The Awkward but Essential Art of Office Chitchat
nytimes.com
nytimes.com
Doing this takes courage. You WILL make mistakes. At times, you may cringe at yourself. Putting yourself out there, taking small risks is the spice of life. When you fail, embrace it and move on. Don't look back.
If you smile and keep a bright attitude, then that becomes infectious. If showing up is 90%, then the right attitude is showing up. The quickest way to screw this up is to be toxic.
Advanced mode is keeping that positive attitude (don't forget the smile) even when you're feeling attacked. If you can't bear it, then keep a number of exit strategies in your bag of tricks and pull one of them. You have to get going. Someone is expecting you. You need to take a call, etc. If you choose to stay, then you have to stay deft and keep the air light. Don't let someone pin you down into a corner where you have to defend yourself. Continue keeping things light and a bit ridiculous and the air will change. You might even gain some respect.
He has another book “for storytellers” that you can skip over for now. Get Impro, it’s a bit of a cult classic.
I work in education and it’s such an incredible skill for teachers as well. Controlling a class is easiest when you can establish your authority while simultaneously letting your students question it in a playful way. You can really break down a lot of walls and connect better.
Two paragraphs in, I was ready to write that it makes no sense at all, and the Smalltalk experience is nothing like it.
Then I realized that you're not talking about Smalltalk the language, and people e.g. sharing the "hot potato" of vm images (in some other tab I also had opened today's Smalltalk-72 HN thread)...
A conversation, especially a face-to-face one, contains something beyond content: Something like a meeting of souls. The (hopefully positive) feeling of the presence of another human being. The breadth and importance of this non-verbal communication is obvious.
Smalltalk then, is basically a request to engage only in this non-verbal connection for a fleeting moment. The content is almost completely irrelevant. It's just the excuse to be in a bubble together for a while. Seen this way helps (me) in two ways:
0. You don't need to be "good" at it. It really doesn't matter what you say. Say anything and the ball keeps rolling for a few moments longer. 1. You can find compassion towards the person who initiates it instead of contempt: They are actually asking to warm by your fire for a little bit. They are not testing/dueling you.
Or in the more sentimental words of L. Armstrong: "I see friends shaking hands, saying How Do You Do. They're really saying I Love You"
Not everybody is comfortable with silence and, given a chance, you might find that some small talk kicks off the deeper conversation you so desire. After that I realised it wasn’t so much the deep meaning that I wanted so much, it was being able to connect, listen and empathise. And to enjoy some of that from someone else.
In the end, the small talk is quite valuable even if it seems utterly banal on the surface. Sometimes I just laugh about it, use it as an icebreaker.
Not everybody is comfortable with silence and, given a chance, you might find that some small talk kicks off the deeper conversation you so desire. After that I realised it wasn’t so much the deep meaning that I wanted so much, it was being able to connect, listen and empathise. And to enjoy some of that from someone else.
In the end, the small talk is quite valuable even if it seems utterly banal on the surface. Sometimes I just laugh about it, use it as an icebreaker. Life isn’t so serious all the time, after all.
I don't understand coworkers who say silly things at the lunch table without a second thought, or those who base their social lives around co-workers... doing so seems to risk your upward mobility. It's a sad POV but from my experience anyways I think it's reality.
Maybe some people aren't that concerned about upwards mobility, and care more about having a work envitonment where they can relax and be themselves?
Indeed, this is a very good way to put it. Although I do understand people who say silly things at the lunch table without a second thought - they value fun and genuine social interactions more than "upward mobility".
If you can't be yourself for at least 8h/day and you also can't be yourself after that, because you shouldn't base you social life around your co-workers, then who are you? And when are you allowed to be yourself? Weekends and bank holidays? Fuck. That.
We would all be happier if we were allowed to be ourselves all the time. Maybe by hopping around until landing on a cluster of likewise co-workers who can see the "high quality professional" side by side with the crazy cat lady or the punkrocker.
But again, I think your decription is correct and that we live within a very sad state of affairs.
