Yesterday I wrote that in my opinion, the level playing field at work is a myth. Because of some powerful group dynamics that we often are not aware of, getting into an organization is very different than staying in and being able to rise to the very top. Let me give you an example.
At one of my previous places of employment, I worked with a group of people that perceived themselves as being very nice folks and having a very pleasant place to work. It was part of the official folklore that they told to each other and disseminated with pride to external constituencies.
One of the informal rituals that they used to testify to their collegiality was meeting outside of the workplace. Every Friday after work, they would meet for beer, snacks, and conversation at a local restaurant. From what I could tell, they had been meeting as a group every Friday after work for years. An important part of this ritual was they made sure everyone was invited, so in their mind they were doing something positive that contributed to making work better. They felt very good about themselves.
But what if for whatever reasons it did not fit your lifestyle to drink beer with them any Friday night? What if you did not drink beer, or just preferred to do so in the privacy of your home? Or what if you were on a tight budget and beer money was not a priority?
Could you decide to not participate in this informal ritual without feeling compelled to provide an acceptable explanation and without serious consequences to your career? No way.
One week I decided to suggest an alternative to the group. I sent an e-mail to everyone and suggested that instead of meeting for beer at the regular establishment, just this once let’s do XYZ instead, which I would gladly organize. What do you think their reply was?
Silence. Not a single person even acknowledged my request. Instead, they met as usual to drink beer at their favorite place. If they had truly been as inclusive as they espoused, the response would have been something like “well, that’s different, but we’ll give it a try.”
Although they never saw it, and would deny that they meant it, the message was loud and clear. “We are glad you joined us, and you are very welcome here, as long as you now become just like one of us.” While their folklore portrayed them as an inclusive group, they were in fact a very exclusive group.
Drinking beer on Friday after work served as both a test to see if someone fit in, and a tool to teach them how to fit in. It was actually one of several very similar tests and tools they used to enforce their own style of very friendly but no less absolute conformity.
What are the tests and tools used in your workplace to squeeze diversity out of people in the name of fit?
You should follow me on twitter here.
This is really interesting. There is no question that group cohesion is positively affected by social interactions like those you describe. However, no matter how flexible the organisers are, there will always be some people who do not wish to take part. We know that the difficulty of getting a team to work well together increases with group diversity, but we also know that the potential payback in terms of productivity should we succeed is far greater. The question is can we, or even should we, force people into this sort of social situation to facilitate better team work?
A previous manager of mine organised charity days every 6 months. Work would stop for a day and we would all go and provide some community service like painting a playground or clearing a park. He paid lip service to the idea of them being team-building days, but there were a number of problems (not least that he never joined in!) and so it never really worked. I still think it was the seed of an excellent idea however.
I think, once I have my own team to build, I will borrow his idea but tweak it to include a group lunch, an early finish and family friendly early evening events followed by something in the evening for those with the will. You can’t force people to make use of socializing opportunities, but you can make it as easy for them as possible.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
September 7th, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Ellie, I really appreciate this great comment! Would agree that group cohesion is a good thing, but it *always* also breeds a degree of group think. It feels good to be cohesive, so anyone that rocks the boat will feel the very strong pressures to conform.
I think the key to this team building is to be flexible and responsive. If someone proposes something different and is willing to help make it happen, go with it. Be willing to adapt and change to incorporate the variety in the group.
Thanks!! Bret
[Reply]
I think you summed it up well in the last paragraph. The beer drinking was both an “example” of their inclusiveness and a culture-indoctrination program.
Interestingly, I had a client with a similar ritual where two of the issues you mention we handled quite differently. When the office manager found out that some people really would love to come, but didn’t have the budget, she set up a system where the organization paid for the a week’s event out of petty cash.
They set up a donations basket where folks could contribute to the fund that would pay for the next week’s event. The office manager told senior managers what was going on. The first week of the new system, one of them (not the CEO) put enough in the basket to cover a couple of weeks.
At the end of a year, the “Keg Fund,” as they called it had enough in it to make a sizable donation to a local food bank. The office manager then started the next year by paying for the first week out of petty cash, and the cycle started again.
[Reply]
Bret L. Simmons Reply:
September 9th, 2009 at 10:35 am
That is a great story, Wally. Great point also that the ritual is not just a test and a tool, it is also a signal about who *we* are at work. Thanks! Bret
[Reply]