Socialising at Work

BlinkingLights

I think it's very much a creeping in very American management philosophy of enforced team building where one must be a "company man/woman".

I'm not really sure they're very compatible with European and Irish work-life balance ideas. The corporate culture in the US has morphed about being almost married to the business and constantly demonstrating how much you're prepared to suck up rather than how good you are at your job.

Add a bit of management psychobabble and you've suddenly got closely monitored by HR socialising events that become mandatory.

BlinkingLights

doolox wrote: »

You should have got a doctors note explaining the serious condition that coeliac is and stop him forcing you to eat medically prohibited food.

Also an injunction barring him from discussing personal issues such as food and dietary regimes.

The job wasn't worth going that far. I just left and got one with a much better environment.

davo10

neonsofa wrote: »

Many people are good at their job, love their job, get on with their colleagues, and still don't feel the need to regularly socialise outside of work with said colleagues.

Very true, and in an ideal world everyone would get on all the time, but when you realise that tensions are increasing between colleagues, you have to act or it will only be a matter of time before those tensions come to a head.

I accept my approach is not for everyone, just as posters will have to accept that I am committed to having a good atmosphere at work and I have found that this approach has helped. I don't have to organise these events, and if all I was interested in was "service", I wouldn't bother. It happens that it has worked very well and there have been no conflicts of note for a good few years.

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

They havent all been with you for so long
What about the lucky ones

Core staff have all been here for years, younger staff come and go occasionally for a veriety of reasons including emigration and proximity to home. None hav left because of conflict with co workers.

I suppose you could argue that the lucky ones are the ones who stay and work in a friendly environment and are well paid. And who get occasional fully paid nights out on an appreciative boss. But hey, if that doesn't interest you, we just have to accept that.

Morgans

BlinkingLights wrote: »

I think it's very much a creeping in very American management philosophy of enforced team building where one must be a "company man/woman".

I'm not really sure they're very compatible with European and Irish work-life balance ideas. The corporate culture in the US has morphed about being almost married to the business and constantly demonstrating how much you're prepared to suck up rather than how good you are at your job.

Add a bit of management psychobabble and you've suddenly got closely monitored by HR socialising events that become mandatory.

Yeah, I dont know about this. I think if your boss was considerate and showed that he went the extra mile knowing your allergies, you'd appreciate it. And hopefully, your new boss will be more like that.

More generally, I think that being part of a team encourages people to do more happily, in what in many days may be a relatively boring occupation. Showing some appreciation is better than being ignored. Even if its hard to force a team to engage together.

One thing that I have noticed is that those people who believe that life is too short to take part in any social activity outside the office hours seem to be content to be in work for 35-40 hours a week, even if its functional or miserable. The idea is that if people get on better that time would be more rewarding. Ideally, this would be a natural byproduct of the jobs being asked to do 9-5, but many jobs dont allow this unfortunately.

It is a tricky one to get right for management, and its hard to get people voicing appreciation for the effort when there are some who see it as intrusive or discommoding. I think some of the criticism has been way over the top for even though you may feel the effort is misguided, an effort is being made.

Aglomerado

I'm the same as you OP. When I started in this job I was part of a group of newbies and we all went for tea together and the craic was good, people I had loads in common with, talking about books, films, architecture and music. Gradually they moved away (external promotions and being levied off to departments in greater need - think DSP in the recession).

I never did manage to integrate myself into another group. Most people here are very nice, but I've not been able to find my niche. I'm very introverted and small talk drains me after a while also. The women love to talk about dresses, weddings and babies (I'm single, childfree and never wear dresses) and men talk about sport (bloody golf everywhere today). So I go for an earlier break with a book.

I do go to social outings at Christmas and the like, but my unit prefer formal sit down lunches rather than casual drinks so that's not ideal either, back to work afterwards.

One tea break a month is devoted to our office book club and I love this, it's an oasis of social fun with no sport or small talk!

Mountainsandh

davo10 wrote: »

No, "basically" I am not saying that. I am saying that someone who does not fit into the group dynamic of my workplace will not last. That has absolutely nothing to do with the social events. As the events are quarterly, I can't remember anyone I have let go even making it to the date of one of the events. As stated earlier, these events are not tests, I do not judge anyone on those nights, but I do expect them to attend them. They are organised well in advance and coincidently, I've often been told that they are a great excuse to get out for a night by staff with kids.