And small talk might actually help your chances of upward mobility since people start being aware of your name. They know you delivered something. Your superiors are more likely to mention that and you if people in the room know who you are than if you're "a resource".
I've even decided that I will no longer 'perform' interviews. I could get most jobs, because I'm pretty good at doing interviews. However, I've come to the conclusion that I should just be me and if they don't like it, there isn't a fit. Recently got my first rejection because of this and I didn't mind as much as I thought I would. Of course, exceptions will be made when I really need a job. But as long as the market is on my side, I'll just keep being myself.
We've all known for a while that being unemployed, and having that desperation stink on you, is a bad situation. But I'd never really considered it from the hiring side, that when you are interviewing someone who desperately needs a job, you're interviewing more of an actor.
THe person conducting the interview is asking you questions he knows the answer to, and knows that you know what he wants to hear, and is just checking that you know how to play the game and repeat back to him what he wants.
If you answered all the stupid interview questions completely honestly you would never get a job. Both parties know this, yet everyone keeps ploughing on with this moronic game.
It's more comfortable, and it makes me want to go back to work on Monday.
I've also found that letting out the least amount of personal information possible disarms those that to climb the ladder exploit and set people against each other.
I'm such a coworker. Two reasons I do this:
1. I don't care about "upward mobility".
2. People don't see me as a threat to theirs, which is a good thing, because you don't want an overly ambitious junior developer trying to prove his(or hers) worth by picking on you.
Reason 0. is that weirdly enough it's good to appear somewhat "incompetent", but still in reality be able to deliver.
Wait long enough and you'll probably find younger people will do your job for cheaper, unless you can prove you're worth promoting. Some people can really stick it out, but usually by job security ("Larry is the only one who knows AIX and we can't replace it")
> 2. People don't see me as a threat to theirs
Eventually there will be layoffs, at which point you don't want to be the one guy that nobody wants around.
I know most people in tech seem to think they'll be employable forever, but it's an illusion.
2. I've been laid off in the past. What's interesting about this is that another company will still have you provided you pass their recruitment process. Seems obvious, but not for someone who's going through this for the same time.
What also helps is that I'm EU-Eastern-European, so my labour is relatively cheap.
How so? To maintain lower expectations & set yourself up to surprise people positively?
""" When someone invites you to a wedding feast, do not take the place of honor, for a person more distinguished than you may have been invited. If so, the host who invited both of you will come and say to you, 'Give this person your seat.' Then, humiliated, you will have to take the least important place. But when you are invited, take the lowest place, so that when your host comes, he will say to you, 'Friend, move up to a better place.' Then you will be honored in the presence of all the other guests. For all those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. """
Basically, it gives people the opportunity to vouch for you, which is good for social capital.
They say that there are two tokens on the table at the start of any such interaction, one says "this is very serious" and the other labeled "it's not a big deal." If you are receiving a report of a problem from a customer, you are best advised to pick up the "very serious" token, as by signaling that you take the problem or issue reported most seriously, you can reassure the other person and alleviate their feelings of how serious it is for them.
Whichever token is picked up first, the other party will always take the other one. It is serious enough for them to call, so they will be appreciative if the service person who is responding clearly takes the matter very seriously. Even to the point of taking the opposite position, disarmed.
If you instead chose the other token, to signal with your speech that it's not a very big problem by saying for example "that's no problem at all," then you may get a very different response. "Well for me, it is a problem, and I need it resolved quickly." Instead of being disarmed, the person may feel a need to defend their reason for calling.
I got this from "It Doesn't Have to Be Crazy at Work"
If they act normal and are of normal competence, then again there’s not much that you need to think about. If they’re very competent and act normal my guess is they can be trusted to give generally honest assessments of different situations without worrying too much about looking good.
This may appear to the untrained eye as incompetence, maybe imagine the dumbest possible way to navigate an interface, but in the thought process of someone who learns a thing inside and out, behaving in this way can actually promote a more complete understanding.
I mean to elaborate on the idea of "baffled slobs" – not sure if this is exactly what you meant.
