Consulting multiple advisors: when it hurts and when it does not hurt the advisor–advisee relationship?

Consulting multiple advisors tends to improve decision quality; however, limited understanding exists regarding how advisors respond to the presence of co-advisors. Previous research has cautioned about the potential interpersonal costs of seeking advice from multiple sources. It suggests that advisors may perceive their advice as less likely to be utilized, diminishing their willingness to continue assisting the seeker. In contrast, we propose that advisors are generally unconcerned if seekers consult others, as long as they are informed before offering advice. We argue that advisors do not closely monitor or dwell on the utilization of their advice and maintain a positive attitude toward the seeker unless they infer rejection of their advice. In three studies, we show that disclosing a co-advisor upfront completely eliminates any negative interpersonal effects by rendering inferences about advice rejection implausible. Advisors respond as if they were the sole advisor irrespective of the presence of multiple co-advisors and regardless of whether they are consulted first of second.