I think you are looking for ways to complain about the "unfairness" of this.

The way you are presenting it comes across as very passive-aggressive. I'd hate to work in such an atmosphere.

OP I'm the same. I think it's ok, and I respect that in others, I also respect people who love to spend their breaks gossiping. Work is work, private life is private, and I consider lunch breaks to be my own time. No one would bat an eyelid if someone said they're going for a quick run at lunch, or playing tennis for half an hour or something, so really, if you wish to read a book in your car or even take a power nap, that should really be treated in the same manner. Interactions about work take place in work time.

davo10 wrote: »

Experience has taught me that employees who are happy at work, work better together and stay longer with the company. A job as a means to an end is fine for a lot of people but I don't think it is ground breaking to say that if people like their job and the people they work with, it makes life a hell of a lot easier for everyone.

It seems strange that you don't seem to understand that people may like their job, be happy doing that job, and "like" (ie be perfectly friendly with and able to communicate with) colleagues without the socializing aspect. Tensions may arise and resolve within a work environment, without a need to spill that into the outer realm.

It strikes me too, that your employees may simply have understood that a certain veneer of social "happiness" is required in your work environment, and they simply play along for the sake of their career.
I would personally hate to play-pretend for my entire professional career, although I understand that is how some people choose to live their life.

slovakchick

Mountainsandh wrote: »

The way you are presenting it comes across as very passive-aggressive. I'd hate to work in such an atmosphere.

OP I'm the same. I think it's ok, and I respect that in others, I also respect people who love to spend their breaks gossiping. Work is work, private life is private, and I consider lunch breaks to be my own time. No one would bat an eyelid if someone said they're going for a quick run at lunch, or playing tennis for half an hour or something, so really, if you wish to read a book in your car or even take a power nap, that should really be treated in the same manner. Interactions about work take place in work time.



It seems strange that you don't seem to understand that people may like their job, be happy doing that job, and "like" (ie be perfectly friendly with and able to communicate with) colleagues without the socializing aspect. Tensions may arise and resolve within a work environment, without a need to spill that into the outer realm.

It strikes me too, that your employees may simply have understood that a certain veneer of social "happiness" is required in your work environment, and they simply play along for the sake of their career.
I would personally hate to play-pretend for my entire professional career, although I understand that is how some people choose to live their life.

Forced happiness

Morgans

I think people are assuming that everyone gets on well in groups in offices. And when that happens, forced fun is pointless.

However, in many well established companies, cliques who have bonded either over work, or out of work activities, can cause lots of hassle for new staff and for those outside the clique. Management should look to address this to ensure there are fewer instances like that described by the OP and others on here. Ignoring it is not good management practice. Those in the cliques or just well established routines in work will no doubt roll their eyes at these efforts. Ideally, activities that help staff to get to know each other don't grate. Still not sure of the level of criticism for this, and certainly none of the posts seem to offering any sort of solution to the situation the OP is in.

FWIW, think about starting an activity that you are happy to organise, and see if others are interested. Book club was mentioned here. Hope things do get easier.

C3PO

davo10 wrote: »

Op, as an employer of both sexes and ages that range from early 50's to early 20's, it would be ideal if all employees were all friends but that just doesn't happen. They are all at different stages of life and though some have interests in common, the only things they all have in common is that they work in the same place and must all work together.

It certainly makes for a nicer working environment if employees occasionally socialise and share some downtime. Quarterly I organise social outings, dinner after work on a Friday night with a free bar, day at the races all expenses paid etc. Unless there is a good reason for non attendance, I expect everyone to attend. I have found it is a great way for staff to blow off steam and by getting to know their colleagues a little better outside work, there is better understanding between them and more willingness to accept that everyone has off days. After starting these social events around 5 years ago I found that staff issues and conflicts have decreased significantly.

You don't have to share your personal life with your colleagues but it does help to get to know them a little. They will be more inclined to help you if you need help in future.

I'm the manager of a team and also organise regular "paid for" nights out for them! However I certainly wouldn't "expect" everyone to attend and know full well that some of them have no interest and won't go - which is absolutely fine! I would see these nights as a "thank you for your work" rather than a compulsory team building exercise!

BlinkingLights

doolox wrote: »

You should have got a doctors note explaining the serious condition that coeliac is and stop him forcing you to eat medically prohibited food.

Also an injunction barring him from discussing personal issues such as food and dietary regimes.

