The tendency to “always look on the bright side of life,” epitomized in British culture by the Monty Python song, underscores the value of resilience and positivity in the face of adversity. Yet, despite the demonstrated benefits of focusing on the positive (ranging from enhanced creativity and innovation to improved performance) management research remains disproportionately focused on the negative. A brief analysis of leading management journals reveals a stark contrast in attention given to negative versus positive phenomena, exemplifying the pervasive negativity bias in the field. Negativity bias, the tendency to prioritize negative over positive attitudes, behaviors, and events, serves important evolutionary and diagnostic functions, such as drawing attention to anomalies and fostering learning from adverse experiences. However, in management research, this bias has led to knowledge gaps, stigmatization, and misguided practical recommendations. Our study examines three areas (quiet quitting, exclusion, and overqualification) that highlight how this bias distorts understanding and impedes progress. By focusing only on what fails or causes harm, researchers usually overlook the brighter aspects of these phenomena, missing opportunities to uncover novel perspectives, reframe existing paradigms, and inspire actionable, constructive insights. We argue that overcoming negativity bias can fundamentally transform the field. It can lead to more comprehensive theories, more balanced recommendations for practice, and a broader scope for future inquiry. We suggest that management research should shift toward exploring “what is good, what works, and what succeeds”. Such a reorientation will not only address the field’s existing blind spots but also empower scholars.
