We are all aware of how crucial the initial perceptions of individuals can be, especially within the context of groups or organizations. The social evaluation we establish from the outset wields a more profound impact than we often think.

It isn’t just about first impression bias — the implications go deeper. It would be easier if the “first impression” was always the only factor — a bad start could be counteracted with extra effort to overcome that initial negative image. In reality, sometimes (not always) it doesn’t work that way; it’s much more complicated than that.

Consider a situation where you’re new to an organization. If someone, particularly someone who holds a position of power in charge of your evaluation, publicly expresses a disparaging opinion about you, whether it’s accurate or not, it’s pretty much over. Any rectifying measures are very likely futile; in fact, they could make it worse.

Think about this. Your attempts to make a comeback would be seen as trying to prove that person wrong. How could that person allow that to happen? This could lead to that person trying to eliminate you — like rejecting you after your probation. Even if you manage to survive that blow, the road ahead is likely to be tough, as your mere existence is a humiliation for that person. Unless you have someone with higher power backing you up, or you choose to play political games — forming coalitions whatsoever.

The same goes for when you enter a new social circle and are misunderstood from the get-go. Even if subsequent revelations prove those initial judgments about you incorrect, those who hold influence and openly wronged you will: At best, let it slip by in hushed stillness; at worst, sideline you or double down by finding faults with you. Of course, this isn’t the case if your (perceived) social hierarchy is above theirs.

It might sound like an overgeneralization, but it’s not an accident that the aforementioned scenarios usually premise on a relatively strong overt (organizational) and/or covert (social acceptance) hierarchical environment, prone to influential but narcissistic individuals leading the narratives. Even if less influential individuals within the group spotted the error, are unlikely to risk themselves and stand up for justice, heck, those who would are unlikely to make it through the “survival fitness” in the first place.

Make no mistake, I do believe there are instances where individuals who misjudged someone come up and apologize, but those instances are rare. Even if they do, often it’s driven by vested interests or simply the realization that they can’t afford to mess with the person they wronged, rather than pure repentance.

The crux of the matter isn’t solely about cognitive biases; it’s about not letting the halo slip.