Why would I bother going to that level of expense and ridiculousness for something that's nothing to do with work ?

lisasimpson

BlinkingLights wrote: »

Why would I bother going to that level of expense and ridiculousness for something that's nothing to do with work ?

Point of principle...your boss was singling you out and it was bullying... its not that hard to sort out gluten freefood in most places

neonsofa

davo10 wrote: »

Very true, and in an ideal world everyone would get on all the time, but when you realise that tensions are increasing between colleagues, you have to act or it will only be a matter of time before those tensions come to a head.

I accept my approach is not for everyone, just as posters will have to accept that I am committed to having a good atmosphere at work and I have found that this approach has helped. I don't have to organise these events, and if all I was interested in was "service", I wouldn't bother. It happens that it has worked very well and there have been no conflicts of note for a good few years.

If tensions were high with myself and my colleagues, having to spend time outside work hours with them would not ease tensions in the slightest. I'd feel more resentful at the idea tbh.

slovakchick

neonsofa wrote: »

If tensions were high with myself and my colleagues, having to spend time outside work hours with them would not ease tensions in the slightest. I'd feel more resentful at the idea tbh.

Forcing a happiness cultural for the sake of productivity leads to depression in those that cant conform but i doubt this poster has unions to worry about otherwise it would be different

threetrees

davo10 wrote: »

It certainly makes for a nicer working environment if employees occasionally socialise and share some downtime. Quarterly I organise social outings, dinner after work on a Friday night with a free bar, day at the races all expenses paid etc. Unless there is a good reason for non attendance, I expect everyone to attend. I have found it is a great way for staff to blow off steam and by getting to know their colleagues a little better outside work, there is better understanding between them and more willingness to accept that everyone has off days. After starting these social events around 5 years ago I found that staff issues and conflicts have decreased significantly.

As a sufferer of social anxiety this would be my worst nightmare. I can settle in a job with some initial anxiety but frequent social events would cause me a lot of distress. I am on medication so can cope to a point but what you have described would be awful for me. Fwiw I hold a very responsible job and am settled so my anxiety does not affect my job.

Harry Palmr

BlinkingLights wrote: »

Why would I bother going to that level of expense and ridiculousness for something that's nothing to do with work ?

You medical and dietary needs as should have been discussed when you got the job. I'm diabetic and know the importance of not leaving bosses and colleagues in the dark, such disclosure should be routine.

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

Forcing a happiness cultural for the sake of productivity leads to depression in those that cant conform but i doubt this poster has unions to worry about otherwise it would be different

You are correct, no unions to worry about, my employees have never requested them because they have never needed them.

You can't force people to get along, you can however provide a time outside the work environment which allows them time to interact on a more personal level.

A lot of posters don't agree with my approach, I have absolutely no problem with that, I have a happy workforce most of whom have been with me a long time. That is evidence enough for me that it works. I could of course leave people to work out the tension themselves, but that just doesn't happen the way you want it to sometimes and good employees leave, that has happened in the past and actually spurred me on to try and nip problems in the bud before I lose a valued member.

It is strange that the instinct of some is to push against something which might actually benefit them, and to even "resent" it. I gain from a contented team which works well together, they gain by having the opportunity to mix occasionally outside office hours at my expense. I get the feeling that the main issue some posters have is that I expect the employees to be there, I make no apology for that, it's about 10-12 hours per year and to be honest if you can't spend that time socialising with colleagues then I don't want you in my workplace.

Horses for courses. All the nah-Sayers wouldn't like to work in this enviornment and I wouldn't want them to work there either. But I suspect a lot of people have no problem with a couple of paid nights out with friends from work at the bosses expense.

Bredabe

In one of my jobs there was such a them and us mentality that i was shocked to be invited to their christmas party! i said to myself then as now, I get paid to put up with them at work, they gotta pay me to put up with them outside or im not going.

I have a career now and work with all kinds of professionals, I dont go to many of the social occasions for that either, yea some of them are networking opportunities, but i know from experience that if im socialising i dont want some handger on trying to make a name for themselves bothering me or trying on my off time to impress others. I work hard in my job(above and beyond according to some) if that doesn't speak for itself when it comes to promotion, I can live with that.

slovakchick

threetrees wrote: »

As a sufferer of social anxiety this would be my worst nightmare. I can settle in a job with some initial anxiety but frequent social events would cause me a lot of distress. I am on medication so can cope to a point but what you have described would be awful for me. Fwiw I hold a very responsible job and am settled so my anxiety does not affect my job.

