Forcing Interaction with Coworkers/Students

[Chaotic Harmony]

For what seems like the millionth time, the people running our meeting yesterday forced people to break away from their cliques. It seems like every meeting or retreat we have anymore they insist on assigning seats or do some stupid game to break up the cliques. I'm incredibly reserved at work and keep to myself, so I hate when they do this. I prefer to stick around the people I know and am comfortable with. At the last staff retreat we had, when they assigned seats, I actually had an anxiety attack because I just wasn't comfortable with the people I had to sit with...not to mention I got stuck next to a woman that drives me crazy on a daily basis at work. (Thanks! I avoid her for a reason guys! That's another story though.) The other thing was, I tend to sit in the back off to the side because it's less distracting for me. When they forced us to move around, I wound up with a woman who would not shut up through the entire meeting and just kept making snarky comments. That's part of the reason I prefer to choose where I sit and who is around me.

I guess I just don't see the point in making people branch away from the people they are comfortable with. It never changes anything around here. After the meeting or retreat is over everyone flocks back to who they are more comfortable around. I have yet to ever see one of these forced interactions result in any kind of bond or friendship after the meeting/retreat was over. The only thing it does is makes me want to find a reason to be absent or busy when the next meeting rolls around.

Anybody else hate being forced to interact with your coworkers you don't know well? Or being forced to interact with other students in a class you don't know well?

 

[Such Irony]

I have mixed feelings about this. I prefer to choose to interact with the people I want to interact with and ignore the rest given the choice. I agree that forced interactions rarely result in bonds and friendships. However, I can see why this may done. In real life, even if you don't particularly like or feel a bond with someone, you still have to work with a large variety of people. At least with forced interactions, you can see where the other people are coming from and get to know them better. You don't have to be friends with everyone you work with.

Regarding school, I dreaded those group assignments and much preferred to work alone. When we had to work in groups, my muscles would tighten when the teacher had us find our own groups. I was uncomfortable initiating contact and asking people if they wanted to join me. I was often the last person without a group and the teacher would go around the classroom talking another group into taking me in. It was worst in middle school when I was very socially awkward and unpopular. I was actually relieved when the teacher would just assign groups as it took that stress off.

 

[Chaotic Harmony]

I think my resentment came from the retreat where I was sitting in a group that had two people I worked with frequently, that always make me really tense to be around. One is very bitter with this place right now, so she's been kind of a loose canon and unpleasant to be around. So I always get really tense and uneasy around her. The other one is just a pain in the rear because she doesn't listen or follow rules that are in place for a reason. I can get trying to get people to mingle, but I wish they'd find better ways to handle it.

Sometimes it's not so much that we just stick to the people we are comfortable with, but we are avoiding the people that we are uncomfortable around. I know if I don't have any of my buddies with me I would rather sit next to someone I don't know at all, than someone who I do know and am not comfortable around!

 

[Aquarelle]

I don't really have "friends" at work, so I usually end up sitting with random people anyway at retreats. But I do prefer to stick around people that I am more comfortable around, so at events when we are with the other offices in our department, not just ours, I prefer to stick with my office mates. I don't like "mixers."

When I was in school it was even worse. I can say "ditto" to pretty much everything [MENTION=10653]SuchIrony[/MENTION] said on that front.

 

[Chaotic Harmony]

You phrased it better than I could [MENTION=10315]Aquarelle[/MENTION]. I don't really have friends at work, aside from my mom, so I prefer to stick with my department or my mom's department (our departments work together a lot).

When it comes to school stuff... I'm so shy. If you put me in a group and I don't trust the work of the others I'm pretty likely to tell them to sit back and I'll just do all the work. No joke, I'd rather take on all the work on my own than interact with others sometimes! In some groups, I'll just sit back and do my part and let the others work together while I work on my part alone. I just do not like working with people I don't know or trust.

 

[Coriolis]

I have mixed feelings about this. I prefer to choose to interact with the people I want to interact with and ignore the rest given the choice. I agree that forced interactions rarely result in bonds and friendships. However, I can see why this may done. In real life, even if you don't particularly like or feel a bond with someone, you still have to work with a large variety of people. At least with forced interactions, you can see where the other people are coming from and get to know them better. You don't have to be friends with everyone you work with.

Regarding school, I dreaded those group assignments and much preferred to work alone. When we had to work in groups, my muscles would tighten when the teacher had us find our own groups. I was uncomfortable initiating contact and asking people if they wanted to join me. I was often the last person without a group and the teacher would go around the classroom talking another group into taking me in. It was worst in middle school when I was very socially awkward and unpopular. I was actually relieved when the teacher would just assign groups as it took that stress off.

This is a good explanation of the merits of such an arrangement. Still, the second paragraph describes my experience as well. I always hated group projects, and still do to some extent.

