That said: Personally, I do want my coworkers and I to be something akin to a family. If I’m going to spend around a third of my life working, I want to do it with a group of people I like and care about.
Families absolutely do that, and this was and is normalised in various contexts e.g. farm families, or older (and now fundie) families where the oldest are tasked with caring for the youngest.
Lots of families are absolute shit, in a way which exactly matches the article:
> Recently, however, a friend in my department was told she would not receive a promotion because she is not a “team player.” When pressed, HR and her supervisor mentioned her absence from department-bonding activities.
Not being there for a family reunion / holiday / birthday leading to long-term grudges with emotional and financial consequences? Yep. It doesn't take much (or many) for family politics to be worse than office politics, with devastating consequences to some.
It's frustrating that too often management don't see the problems everyone else sees, and would rather waste $£ on recruitment than retention.
I left both of my last jobs for these reasons. It became a waste of time to go voice these concerns when my time would be better spent looking for a new job.
I had a discussion with my manager about this the other week and they asked me to let them know if I was considering other work so that they could try to fix it - my response was that I didn't think that would help. By the time I'm considering another job it's _because_ I no longer think my manager can or will do anything to fix the issues I have.
People generally don't leave companies when they feel like their manager would have been able to solve their issues with the company.
I can't read minds. I need people to tell me what works and what doesn't for them. An employment is a continuous transaction, if the situation changes it is absolutely open to re-negotiation. It's on both the employer, the direct manager and the employee to make sure everybody is happy with the arrangement.
And the two times I did hear about problem before the new contract was signed, I was able to find a solution. In the other case there is not much I can do.
One problem I've noticed is the sort of person who wants to apply for management roles is often the exact sort of person who should never be given that role.
I can tell you that many people left, and after years small groups of former co-workers formed at various other companies.
However, I don't think anybody would even try to bring anything from the old job if it's not worth it (technically/professionally) Nd valid in general.
It's honestly a bit rough having to rebuild relationships. I'm working in completely new technologies, which is one of the reasons I decided to move, but it's kind of difficult to go from a place of 100% trust of your peers to uncertainty about how they perceive you.
I've still been seeing some of my old team on weekends.
I think this is the key to it right here. The ones you chose not to leave behind were friends, not peers. After almost a decade, they probably are more family than friend. The rest of them though? Not even close.
I strongly agree with this sentiment. Above a certain wage-threshold, this is much more important to me than additional remuneration. I do some of my best work when I'm working with a good team with a high degree of trust, which is much easier to come by when I like the people on the team. The current state of semi-permanent WFH has had a negative impact on this.
(This isn't a blanket argument against work from home—people have different prioritizes.)
Their biggest issue seems to be that they, and their co-worker, didn't get promotions:
> I am currently far exceeding my “assistant” job description and am also seeking a title/compensation change to reflect the project manager role I’m now performing.
> a friend in my department was told she would not receive a promotion because she is not a “team player.” When pressed, HR and her supervisor mentioned her absence from department-bonding activities.
However i'm not sure that they are indicating the right behaviours for a promotion in their message.
1) They seem to think they should get a promotion without taking part in 'department-bonding activities', however taking part in these 'department-bonding activities' is ultimately part of being a manager in lots of companies (where your job becomes more about setting culture, building relationships and demonstrating the right behaviours).
2) They want a promotion, but are "resolutely firm on never working lunches or doing things outside of work hours". IMO Project Managers in lots of companies can't always have as firm boundaries about work and life as an assistant can, and there is an expectation that if things need to be done, they will stay late and work lunches to get stuff done when it needs to be done. That comes with the pay-packet unfortunately.
3) They think they should get a promotion, but describe the fact that they are seen frantically trying to get everything done in their current role, and tell people there is not enough time to join in on the company team-building activities which they appear to roll their eyes at - however the actual behaviour people should put on if they want to become promoted is to be like a 'swan' - i.e. rather than being seen to be busy and barely keeping up with your work, you are seen as gliding through your workload calmly while kicking vigorously under the water level, and still attending the social events despite having lots of work on because you are able to balance everything.