Dumb athletes are better at the start because they’ll just do what their coach tells them, but smart ones eventually overtake them as they figure things out.
In fact they are often highly inappropriate because it will lead others to say bad stuff, meaning gossip they can share with their chosen handler, who can then use that gossip against others to promote themselves and bring their lackey along for the ride.
Maybe we've worked in different environments. :)
Seems like the standard "kiss up, kick down" mentality that is often present in corporate environments
I'm done with that nonsense. I won't embarrass the company, insult clients, or create a hostile work environment but otherwise I'm not going to pretend that I left my personality in the car.
If you can't accept me then you don't deserve me. Fit that into your culture if you can.
1. Things that are simply silly. I like assembling toy models. Is it silly? Absolutely. Am I shy about talking about it with peers or making jokes about it? Nope. It's just silly. Same goes for my favorite wing place or a dozen other topics.
2. Things that are possibly offensive. A good model here is "combustible topics". Even if the topic itself may not bother someone, it could become that way. Religion, politics, social theory, etc. It's not that I don't have plenty of opinions here, it's that work is not the right place to raise these up. I also recommend avoiding them at family events, and any other situation in which strangers are trapped into conversing with you.
But I agree with this: > I don't understand... those who base their social lives around co-workers
Dangerous territory. You may be great friends in real life but be on opposite sides of the table at work or vice versa. Worst of all, you may find out someone who you work with constantly has several behaviors or opinions you find distasteful. Keep some space.
Since you targeted me, your attitude seems like the typical Silicon Valley "lifestyle" worker, which I think is the most uninspiring type of SV person around.
Some people could not give less fucks about "upward mobility" (especially at the cost of some other things they value). They have what they want in life, and they'd rather be genuine...
Its hard.
The most popular trust-creation mechanism for adults seems to be getting drunk together, which reliably leads to little infractions, which every witness has the choice to exploit or not. The latter option engenders trust.
"I don't trust someone that I didn't get drunk with" is a sentiment I've heard repeatedly, both privately and professionally. The most successful startup that I worked for even asked "What's your favourite beer?" when they interviewed me for a programmer position, and when I asked by this was of interest, they said they took their after work drinking sessions pretty seriously, and "don't want to work with people they can't have fun with". As somebody who doesn't enjoy being drunk, this was difficult for me to adapt to.
As to the drinking after work... I think it's appropriate to set boundaries. I only drink a handful of times a year but will participate in some activities including outside work hours, I also don't have more than a single drink if I'm going to drive within a couple hours. Also, get two non-alcoholic drinks or glasses of water per alcoholic beverage, could pretty much stay close to sober all evening when I was in my 20s by doing that.
In the end, it's about striking a balance of being sociable without being irresponsible at the same time.
Note also that pretending to drink feels a bit like cheating to me: I'm actively deceiving others. I wish I could live my life without deceit.
That's something I've heard as well, and I tell them that drinking with me is a bad idea, and getting me drunk is even worse. Because that's when my persona slips and my shadow comes out to play -- and my shadow is kinda like Sam Kinison, only not funny.
But when something happens that contradicts your model, it means your model is wrong, and this causes severe anxiety (cognitive dissonance). This explains why people get more upset when things don't go the way they expect than whether or not things go badly or well, which is why managing expectations is such a high priority for project managers. It also explains why autistic people who struggle to abstract and get upset by social disappointment rock themselves: to create a signal they can predict. Otherwise, the bottom of your world falls out every time someone moves their cheese - like a baby throwing a tantrum when they drop their favourite toy before they have a model of gravity.
Now, why would people want to get drunk together? I think we want to test congruence and resilience in a vulnerable situation. The better a person can predict your social cooperation in a variety of contexts, the less bandwidth they can afford to devote to modelling your actions, which might otherwise pose an existential threat. Once you have mutually compatible models of cooperation, you can safely turn your backs to each other and work on solving external problems without causing internal anxiety.