I make a distinction, though, between being forced into unfamiliar or random groupings to do something productive and important, like a class project, and being grouped that way for a social, team-building, or other short-term activity. In the first case, I need to be able to trust that my groupmates will pull their own weight, stay on task, and be able to work together. In the second case, I don't really care. Yes, being with familiar, comfortable people is more . . . comfortable. I will learn more about people in the mixed/random group, though - not always pleasant lessons, but informative nonetheless. I have plenty of ways to keep it/them from getting to me when I know the encounter is to be short-lived. (The bad part is that, if I find them too aggravating, I might start to toy with them, since they are not my real day-to-day colleagues.)

 

[Ism]

It's probably something your boss was told would improve productivity in the work environment. That's usually the reason they do these sorts of things, regardless of how much they don't work.

My approach is to occasionally chuckle, half-smile, and stomach it. I'm pretty sure no one likes these kinds of things unless they happen to end up in a group with people they know.

 

[Chaotic Harmony]

It's probably something your boss was told would improve productivity in the work environment. That's usually the reason they do these sorts of things, regardless of how much they don't work.

My approach is to occasionally chuckle, half-smile, and stomach it. I'm pretty sure no one likes these kinds of things unless they happen to end up in a group with people they know.

I guess that's the one advantage of working in IT. My boss and coworkers are all pretty well on the same page. So he doesn't try and force us to interact more with others... He has told me to be nicer to our counter parts at Central Office...but that's another story.

It always seems to come after there has been some workshop on campus about diversity that the executive directors all get together and decide to do something like this. I sometimes wish we'd have a workshop on the variety of personality types out there... Then maybe they'd get how the rest of us tick. I figure as long as I'm working here and not out on my own I'll have to suck it up and deal with it.

 

[garbage]

Facilitated icebreakers can be a good thing. They help people get--and feel comfortable with--opportunities to get to know one another. Creating those opportunities is great for identifying common interests and personalities that might mesh; so that people can develop partnerships, teams, and friendships on their own terms.

Forced confinement within a group is very much bad. At that point, it's less 'opportunity,' more 'stab-me-in-the-head chore.' It's grating. It's pointless. It creates resentment.

If the former is akin to attending a singles mixer on one's own terms, then the latter is akin to being forced to stay in an abusive relationship.

Gotta love the bosses who do not understand the difference, having received all of their training from a few 'pop-management' books they read on the commute.

 

[skylights]

I make a distinction, though, between being forced into unfamiliar or random groupings to do something productive and important, like a class project, and being grouped that way for a social, team-building, or other short-term activity. In the first case, I need to be able to trust that my groupmates will pull their own weight, stay on task, and be able to work together. In the second case, I don't really care. Yes, being with familiar, comfortable people is more . . . comfortable. I will learn more about people in the mixed/random group, though - not always pleasant lessons, but informative nonetheless. I have plenty of ways to keep it/them from getting to me when I know the encounter is to be short-lived. (The bad part is that, if I find them too aggravating, I might start to toy with them, since they are not my real day-to-day colleagues.)

That's interesting, I was actually thinking the opposite. I see more value in learning to work with unfamiliar others on important, productive tasks - though given my past history with group work (as in, me generally ending up doing the majority of the work because I'm a perfectionist), I tend to dislike forced-group interactions where the group is rated. But I don't understand the point of forcing people out of their comfort zones during a brief, casual time period. They way I thought about it, if real connections are going to be forged, they'll be forged because there's a reason to connect, mutual benefit to be obtained for connecting. The same holds true for icebreakers - if it's like the "two truths and a lie" game, ugh. I hate telling a group my personal business and them having to interact with me when we all know that none of us are interested. If it's a discussion about cultural background to learn more about each other, that's actually potentially useful. I just resent forced socialization when the point is forced socialization.

 

[Orangey]

Well, I don't mind that kind of shit, and as a teacher I did it all the time. It helps get rid of group-think problems, helps people with group picking issues like [MENTION=10653]SuchIrony[/MENTION]'s, and allows for equalization of the playing field. I never let groups remain for too long. It makes people better at dealing with unfamiliar others (which is a skill, and can indeed be improved with practice) and thinking on their feet. It also breaks up the kind of pre-formed, petty power hierarchies that hinder personal and group progress.

But that's for assignments. I don't know about this "retreat," nor would I ever really recommend this as a friend-making device. Although, now that you mention it, don't we make most of our friends through school and work? And aren't school and work basically just another kind of forced socialization? So yeah, maybe it works for that, too.

 

[Coriolis]

That's interesting, I was actually thinking the opposite. I see more value in learning to work with unfamiliar others on important, productive tasks - though given my past history with group work (as in, me generally ending up doing the majority of the work because I'm a perfectionist), I tend to dislike forced-group interactions where the group is rated. But I don't understand the point of forcing people out of their comfort zones during a brief, casual time period. They way I thought about it, if real connections are going to be forged, they'll be forged because there's a reason to connect, mutual benefit to be obtained for connecting. The same holds true for icebreakers - if it's like the "two truths and a lie" game, ugh. I hate telling a group my personal business and them having to interact with me when we all know that none of us are interested. If it's a discussion about cultural background to learn more about each other, that's actually potentially useful. I just resent forced socialization when the point is forced socialization.