So it sounds like "I want to get a promotion, however I don't want to do the part of the role that involves taking part in relationship-building activities (other than sending a few instant messages), and won't accept being flexible with my hours or even having a working lunch if we are in the shit".
And it is kind of risky. Some colleague may feel harassed, or disagree with some personal views. Good way to get fired!
Depends on the job - I only have experience in the UK working as a Project Manager, but all Project Manager roles i've had don't have overtime and the expectation is that you work the hours you need to get the job done. You get paid a decent salary, which effectively prices-in this expectation.
Overtime doesn't really incentivise good behaviour for project managers anyway, because some people like overtime as you get more pay, but the more effectively you manage the projects you have the less opportunity there will be to get overtime pay (i.e. worse project managers get more hours and more pay).
> If she is doing good job at 9-5, she should get a promotion.
People don't usually get promotions for doing well in their current role - they usually get a promotion if they are ready & suitable for the next role, and are willing to take on the additional responsibility and accountability that comes with it.
> And it is kind of risky. Some colleague may feel harassed, or disagree with some personal views. Good way to get fired!
Being able to build relationships with team-members without them feeling harassed is a pretty key skill for managers, and part of this is understanding what personal views to share and which to leave at the door.
If you can't build an effective relationship without your team members feeling harassed, you aren't going to be a good manager.
This is a charity and they are notorious as bad employers / workplaces.
Its also not clear if the Job is a real professional salaried job or not - from some of the attitude I suspect its actually more of an admin blue collar role.
And from how the person "presents" I suspect they would not be a good manager
I find that admirable, but having gone through a number of different workplaces in the last 6 years, also very naive.
Out of the hundreds of colleagues I had, I would voluntarily choose to talk to maybe 3 of them.
I don't think I find 97% of people I encounter in general disagreeable, in my experience Software Engineering just has loads and loads of "that guy"s. You know, the ones you try to avoid at parties. Except that's most of them, so you don't show up to the parties in the first place.
I have been on the job hunt since May 2020 and have only come up against obstacles so far.
It has really cheered me up to hear those words!
A good company makes you happy, isn’t a perpetual stress fest and makes good money as well.
Of course it does come with some downsides, like the fact that it's tougher when someone leaves. That's life I guess :)
At some point it’s not them, it’s you.
And I totally agree. I have had to quit job interviews simply because both sides agreed that while we could work together, we probably would both just have a bad time.
But then I've also worked jobs where in 2020, employees still referred to things they thought were bad as "gay", so that's that.
Good relationships take time to build.
I know everyone has an off day some time, but I literally had job interview video calls before where my prospective boss asked me questions, then interrupted my answers 10 words in, for 20 minutes straight.
There are definitely such people that I've disliked within 10 minutes of meeting them, but they were extremely rare and they were total strangers who were usually freaking out in public over something trivial (not necessarily related to me)
I've never encountered such people in my professional life (thankfully).
> video calls before where my prospective boss asked me questions, then interrupted my answers 10 words in, for 20 minutes straight.
Yes, that might do it. I wonder how others tolerate them.
But that doesn't mean I would invite most of them over for a beer, talk about politics, and still expect to have a good time.
The question is why? Because they would disagree with you? They would challenge your beliefs?
I am finding that more and more. People want agreement and echo chambers, not debates and arguments.
I love arguing politics, hell sometimes I will take a contrarian position just to have the contrarian position not because I believe / support it.
Debate and augmentation is how with strength our principles, our worldview, and solidify our beliefs as we age. As a society (in the US at least) we seem to be losing the ability to sit down with people that have different politics, have a heated debate/conversation, but then still walk away as friends or colleagues. that is very bad for society over all
No and no.
Because I couldn't get a word in edgewise. And they can shout louder than me, and for longer. I have been in that meeting at work before, and I have left with a headache, and they with a sense that "they've won".