He would 'spot you' before the first quartely social event

C3PO

davo10 wrote: »

I get the feeling that the main issue some posters have is that I expect the employees to be there, I make no apology for that, it's about 10-12 hours per year and to be honest if you can't spend that time socialising with colleagues then I don't want you in my workplace.

That and, I suspect, your general attitude to your colleagues ..... the very fact that you refer to "my" rather than "our" workplace says a lot!

davo10

C3PO wrote: »

That and, I suspect, your general attitude to your colleagues ..... the very fact that you refer to "my" rather than "our" workplace says a lot!

As 100% business owner, it's my business alright. But if you get the sense that I am wholely interested in myself, why would you think I bother going to the effort and expense to keep a happy workforce? Again, just in case you missed the first dozen times I posted it, most staff have been here for years, hardly a validation of your point that it says a lot about my "attitude" to colleagues when I post "my" instead of "we".

davo10

slovakchick wrote: »

He would 'spot you' before the first quartely social event

There is a difference between can't and won't. It's a simple but a none the less important one. Social anxiety is a very good reason not to attend.

freshpopcorn

I actually think davo10, your doing a great job. It would be somewhere I'd like to work for and if I didn't bond with my colleagues I'd leave. The people I know who are happiest at work generally work with employers who'd have the same approach to you.

professore

davo10 wrote: »

You've completely missed the point. The good or bad fit is obvious at work, I don't need a night out to tell me that. The social nights are a perk for the staff and a way of improving working relationships by allowing people who would not normally socialise together to talk outside of the workplace.

The benefits of this to our workplace are not anecdotal, they are real, less tension between colleagues, better communication, better understanding of those around them.

If it's a chore for you to spend a couple of hours a year socialising with colleagues, then it would be difficult for you to fit into some work environments where close reliance on colleagues is essential. That's what would be spotted early and you would be job hunting again.

It depends on the job. If you run a team of high octane extrovert sales people then this would be ideal for them. If it's a bunch of programmers or engineers at least some of them will literally be dreading the "bonding" night out for months. I've gotten to know some people like this and they are great 1 on 1, diligent, great workers etc but terrible in groups - and literally dread it.

You are running the business so you are entitled to hire staff that are a good "fit" with the culture at your workplace.

I'm not one of those people, I enjoy a good night out as well (or sometimes more ) than the next person, but not everyone is like me. Some brilliant techie people are really awkward socially.

BlinkingLights

The key is to have social things that people *can* partake in without making them an obligatory event.

Ideally, it should be about facilitating and not forcing social interaction.

It would be highly unusual to get one type of personality across an entire organisation too. You'll have your extroverts and your introverts and you'll have your socialites and those who have busy lives who may just want to do the job and go home. As their circumstances change (eg kids get older) that can vary a lot too.

You've also got to provide things that are suitable for entire families and for single people and a range of events.

I know one company for example who continuously booked one thing and a significant % dislikes that one activity.

If you want to create a social space - diversity of activities, places for people to interact - things like having coffee areas and seating is actually really important.

It's not just a one size fits all and it shouldn't ever feel like a company is trying to manage your social life.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

Here's the thing, I don't force them to get along, I just hope they will and this helps. It's not for everyone but as stated repeatedly, it works for me and my staff. I'm picky about who I employ and this has resulted in a workforce some of whom have been with me almost 20 years. Someone with an attitude like yours would not suit my company but might be perfect for others. It is not just about doing a job, a happy working environment makes it more pleasant for everyone.

I say again, the evidence of this working is not anecdotal.

What exactly is wrong with my attitude? You are already judging me and all because I questioned your management style? What exactly do you describe as a "good fit"? Because if it were me, I wouldn't care LESS what someone does outside of work as long as they can be professional for 8 hours a day and get the job done, end of story. Outside of work is their own life, its clear from your posts that you rate social skills over competence, I would hate to work for someone like you. Treating employees like children always backfires by the way. Maybe someone should be looking into your fit skills.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

I don't pay for services, most seals can be trained to clap. I pay for people who are good at their job and who work well with others, that is why they have been with me so long.