But being predictable also means you are vulnerable. If you can be modelled, you can be manipulated. So we crave a certain "predictable chaos" from our friends, partners and co-workers. We want someone self-aware enough to follow the rules, while pleasantly surprising us in ways that expand our mental territory without invalidating too much of the existing foundation. A quick way to upset a drinker is to turn down free drinks at a bar at night (but not in the middle of the day). It forces them to re-evaluate their model of the world - and, people hate doing that, especially drunk people. The same is true of questioning people's religion.
Incidentally, this is also why you dream and have nightmares, and seek out horror movies when things feel stagnant. Your mind is exploring your survivability in a bunch of threatening situations that could arise, and learning from them without dying.
Incidentally, the essence of what you say (the mind is always predicting and learns from prediction failure) is also the essence of idealist philosophy, and has found its most advanced expression in Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Unfortunately, Kant uses a language that's difficult to access today, so a lot Kant's insight has fallen out of today.
... you can analyse this in a different way: think long term! The more successful you are in your job, the more you will bump into the same people again and again later, sometimes a decade later. Somebody else abused your trust by talking to HR, hence you could decide on the simple policy of never trusting them again, and cut them out of your high-trust network. Some fail your trust-related tests, some pass. Use this information wisely. (Note that an alternative policy is not being too history-sensitive, and let bygones be bygones.)
While this 'say what you see' served as a functional ice-breaker, as an introvert I found it strangely confrontational, almost like an interrogation. I felt like I was having to justify myself, as there was no obvious opening for a meaningful reply otherwise (simply saying 'yes' hardly cuts it). Of course, that was all on me, he had no idea I was reacting in such a way.
"Got a hair cut?" "Nope, I got all of them cut."
(Funny enough, I did brainstorm solutions as thought experiments. The one I saw working was to mercilessly point out what he was doing, every time he did it. "A-ha! Captain Obvious speaks!" "Got any obvious observations for me today?". But that would have been staggeringly cruel, after all the poor guy was only trying to be friendly!)
"Hey, that looks pretty good!""Smells good! What'cha got there?""Bring me some next time!"
I avoided the office kitchen at all costs to prevent this sort of small-talk. My routine would be retrieving my food from the fridge as fast as humanly possible, eating at my desk, and then spending my actual lunch break reading a book someplace. Ask me anything, just leave my food alone.
The worst was when I'd reheat some meat-and-veggie entree I made the night before, and people would say "wow, smells good!" What the hell am I supposed to say to this? "Yup..." I think I have office-trauma-induced-asperger's now....
Of course a few people are unsalvageably annoying, but what this behavior sometimes means is they want to have some sort of conversation with you, but they don’t know how. They may be nervous about saying something wrong, and going for safe statements. One trick that has worked for me: acknowledge the statement with a smile and reply with a complete change of subject, asking them a question about their work or life. Statements don’t require a response, so don’t respond, but ask them a question instead that guides the conversation in a direction that’s interesting or at least tolerable for you. If you can appear interested, or better yet actually learn about the person and find some shared interests and/or shared context, you may be able to permanently change the annoying greetings into chit-chat you like.
I worked with someone who rotated the same asinine 1/2 dozen or so comments about me and my appearance or arrival time etc. It annoyed the shit out of me, but, I also realized he probably didn't know another way. Sometimes people are trying to find any way, in their limited ability, to connect with someone who is clearly smarter than they are. So they pick on you. A good first attempt to stop this is to try to connect with them. Sometimes that stops this behavior.
This really doesn't fall into the 'I need to report this person' category, but, my guy didn't stop even when I got to know him.
So, realizing he was stuck in a loop I came up with my own canned, corny, responses.
'Got your hair cut!' --> 'No, I got them all cut!' 'You are early today!' --> 'Yep, I couldn't wait to be here!' 'Red shirt today!' --> 'Yep, I read it before I put it on!'
Note: These are not confrontational.
Two things happened.
1. I didn't have to think about what to say but once, then I repeated that. Cognitive offload. 2. He began to recognize how repetitive he was and eventually he either said 'good morning' or nothing. A win for everyone.
