I know it's crazy, but there are psychological, sociological, anthropological and other reasons, all of them perhaps anecdotal or circumstantial and it takes a

I know it's crazy, but there are psychological, sociological, anthropological and other reasons, all of them perhaps anecdotal or circumstantial and it takes a mental leap in order to get the point -- that's actually a good thing, that it's not immediately apparent doesn't make it meaningless, it is something that is subtle and very easy to overlook. I'm arguing that subtlety is a vital characteristic of the mathematician and software professional and any mathematician worth his salt ought to be able to get an inkling of how the nexus and mathematics and human psychology might work? Another thing is that it's subtle you may not begin to notice it for weeks or years, but it's there, just because the rational mind doesn't see it doesn't mean other layers of the mind don't.. apparently the mind has all sorts of filters maybe when those filters are activated the very fact of their activation provides some other sort of feedback? It's a pretty complex machine I'll give you a few ideas -- mind you this is only one particular spin on the idea, there are many others that point to 'wear the damned tie' Network effects As an executive, you're setting a tone on what's good enough and what's expected within the organization. Ostensibly the organization's eyes are on you and people are consciously and subconsciously judging you on your habits (dress being a rather big one; whether you like it or not, people will be reading into the way you dress and can glean a lot about your habits based on the way you dress, even in the modern day when everyone claims to ignore these sorts of cues, people aren't always ignoring these types of cues) Now as an executive, if every single day of the year you're skipping the tie, you're sending a very clear message that skipping the tie is not only fine, it's practically mandated and I'm telling you that's a very slippery slope for an organization -- One thing people have gotten distorted from traditional values is the idea that leaders are meant to be just that much better than their people, i.e. they must try that much more because a true leader expects more of themselves before they begin expecting more of others it's simple courtesy -- I recall someone perhaps George Washington once said that a leader must be 15% earlier, 15% better prepared and 15% better dressed (the meaning of `dress` here being dress(3): `treated or prepared` and it's no coincidence that dress(4) has the meaning of `drawing up troops to proper alignment` -- the corporate structure mirrors the military but only when it's convenient I guess?) However in the modern era, it's taken backwards: people must be just that much worse than their superiors.. so it devolves as it trickles down.. people see the CEO skipping the tie, it immediately means they would be out of line to wear one -- can you see the network effects that come into play? the VP layer will begin skipping the collar shirt even, you'll begin seeing sweater vests and other paraphernalia By the time it trickles down to the engineering layers the people will practically be disrobed because management is walking around in blue jeans and sneakers, it must be alright to come in with the odd hole in your pants, right? or maybe your favourite punk band T-shirt fifty days out of the year? you're not customer facing after all... And so morale takes a huge hit it's no secret people are being treated like slaves in the bull pens (a conversation for another day) and I'm of the opinion it all starts by how leadership signals 'good enough' -- I'll go one step further Based on how people dress, I can also tell you how they pack when they travel. No chance in hell a guy who never wears a tie would even pack a tie for a conference, right? Well what if a big investment opportunity with Softbank or some other unicorn maker came up during that conference? The gregarious C level exec would have to show up with popping collars looking like the most unbuttoned guy in the room and well.. some people just don't like that, especially ones that have billions to play with and can't risk any details being out of place? So like suddenly our chief executive becomes our chief liability because we're all depending on him to pull through and he's going to the conference completely oblivious as to the chance that maybe just maybe he'll bump into Bill Gates or whoever It's the same as leaving your house without your camera -- you're saying 'today there will be no picture opportunities' So the necktie for men has become a missing conversation piece to the detriment of opportunities that may have turned out otherwise. After a long enough while 'casual and approachable' begins to reek of 'entitled and comfortable' and that's no way for leadership to connote