You seem to be completely and utterly oblivious to the fact that people can work together and be professional within a team but not particularly like each other outside of work or want to socialize with them- what do you find so difficult to grasp within that theory?
How do you know people like it? Maybe they are only going because they feel they have to, and their careers or promotions would be affected if they don't, did you ever consider that? Employees aren't going to rock the boat when it comes to bosses so your declaration that there has been an improvement in working relationships could all be built on sand.
I think frankly its appalling to expect grown men and women to give up their leisure time to attend some false event purely for the bosses pleasure. I don't think you are nearly as perceptive of people as you make out. Would you be annoyed at an employee who said straight out to you "I'm not comfortable going to these events but I still do my work every day on time and to a high standard"?.

Wanderer2010

davo10 wrote: »

You are correct, no unions to worry about, my employees have never requested them because they have never needed them.

You can't force people to get along, you can however provide a time outside the work environment which allows them time to interact on a more personal level.

A lot of posters don't agree with my approach, I have absolutely no problem with that, I have a happy workforce most of whom have been with me a long time. That is evidence enough for me that it works. I could of course leave people to work out the tension themselves, but that just doesn't happen the way you want it to sometimes and good employees leave, that has happened in the past and actually spurred me on to try and nip problems in the bud before I lose a valued member.

It is strange that the instinct of some is to push against something which might actually benefit them, and to even "resent" it. I gain from a contented team which works well together, they gain by having the opportunity to mix occasionally outside office hours at my expense. I get the feeling that the main issue some posters have is that I expect the employees to be there, I make no apology for that, it's about 10-12 hours per year and to be honest if you can't spend that time socialising with colleagues then I don't want you in my workplace.

Horses for courses. All the nah-Sayers wouldn't like to work in this enviornment and I wouldn't want them to work there either. But I suspect a lot of people have no problem with a couple of paid nights out with friends from work at the bosses expense.

The fact that there is no union pretty much explains 90% of your posts now, its so much clearer now. Basically there is nobody there to fight on behalf of these workers, many of whom are probably just towing the party line for fear of being pulled up. Did your company every have a union or was there a specific reason you don't have one. If you did, I suspect a lot of your power would be taken away from you as you are abusing your managerial authority by forcing adults to mix outside of hours, God I would HATE to work for someone like you! You are exactly the type of boss I dread- analysing peoples social skills, forced merriment, unable to see a broader view. God help them!

davo10

professore wrote: »

It depends on the job. If you run a team of high octane extrovert sales people then this would be ideal for them. If it's a bunch of programmers or engineers at least some of them will literally be dreading the "bonding" night out for months. I've gotten to know some people like this and they are great 1 on 1, diligent, great workers etc but terrible in groups - and literally dread it.

You are running the business so you are entitled to hire staff that are a good "fit" with the culture at your workplace.

I'm not one of those people, I enjoy a good night out as well (or sometimes more ) than the next person, but not everyone is like me. Some brilliant techie people are really awkward socially.

I absolutely agree with you, that is why I have said in all my posts that this works for my business and my business alone. It probably wouldn't work in other jobs, but my posts are only based on my experience. Including part time staff there are 12 people. They all get along very well most of the time but there is an age divide, roughly half being in their twenties and the other half forties/fifties. But we all have to work closely together and are interdependent.

I understand that social events can seem a bind to those that can't be bothered getting to know their colleagues or believe that doing a good job is all that is required. But the fact is that there are thousands, maybe even hundreds of thousands who can just do what is required, but a bad employee in such a close knit unit can break everyone's heart.

Again, I make no apologies for my approach and if organising social events and expecting people to attend for the good of the group offends, then so be it. The only evidence I need to show me it is worthwhile is the fact that the employees work better together, none have left, all appreciate the effort and expense and there is a marked reduction in tension/conflict. Now if that isn't good enough, nothing will be.

davo10

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

The fact that there is no union pretty much explains 90% of your posts now, its so much clearer now. Basically there is nobody there to fight on behalf of these workers, many of whom are probably just towing the party line for fear of being pulled up. Did your company every have a union or was there a specific reason you don't have one. If you did, I suspect a lot of your power would be taken away from you as you are abusing your managerial authority by forcing adults to mix outside of hours, God I would HATE to work for someone like you! You are exactly the type of boss I dread- analysing peoples social skills, forced merriment, unable to see a broader view. God help them!

Would you get over yourself. You want a union to fight for your right not to have free nights out at your employers expense? For Gods sake most employers don't give a damn about their employees and would replace them at the drop of a hat. I try to improve the atmosphere and you see it as a form of bullying and forced merriment, Jesus wept.