I have a million stories of idiots at work who are intimidated by the smart, quiet computer guy and so they pull dumb shit like this.
The one I hate the most is when someone gives you a nickname.
Rarely is it flattering and I struggled with how to deal with that for a long time. We intentionally don't call each other names in my family so it was always bit jarring. I tried everything: getting mad, addressing it directly nicely, ignoring it hoping it would stop, joking about it.
Nothing worked, until I tried the following.
The very first time someone gave me a nickname, I immediately gave them one. It doesn't have to be mean, just anything really. If it has a little stank on it thats ok too. Just don't get personal. Idiots will give you a nickname and smile. So, do that too, smile. Then every single time you hear it, you say their nickname. You don't call them their nickname except as a response to hearing yours. That's the key. If you use it outside of this context it does not communicate your message.
Eventually they will stop or find someone else to annoy.
In general if you think you are smart the best way to demonstrate that is not by telling people about it. To paraphrase Geto Boys: “real gangstas don’t flex nuts cause real gangstas know they got em”
On the other hand, why see "introvert" or "extrovert" as something that you essentially are, and not an accidental attribute, one can, and perhaps should, work on?
In that case, his 'say what you see' routine would be a good testing ground to stop caring as much for the supposed "confrontation"...
Learning that about myself and figuring out how to work with that has made life a lot easier.
You are quite right here - it is a perfect learning opportunity. After all, I know it is coming, and so can prepare for it. I did make my peace with it in the end, the key was to connect on a deeper social level so we could talk about something more interesting. Essentially just ignoring the captain obvious opener in the same way you skip past 'how are you?' as a greeting, not a question.
Every example you gave can be deftly handled with:
"Yes I did. Good morning! I'm going to grab a morning $beverage now."
Optionally mention what you are going to work on after you get the beverage.
But fair comment.
I am totally with you on both points. The important thing to realize is that it is uninteresting and boring, but that is not the point. It is a skill like many others, if you want the benefits it brings, you have to learn it through practice and however else you normally learn skills
Anyway, I should probably have disclaimed my first comment more loudly: it's anecdotal. For me smalltalk is absolutely a learned skill. I used to suck at it, now I can get by, and it took a lot of conscious effort on my part. YMMV
Sandi's talk was called "You Are Insufficiently Persuasive" and she talks a good bit about this idea, starting with that the unhappiness of programmers primarily comes from other people, and that if only we could make them behave the way we want them to act, we would all be much happier. This is one of those Sandi talks I've listened to a few times more than once, and I recommend watching it all the way through, if this is an interesting idea for you.
But to spoil it just a bit, after the major arc of the talk it is suggested that the way to get people to act better is to first change your own behavior, and that it's also often helpful to question whether your way is actually right.
I haven't actually watched this particular talk in a while, so I'm interested to see if others who did have a different interpretation, and whether you think I got it right.
No offence, but if you're not interested in people, or at least in learning to fake it, how do you expect to manage them?
What I wanted was to progress my career based on my skillset. However, without 'people skills' it's impossible to progress in any large organisation.
These days, I stick to contracting. Zero people skills required, and I can avoid all the office bullsh*t without issue.
At least that what I try to do.
And even then, I find myself sitting there learning about the intricacies of different automobile designs, which while better than small talk, can still be kind of boring.
Dismissing this critical skill as "slapping each other on the back" and contrasting it to "work performance" shows that you may be dismissing a key skillset that is necessary to move up, if that is something you want to do.
Senior management look for communicators and influencers when deciding whom to promote. A solid performer they have talked to, have seen interacting with others, and know a thing or two about is more likely to get the nod.
The engineer who few people know or trust but is always "right" isn't going to effect change. The one who can talk to Jane in accounting and convince her that this change is going to be better for everyone, because they have a good work relationship and she trusts him, is going to be able to put their plans into action.
1) Your mutilation was against company policy 2) Some bits of you got on their shirt.
