Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You posted this on a public forum, I gave my opinion.
We don't agree, and there's obviously nothing wrong with that, but understand you will get opinions that might not match your own here. I see absolutely nothing wrong with spending 15-30 minutes eating with co-workers a few times per year, and honestly I see it as silly to complain about something that trivial.
My point is: people automatically and wrongly assume that wishing not to be FORCED to socialize means that one doesn't WISH to socialize, and that's a false premise. Those of us who prefer being in control of our own levels of socialization at work may be absolute social butterflies, for all anyone knows. It's the mandatory (therefore forced, therefore unnatural) aspect that some of us find objectionable. To clarify...
My point is: people automatically and wrongly assume that wishing not to be FORCED to socialize means that one doesn't WISH to socialize, and that's a false premise. Those of us who prefer being in control of our own levels of socialization at work may be absolute social butterflies, for all anyone knows. It's the mandatory (therefore forced, therefore unnatural) aspect that some of us find objectionable. To clarify...
Organizations often like to push the illusion that the people who work there are friends and enjoy each other's company rather than the reality that the employees just put up with each other. Trying to force camaraderie doesn't work. It just makes people frustrated and resentful.
I have to wonder how a country so determined to keep individualism a trait of its people can create the mantra "team player" at every workplace in America.
I'm as introverted and individual as anyone can get, but I don't mind being a team player at work and I'm very good at it. What I object to is when the manager tells me I'm not a team player because I don't want to pal around with my boss and coworkers on my time off. I'm not being paid to shine when I'm off the clock.
Now I do understand that kissing butt at some businesses is the way you rise through the ranks and for some careers, hobnobbing with the boss and coworkers after hours is a way to work your way up the ladder. There's a reason I was never in those jobs. But in the case of my job, where you wouldn't get promoted on anything but seniority and there's no reason to play up to the manager, it gets even more irritating when you are told you need to be social with everyone after work.
And when I say I have better things to do instead of socializing, that means I have better things to do. Even if those things just include a quiet evening at home with a book. None of those better things has to have the approval of anyone else and I shouldn't have to prove their validity to anyone.
"But in the case of my job, where you wouldn't get promoted on anything but seniority and there's no reason to play up to the manager, it gets even more irritating when you are told you need to be social with everyone after work."
Or, in my case, where one really HAS to be an introvert to DO the job. An extrovert wouldn't last a day. Yet I'm expected to behave like an extrovert at my job where I'm paid to be an introvert? It's a little schizophrenic. Not surprisingly, many of these managers are themselves extroverts and thus expect everyone else to be...
My point is: people automatically and wrongly assume that wishing not to be FORCED to socialize means that one doesn't WISH to socialize, and that's a false premise. Those of us who prefer being in control of our own levels of socialization at work may be absolute social butterflies, for all anyone knows. It's the mandatory (therefore forced, therefore unnatural) aspect that some of us find objectionable. To clarify...
I understand your point. This is trivial enough I don't see why it would upset someone. Just go and enjoy the free food. Take 15 minutes, make an appearance, catch up with someone 1:1 towards the side of the room and everyone's happy. In my personal opinion this is not nearly a big enough deal to invest any energy in being annoyed or upset about it. We can agree to disagree here.
"But in the case of my job, where you wouldn't get promoted on anything but seniority and there's no reason to play up to the manager, it gets even more irritating when you are told you need to be social with everyone after work."
Or, in my case, where one really HAS to be an introvert to DO the job. An extrovert wouldn't last a day. Yet I'm expected to behave like an extrovert at my job where I'm paid to be an introvert? It's a little schizophrenic. Not surprisingly, many of these managers are themselves extroverts and thus expect everyone else to be...
If the teambuilding stuff is part of the job and is being done on paid time, then simply take it as part of the job and go with it.
The leadership gets to define what the job entails. If you can't accomplish what the job entails, then it's simply a matter of seeking other work. It's just like window washing: If you can't stand heights, then you can't be a window washer.
However, don't blame that on being an introvert.
Introversion is not a handicap that prevents being sociable when work calls for it.
Lets compare the employees and managers point of view.
Employees complain that the ones that are social and are friends of the managers get the promotions to managers.
Managers have found that managers have to have a different skill than just doing the job. The have to be able to lead to do the management jobs. An employee that just wants to do the job, and keep distant from other employees will never be good managers.
These social happenings, is a way to learn who will be able to handle being with and socializing with other people.
Thus an employee that never wants to be involved with other people and hide in a corner by themselves (a loner) will never be a good manager and will never be promoted.
This is the culture of many start up companies, that have succeeded almost beyond belief. They have it where it is almost a family group, with a lot of extras to make it great. It is not a very friendly attitude for introverts that do not like socialization, but works great for the company with very little turn over of personnel.
