · 2024 · Academy of Management Journal

How much inequity do you even see?

Employees with more power in their organization tend to perceive less gender and racial inequity in their own workplace, though not in other workplaces, and they tend to support diversity efforts less. Part of the reason appears to be identification: people who identify strongly with their organization want to think well of it. When people recalled a specific incident of bias at work, the gap in support between more and less powerful employees disappeared.

Li, Sherf & Tangirala · 2023 · Organization Science

Two kinds of fair rewards go with two kinds of relearning.

After a factory switched products, teams had to relearn their own tasks, which went with early recovery, and how to work together, which went with later recovery. Teams relearned their own tasks more when members saw rewards as matching each person's contribution, and relearned coordination more when members saw rewards as shared equally. Managers need not pick one kind of fairness: members can see the same pay system as both.

Stream 03

Allyship at Work

Many employees endorse diversity efforts in principle, yet fewer take part in them. Whether people act, and whether others are persuaded when they do, depends in part on whether they see themselves, and are seen by others, as legitimate spokespersons for the issue. Allyship can help colleagues who face disadvantage by reducing the sources of that disadvantage or by signaling that they are valued. My coauthors and I propose that the first path generally has stronger and longer-lasting effects.

Recent publications See all publications →

Tedder-King, Prengler & Sherf · 2025 · Journal of Applied Psychology

Allyship that removes a barrier may do more than allyship that signals support.

Allies can support a colleague in two ways: by reducing what disadvantages them, such as biased treatment or unequal access to resources, or by signaling that the colleague is valued and safe. Most research has studied the signals, but we argue that, with some exceptions, reducing the disadvantage itself has larger and longer-lasting effects. So an ally deciding what to do might first ask what the action will change about the colleague's situation.

★ Monograph★ Editor's Choice★ 2026 Saroj Parasuraman Award

Hussain, Tangirala & Sherf · 2023 · Academy of Management Journal

Who raises a gender-equity issue changes how others judge it.

When only men raise a gender-equity issue, evaluators tend to question their right to speak for it. When only women raise it, some evaluators see the issue as less central to the business. A coalition of women and men avoids both doubts, and evaluators who see the advocates as legitimate on both counts tend to support the proposal more.

Sherf, Tangirala & Weber · 2017 · Organization Science

Men take part less in gender-parity efforts when they feel it is not their place.

Men often feel less psychological standing on gender parity than women do: less sense that it is their place to speak up or act. Men with less standing took part less. When a request told people that the issue affects every employee and that both men and women belong in the effort, men volunteered about as often as women.

News

Beyond the journals

Where I've written about my work for practitioners, and where others have discussed it.

Writing for practitioners

Written about my work

Anthony Klotz · Viking, 2026 Jolted: Why We Quit, When to Stay, and Why It Matters

Klotz discusses my workload and fairness research, and why managers whose organizations reward technical work miss the signs that employees feel treated unfairly.

Colleen Ammerman & Boris Groysberg · Harvard Business Review Press, 2021 Glass Half-Broken: Shattering the Barriers That Still Hold Women Back at Work

Ammerman and Groysberg discuss my psychological standing research on why men often believe it is not their place to speak up about gender equity at work.

Harvard Business Review · 2017 Lots of Men Are Gender-Equality Allies in Private. Why Not in Public?

David G. Smith and W. Brad Johnson draw on my psychological standing research to explain why men who support gender equity stay quiet about it at work.

Read ↗

Podcasts

Teaching

I teach two subjects: how to lead and manage teams, and how to think critically and creatively.

Leading and Managing Teams

The interpersonal processes and structural features that shape how teams perform: how groups make decisions, handle conflict, and distribute influence, and what leaders and members can do to work with them well. The premise is that managing teams is a skill you build through practice, not a talent you're born with.

Thinking Critically and Creatively

Creativity as a process you can learn and improve, not a trait reserved for a few. Drawing on cognitive and organizational psychology, it builds the habits to recognize when a problem needs creative thinking, to change how you approach it, and to foster creativity in a group, complementing analytical and domain expertise rather than replacing it.

Each fall I also teach one of two doctoral seminars, on dependent variables or on interpersonal processes in organizational behavior, and I teach Online MBA sessions on teams and creativity and custom executive education programs.

★ Weatherspoon Award for Excellence in Ph.D. Teaching, 2025 · MBA All-Star Teaching Award, 2022

Elad Sherf at a whiteboard, teaching.