Personally, I'd much rather deal with people knives drawn rather than work hard pretending to care if each other lives or dies.
Also sounds like a great way to end up isolated and alone. Even at work, you sometimes need people in your corner.
Ever wonder why shows like Survivor and Battle Royale games are so popular? That's how office life is these days. Nobody is ever "in your corner" as you put it. Everyone is always and forever trying to gut everyone else in a neverending zero sum game.
Unless you work in a new/high growth field or something, then collaboration can have benefits, but in most static corporate environments, the only gain you have is from someone else's detriment.
Furthermore, I learned the value of collaboration, even if it helps potential opponents, through the card game Puerto Rico. Trading with others helps them, but it equally helps you. Say you're playing with 4 other people. Trading gives you +1 benefit for both parties. Refusing to trade causes 0.5 harm. The rational strategy is to trade as much as possible (except maybe with the frontrunner), because if you just go around harming everyone else, you'll equally harm yourself. They'll get hurt, but they can just turn around and benefit from trades with other players.
It is possible to get quite far by being a solid person with integrity. And if that appeals to you, you should never sacrifice that.
Finally, it's a big world. My purpose in any job is to learn and grow as much as possible, and then take those skills elsewhere. Meanwhile, those who rise to the top of the heap at some company due to bad politics -- are they actually going anywhere? Or are they stuck in the bed of their own making?
There are subtle signals that people have to both recognise and/or know how to use in order to use smalltalk succesfully - things like never interrupt someone wearing headphones on both ears, or recognising body language of someone absorbed by thought.
Even if you genuinely don't ever like talking to people, they are bound to get the message soon enough and stop trying. And if for some reason they have the spectacularly bad social skills to not pick that up, usually telling them once or twice (kindly!) that you don't like to chat at work should get them to stop.
Apologies for the Star Trek reference, but it feels like being a particularly dense Betazoid working in an office of Vulcans.
If a coworker I like suddenly passes I'm not going to mourn for weeks, I'm going to say "that's a bummer" and go on with my life. But that doesn't mean I am completely devoid of caring for them.
Disclaimer: I work in accessibility, and am legally blind myself, so maybe I fixate too much on disability-related issues sometimes. I can make small talk at the office though.
I, on the other hand, suffer from Programmer's Disease. I can walk into a crowded room, approach someone and try to strike up a conversation and have the discussion killed in 3 minutes.
I try to improve. I really do. I think it's a gift we're born with.
1. She loves it when I come to save her when the tone of the spontaneous discussion is not to her liking and nothing kills said discussions faster then me participating.
2. When I strike it, my conversations tends to be very subject focused and will leave me and the other person smarter and more informed.
So what I do now is either I stand beside her and try to enjoy the (for me) meaningless chatter (I really like the high pitched voices of socially engaged people), or I will try to find that one other weirdo in the room who holds a ton of knowledge in an area that I'm completely blank about and suck as much as possible information out of them.
That is where my 35 years of continence improvement have led me. YMMV.
After looking up continence it fits like a glove :)
My mom has the same thing. Random people just start telling her everything about their life, because she appears open and friendly.
If i'm in public, I usually look miserable (RBF) and have a very specific goal in mind. People don't just walk up to me because its obvious I'm not going to be receptive.
Wait, how are 2.9b people avoiding chitchat? I almost more interested in this.
People love talking about their areas, and I get some intel on the company I work for.
I think the article overstates how important chit chat is, but the overall point is probably correct: don’t be a psycho and never talk to anyone.
IMOA trust is built by delivering, being consistent and helping out.
You can chitchat all day, it won’t help if there’s nothing behind. Some people may be terse on the interaction side but do their job, come to help when they see you need it, and generally be aware of what other people are working on without chitchatting.
In this day and age if chichat is the main communication bus of your group/company, either it consciously chose to do so, and you have been hired in this perspective -> no issue whatsoever. Either it’s doing something fundamentally wrong and you should go somewhere else.