Today many older companies, are moving in managers to develop this attitude such as the OP is describing, to cut down on employee turnover. Employee turn over is expensive, so changing the attitude of the work place, is a way to increase the profits a company earns.
In the future, the workplace is not going to be introvert friendly, as some on this thread are noting the change in their company. They say that they just want to be left alone to do their job, and hate what is happening. But this trend is going to increase, not going away.
Lets compare the employees and managers point of view.
Employees complain that the ones that are social and are friends of the managers get the promotions to managers.
Managers have found that managers have to have a different skill than just doing the job. The have to be able to lead to do the management jobs. An employee that just wants to do the job, and keep distant from other employees will never be good managers.
These social happenings, is a way to learn who will be able to handle being with and socializing with other people.
Thus an employee that never wants to be involved with other people and hide in a corner by themselves (a loner) will never be a good manager and will never be promoted.
This is the culture of many start up companies, that have succeeded almost beyond belief. They have it where it is almost a family group, with a lot of extras to make it great. It is not a very friendly attitude for introverts that do not like socialization, but works great for the company with very little turn over of personnel.
Today many older companies, are moving in managers to develop this attitude such as the OP is describing, to cut down on employee turnover. Employee turn over is expensive, so changing the attitude of the work place, is a way to increase the profits a company earns.
In the future, the workplace is not going to be introvert friendly, as some on this thread are noting the change in their company. They say that they just want to be left alone to do their job, and hate what is happening. But this trend is going to increase, not going away.
Once a company gains a reputation for mass lay offs though (which really it only takes one), there is really nothing they can do to repair that damage short of just offering stupid high salary to get people to work there. Companeis that have any history of lay offs will never gain this family atmosphere no matter what kind of hype man they bring in.
You cant treat people like used toilet paper .... bring in a hype man ... rinse and repeat. People might accept jobs there but will be looking at the same time.
Start ups can do it becasue the people involved, alot of the times, are all share holders. They have legal stake, so even if the "family" divorces down the road they will get cashed out and the cash out (if the company does well) will be retirement level figures not a paltry severace ... or in most cases your last pay check.
The only way a bigger company will reduce the turn over is if people can come in as share holders and they vest proportional to their years of service so that way if they get laid off after 10 years, its not a boot to the curve or a few thousand bucks but rather 7 to 8 figure pay out.
Big companies want the family loyalty but they dont want to pay for it or offer the legal protections nessecary to gain that trust and loyalty. They want girl friends who act like wives.
I would love to find a start up to invest my time and limited money into and have legal stake, I am still looking.
Why would I go to an unfunded "team builder" for a company I dont have legal stake in, I am there for the pay check and that is all. Unless and until I have a non trivial legal stake in the company such that a firing would result in a 7 figure pay out. Sorry, I just dont really care, I might do a few little things here and there just to not draw attention but ultimatly I dont care.
Why anyone gets their panties in a knot over an occasional workplace gathering, party, pot-luck, life-milestone acknowledgment or whatever it is is beyond me. So what if you can't afford to contribute to gifts, don't want to contribute to gifts for some self-imposed arch enemy, don't cook, are too busy, don't like the frequency of events, hate everyone, resent lack of control over your time. It really doesn't matter. There are civil ways to work around all of this if you only make the effort. That's really the key isn't it? YOU cannot be bothered, so make it everyone else's fault when something backfires. You had to compromise and accept some limitations on your personal behavior in order to have a career, get, and hold a job. News flash: you can also compromise, swallow your anti-social pride, get over yourself and do this too. You can choose to be the office speed bump everyone else dislikes or you can manoever just below the social radar. As is said so often: "Is this the hill you really want to die on?"
....
What if we turned this around. Why anyone gets their panties in a knot over someone not attending the gathering, party, pot-luck, or whatever is beyond me. So what if you love to party, be a social butterfly, have nothing else to do, don't like working, want to control everyone else's time. It really doesn't matter. When it comes to accepting that others aren't social butterflies, YOU cannot be bothered.
I could go on but this makes the point. Why do the party animal extroverts expect everyone to conform to them? Why does it bother you so much that introverts don't party as much as you do?
What if we turned this around. Why anyone gets their panties in a knot over someone not attending the gathering, party, pot-luck, or whatever is beyond me. So what if you love to party, be a social butterfly, have nothing else to do, don't like working, want to control everyone else's time. It really doesn't matter. When it comes to accepting that others aren't social butterflies, YOU cannot be bothered.
I could go on but this makes the point. Why do the party animal extroverts expect everyone to conform to them? Why does it bother you so much that introverts don't party as much as you do?
You didn't actually read what you quoted, did you? If so, you didn't actually respond to what was said.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
