(Photo by PeopleImages.com - Yuri A)
71% of CEOs rate themselves ‘9 or 10’ in looks
In a nutshell
81.3% of people believe “pretty privilege” exists in the workplace, with those rating themselves as extremely attractive earning nearly $20,000 more annually than those who rate themselves as unattractive.
CEOs are more than twice as likely to rate themselves as extremely attractive compared to the average person (71% vs. 33%), suggesting a strong correlation between career success and self-perceived attractiveness.
Nearly 4 in 5 workers (78.9%) feel pressured to spend money on their appearance to meet professional expectations, with the average person spending an extra $178 annually on work-related grooming.
LONDON — We all know the saying “Don’t judge a book by its cover,” but a new survey suggests that in the workplace, your “cover” might matter more than you think — especially when it comes to income. A recent survey asked 1,050 Americans about “pretty privilege” – the idea that better-looking people get more advantages in life – and found that a whopping 81.3% believe it exists at work.
The results show how our appearance might be influencing everything from who gets hired to who gets that next big promotion.
Pretty privilege isn’t just limited to modeling or acting jobs. Eight in ten people surveyed believe attractive coworkers are more likely to be promoted, hired, or given raises. Even more telling, 66.9% of people have actually seen someone treated unfairly or talked about negatively because of how they look.
The survey, conducted by Standout CV, shows that the pressure to look good at work is real. About 64.2% of people feel pushed to change their natural features – like straightening their hair or wearing makeup – just to fit in at the office. And 83.4% think colleagues who put more effort into their appearance are seen as more capable professionals.
How We See Ourselves
When asked to rate their own workplace attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 10, the average person gave themselves a 7.7. Men seemed more confident about their looks, with 37.5% rating themselves a 9 or perfect 10, compared to only 27.4% of women.
These self-ratings revealed a lot about career experiences. Nearly half (46%) of people who rated themselves as unattractive (scoring 1-3) said their looks had hurt their careers – that’s five times higher than the average of 7.6%.
On the flip side, those who considered themselves good-looking (rating above 7) were likely to say their appearance helped them professionally (60.7%). This number jumped to 66.8% for those who gave themselves a 9 or 10.
People who saw themselves as average lookers (rating 4-6) were most likely to say their appearance had no impact on their work life (38% compared to just 16.2% overall).
Interestingly, one in five people said their looks affected their careers both positively and negatively. This stayed consistent regardless of how attractive they thought they were. This might happen when someone benefits from good looks but also faces issues like not being taken seriously.
In fact, 55.7% of people admitted to downplaying their appearance to be taken more seriously at work. This number rose to 68.7% among those who considered themselves very attractive.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents feel pressured to adjust their appearance just to fit in at the office. (Photo by RDNE Stock project on Pexels)
Success, Power, and Good Looks
One of the most striking findings shows a clear link between job success and self-perceived attractiveness. Entry-level employees were least likely to think of themselves as attractive (65.52%), while almost all CEOs – 99.8% – rated themselves at 7 or above. Even more telling, 71% of CEOs gave themselves a 9 or 10 – more than double the survey average of 33%.
This pattern held steady up the career ladder, with self-rated attractiveness increasing alongside job rank. The researchers note this connects to other studies showing that 18% of CEOs show narcissistic traits, compared to only 5% of the general population.
The financial impact of this beauty bias is clear. People who rated themselves as very attractive reported earning an average of $63,954, while those who saw themselves as unattractive earned about $44,009 – a difference of nearly $20,000 a year.
The Cost of Looking Good for Work
Beauty standards at work don’t just create pressure – they cost real money. Almost four in five people (78.9%) feel they need to spend on their appearance just to meet job expectations.
The average person spends about $30 extra each month on grooming products specifically for work. Yearly, people spend around $178.18 extra on beauty treatments and services like dry cleaning, manicures, and haircuts that they wouldn’t buy if not for work.
People with higher incomes tend to spend more on their appearance. Those earning over $100,000 a year were twice as likely to spend over $300 on looking good for work compared to the average person (34.8% versus 15.1%).
Following industry beauty standards seems to pay off financially. People earning over $80,000 were most likely to follow these standards (77.2% compared to the average of 64.2%).
About 62.8% of people said they’ve been directly told to dress or present themselves in certain ways to fit their industry’s standards. This pressure exists even for remote workers – 60.4% of women and 45.2% of men working from home admit to putting on makeup and spending extra time on grooming just for video calls.
Many employees have been told they have to look the part in order to fit in in their industry. (© Nejron Photo – stock.adobe.com)
Can You Buy Pretty Privilege?
The survey suggests that while natural good looks help, much of “pretty privilege” might actually come from investing in your appearance.
People who rated themselves as most attractive also spent more money on their looks. Those who saw themselves as very attractive felt more pressure to spend on maintaining their appearance (46.9%) compared to those who considered themselves unattractive (14.7%).
About 74% of people who rated themselves 9 or 10 spent extra money on grooming services to look good at work – much higher than the average of 57.3% and nearly triple the percentage of those who rated themselves between 1-3 (23.3%).
Only people who rated themselves 7 or above spent more than $101 monthly on grooming products for work, and only those rating themselves 6 or above spent over $500 monthly on work clothes and accessories.
This suggests a cycle: people who think they’re attractive invest more in their appearance, which might influence how they’re treated at work, potentially leading to more career success and higher earnings, allowing them to spend even more on their looks.
What This Means for Workplaces
The survey shows a complicated relationship between looks and workplace success. While it doesn’t prove whether attractive people succeed because of their looks or whether successful people just have more money to spend on appearance, it does show that beauty bias is common in today’s workplaces.
For employers, these findings highlight the need for fair hiring and promotion practices that minimize unconscious bias. For employees, especially those just starting their careers, the data suggests that investing in a professional appearance might actually help your career.
However, the survey also raises questions about workplace fairness. With nearly two-thirds of people feeling pressured to change natural features to fit beauty standards, companies might need to rethink workplace cultures that penalize those who don’t fit certain appearance norms.
Survey Methodology
Standout CV surveyed 1,050 employed Americans in December 2024. The survey looked at attitudes about appearance in the workplace, personal experiences with appearance-based treatment, and the financial pressures to meet industry beauty standards.
People rated their workplace attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 10. For analysis, scores of 1-3 were labeled “unattractive,” 4-6 as “average,” 7-8 as “attractive,” and 9-10 as “extremely attractive.” The survey included 55.9% men, 43.0% women, 0.7% non-binary respondents, and 0.4% who preferred not to say. About 27.3% worked in hybrid arrangements, 37.1% worked in-person, and 35.5% worked remotely.