Also what is a “licensed career coach” ? Why don’t they ask 5 or 10 people with actual successful careers and give clearer context advice. It feels so bullshitty to have someone with that title for everyday job interactions.
Having agreements in writing is important for reference. Being present for their creation (and therefore having a say as it takes shape) is worth it.
Lunches are not just food intake, and being there or not will have an effect on your work life.
I personally feel it’s something that should be more explicited. It goes well along shared bathroom breaks, cigarette breaks, after hours drinking, golf on week-ends.
We all draw the line somewhere different on wether we are willing to do it or not, but it should at least be made clearer this is part of work and not some fun ride. We make it clear with our family or partners, it should be clear on the company side as well.
Note: eating with friends that happen to work at the same place is yet another matter, that’s not what I am pointing at
This changes though when you move to different floors. At some point you might be working more with someone that is on the other side of the street that the person next to you. Will you trust them less because you don't see them everyday ? Will you be worse at your job because of the lack of chit-chatting ?
Perhaps, but it's something that you'll need to work on, otherwise your job is just doomed. So people adapt, catch up once in a while but everyday chit chat just becomes less essential.
Then you work with people on other buildings. You have a remote contractor. You have an office in another country.
20 years ago those were extreme scenarii. Now I think people are expected to be productive and efficient in these conditions.
Chit chat is also a form of self promotion or publicity. People are more likely to notice you delivered instead of "it was delivered" if they know you. Don't rely exclusively on your immediate manager to promote you to everyone else. They may not have the time for that and it's unlikely they'll say "John/Jane delivered" if nobody around knows who those people are.
If we go into "all else equal" territory, you could get a promotion and not neighbour because you created your dog an instagram account that your boss likes.
Or you could have built a Minecraft world that was pretty cool when your coworkers checked it from one of your sns profiles.
Or you could be the only one not annoying your boss all day long, and they show their appreciation on bonus day.
Or your release announcement mails have funny gifs.
Or your have a name that's easily remembered.
Or really anything. I think the goal to build trust and reputation is for things to not be equal and not have to play weird games of popularity.
Don't get me wrong, communication is key, but chit chat is a single very specific form of communication, among so many others.
I think in any decent organisation you get better ROI from having good written communication than top of the game chitchat, if you had to focus your attention somewhere. If chitchat is an important part of your professional life, I hope it's by choice and you're not just stuck in a company you hate.
Yours looks more like a list of ridiculous, implausible but of course still technically possible reasons. As a boss I'd like to know if the person I'm promoting is willing to come up with such arguments in an attempt to prove a point. ;)
It takes coffee breaks and some jokes to reach that. And I think it really boosts your productivity.
Don't Talk to Anyone, Ever
https://freebeacon.com/blog/dont-talk-anyone-ever/
Don't talk to strangers at work. I don't care if you're coworkers: Unless you have to do a task with this person, they aren't interested in being anywhere near you, nor should you be in them.
Don't talk to anyone. Ever. Talking is awful. People are worse. It's hard to imagine a more horrifying combination than talking to people.
I worked and have worked with people who know very little or do very little yet but have mastered the art of hobnobbing and have fared a lot better than yours truly who'd rather put his head down and get the work done.
Topics I love to talk about but avoid, diet and exercise. Topics I avoid completely, politics.
How in the hell are you supposed to build a rapport with people who would as soon skin you alive as look at you, and only tolerate you for what you can do that no one else can?
Hm - my wife (who’s an expert on this sort of thing) says that’s actually rude and you should always answer back, “good and you” so that _the other person_ can start taking about their TV show/podcast whatever.
There is so much petty politics and ego in the modern office that all it takes is saying one thing that someone doesn't like to cause potentially years of unnecessary drama.
One gossipy sociopath who's trusted by your manager, that doesn't like something you said during small talk, or who didn't like the look in your eyes when they mentioned a strong political view, can limit your ability to get promoted.
People just talk anything and everything in blue collar jobs and nobody cares. I think that's because nobody has their ego wrapped up in how well they mop a floor or flip a burger.