“A suit doesn’t write code” — clothing as a signal of professionalism

The day before a client meeting, Marek looks at Olek’s hoodie.

— Olek, shirt tomorrow. Okay?
— Why? My code works the same in a shirt.

Olek wants to be judged on competence. Marek is thinking about the first few minutes of the meeting, before the client has any evidence of that competence.

What really happened

Olek wants his competence to be judged by his code, solutions and knowledge. From that perspective, a suit, shirt or hoodie has no bearing on whether he can do the job. Marek is thinking about the period before competence can actually be assessed. A client meeting someone for the first time has very little information and therefore uses quick signals: clothing, speech, manner and behavior. Marek does not have to believe those signals are fair or accurate. He simply sees them as part of the first message people receive about a role and a situation.

What the research says

People do form early impressions of competence, status and professionalism from appearance. Research on workplace attire shows that neatness and formality can affect first evaluations, although the effect varies by industry, observer age and context (Ruetzler et al., 2012). More recent work likewise suggests that clothing changes perceptions of dominance, competence and status, but not in a uniform way across situations (Hundhammer et al., 2025). None of this proves that wearing a suit makes someone competent. It shows that, until better information becomes available, appearance can act as a fast and imperfect signal.

How to handle it

Two extremes are equally unhelpful: pretending appearance never matters, or treating it as evidence of a person’s actual quality. An organization can be explicit about situations in which clothing serves a communication function—for example, a first meeting with a conservative client—and situations in which formalising dress adds little value. Once real work is visible, competence should be judged on that work, not on clothing. The general rule: attire can help signal respect for a context, but it should never substitute for evidence of competence. Use first impressions consciously, then replace them with real data as quickly as possible.

How Empatyzer and Em can help

Empatyzer does not judge clothing or decide who “looks professional”. It can, however, help Olek and his colleagues recognize that appearance can function as one of the codes people use to infer status, seriousness and fit—and that people differ in how much weight they give those codes. Culture-8 and the organization profile can show whether a group tends to be more formal or more relaxed, but Em should treat that as context, not as evidence of competence. Before an important meeting, it can help Olek answer a practical question: “What signal is this client likely to expect, and is it worth sending through clothing if the cost is minimal?” Micro-lessons can also remind the other side not to confuse compliance with a dress norm with intelligence, expertise or quality of work.