Imagine trying to have a beer with Piers Morgan, or a member of the Westboro Baptist Church.
Sure, it might be productive. But it wouldn't be fun, and I feel that was the premise - I don't think the idea of a "family-like atmosphere at work" was to imply "everybody hates each others guts, but still has to get along somehow".
What now? Not in the modern era. No one take personal responsibility for anything, everyone else must conform to their worldview, their opinions, their lifestyle... Period no discussion.
Nothing is wrong with them, everyone else is the problem
That's quite harsh. Empathy and social bonding is normal and healthy.
Yes, there are a lot of hypercompetitive working environments that train workers to see each other as contenders and encourage cynicism. It also depends on country you are it.
But please don't assume it's the norm across all organizations (companies, no-profits, academia...).
I also wasn't trying to hint at competitive workplaces at all. In my experience, the far more prevalent workspace atmosphere is "just let me do my job, I just need to show up for 40h a week to pay the rent and feed my wife and kids".
And that's fine! But that also doesn't lead to a familial work environment.
That... also describes my extended family.
I absolutely understand what you mean! And I certainly think 'family' is an absurd way of thinking of work relationships.
But if you were applying for a promotion, to become the leader of a small team of programmers, can you see how your reluctance to talk to your direct reports would make you unsuitable for the role?
Talking about the job at hand is never an issue. But it's also best to leave it at that to keep the work environment constructive, and not e.g. split a team among party lines.
(In my experience, we are now also talking about a purely hypothetical scenario. At the workplace I spent most of my career, team leads were generally hired externally, or promoted based on nepotism and "company loyalty" [read: years spent working at the company] rather than skill)
They may not share all your hobbies and opinions but they are usually smart people. Like you, they landed the job and they are still there after all. They all have their own, rich world that you may not realize exist because they are not invited at your parties (and you aren't invited at theirs). If you keep an open mind 97% of people are interesting not 3%.
The good thing about workplace "families" is that there is still some distance. You can have a look into their world but you don't have to be part of it if you don't want to. And you don't sleep under the same roof, don't share the chores, etc...
On the other hand, I do think you overestimate the skill of employees in general. Just ask around how many of your colleagues think they could pass the job interview for their current position right now - that percentage is generally pretty low (especially at places like Google, where interview training is basically a full-time job).
Quite often, people that "are still there" are simply still there because they have made themselves indispensable, e.g. they write working software, but no other person can understand their code. Firing someone like that is a business risk - not firing someone like that isn't (immediately).
I should probably mention here that I'm not a professional software developer.
I could have become one. I've always liked coding and working with computers—it's why I'm hanging out on Hacker News—and a lot of people in my life encouraged me to pursue that as a career. But I resisted, and if I'm completely honest with myself, it's because I didn't see programmers as the type of people I wanted to work with.
Talking about this—even thinking about it—feels kind of ugly, because I know I'm stereotyping! And, there are plenty of programmers who I consider wonderful people, some of whom I'm even lucky enough to count as friends! But on average, across the broader population of people who pursue software engineering, I do think there's a lot of truth to the stereotype.
(I currently work at a small graphic design agency, as a sort of bridge between the design and development teams. I'm eventually planning to get a masters in elementary education.)
So not like my family then?
Siblings (departments) compete for love (attention) from the parents (senior management). Hold a grude that they were not the favourite child (employee) and they had to make it all on their own unlike their little sister (new employee / product / competing department) who had it easy and had all the support (resources / marketplace) and help from their parents (management).
One christmas (bonus round) my brother (colleague) got the toy (a big bonus) he really wanted, and I just got a skateboard (a bonus that is the same size but I am certain is less than the other guy got). My parents (boss) obvioulsy doesnt love me (value my contribution) as much as them.
...are you sure?
The jig is up. People aren't fooled any longer by corporate bullshit, and it's none too soon in my opinion.