Too much is riding on those important, productive tasks for me to want to experiment with social interaction. It is like making a recipe for the first time for dinner guests I really want to impress. I would rather have a taste of the new foods first, in a situation with lower stakes. Then I know what confidence level I can assign to it/them.

But that's for assignments. I don't know about this "retreat," nor would I ever really recommend this as a friend-making device. Although, now that you mention it, don't we make most of our friends through school and work? And aren't school and work basically just another kind of forced socialization?

That depends on both the basis for the grouping, and the level of socializing expected. In public school, for instance, we were assigned based on age and address. This means I was thrown in with a broad spectrum of folks, most of whom I had little in common with. Also, more socializing and group activity were expected than I like ever, anywhere. Needless to say, I made few friends. At the opposite end of the spectrum is my current job. I have much in common with my coworkers, and there is little forced socialization. We interact as needed to get the job done, which is actually very enjoyable. Most of my friends have indeed come from such a setting, but then we are all here because we want to be, and because we share those common interests. Grad school was similar; college less so.

 

[Venom]

For what seems like the millionth time, the people running our meeting yesterday forced people to break away from their cliques. It seems like every meeting or retreat we have anymore they insist on assigning seats or do some stupid game to break up the cliques. I'm incredibly reserved at work and keep to myself, so I hate when they do this. I prefer to stick around the people I know and am comfortable with. At the last staff retreat we had, when they assigned seats, I actually had an anxiety attack because I just wasn't comfortable with the people I had to sit with...not to mention I got stuck next to a woman that drives me crazy on a daily basis at work. (Thanks! I avoid her for a reason guys! That's another story though.) The other thing was, I tend to sit in the back off to the side because it's less distracting for me. When they forced us to move around, I wound up with a woman who would not shut up through the entire meeting and just kept making snarky comments. That's part of the reason I prefer to choose where I sit and who is around me.

I guess I just don't see the point in making people branch away from the people they are comfortable with. It never changes anything around here. After the meeting or retreat is over everyone flocks back to who they are more comfortable around. I have yet to ever see one of these forced interactions result in any kind of bond or friendship after the meeting/retreat was over. The only thing it does is makes me want to find a reason to be absent or busy when the next meeting rolls around.

Anybody else hate being forced to interact with your coworkers you don't know well? Or being forced to interact with other students in a class you don't know well?

Ask any teacher and they'll tell you that these sorts of tactics aren't for people like you. They're to avoid the awkwardness the teacher feels when watching someone look for a group when they dont have one. So the teacher just assigns seats to avoid having to watch the awkwardness.

 

[Coriolis]

Ask any teacher and they'll tell you that these sorts of tactics aren't for people like you. They're to avoid the awkwardness the teacher feels when watching someone look for a group when they dont have one. So the teacher just assigns seats to avoid having to watch the awkwardness.

So often when I point out how counterproductive, illogical, or outright stupid some requirement or expectation is, I am told, "It's not meant for people like you".

Then STOP insisting that I do it and go bother the people it IS meant for!

 

[highlander]

For what seems like the millionth time, the people running our meeting yesterday forced people to break away from their cliques. It seems like every meeting or retreat we have anymore they insist on assigning seats or do some stupid game to break up the cliques. I'm incredibly reserved at work and keep to myself, so I hate when they do this. I prefer to stick around the people I know and am comfortable with. At the last staff retreat we had, when they assigned seats, I actually had an anxiety attack because I just wasn't comfortable with the people I had to sit with...not to mention I got stuck next to a woman that drives me crazy on a daily basis at work. (Thanks! I avoid her for a reason guys! That's another story though.) The other thing was, I tend to sit in the back off to the side because it's less distracting for me. When they forced us to move around, I wound up with a woman who would not shut up through the entire meeting and just kept making snarky comments. That's part of the reason I prefer to choose where I sit and who is around me.

I guess I just don't see the point in making people branch away from the people they are comfortable with. It never changes anything around here. After the meeting or retreat is over everyone flocks back to who they are more comfortable around. I have yet to ever see one of these forced interactions result in any kind of bond or friendship after the meeting/retreat was over. The only thing it does is makes me want to find a reason to be absent or busy when the next meeting rolls around.

Anybody else hate being forced to interact with your coworkers you don't know well? Or being forced to interact with other students in a class you don't know well?

I think there are several reasons companies do this. One of the biggest challenges is that people tend to know their specific area - they are siloed in their perspective as well as their thinking. By combining people from different teams, they are looking for people to develop a broader perspective. There is also the aspect of an effective work environment. The "cliques" tend to be characterized by a high level of trust. When that trust doesn't extend beyond the immediate clique to other areas, it can negatively impact productivity as well as people's satisfaction with their job which also then leads to turnover. Employees are more efficient and effective to the extent that people effectively communicate and collaborate with each other. The benefits of breaking down the silos and these little steps to force people to work with people they don't know are not often immediately apparent but over time, I have seen gradual movement towards better collaboration. I've been as guilty as anyone else as far as being part of these cliques. I've had projects where there were multiple cliques and it got in the way of getting the job done. It's really a big issue which is why there is probably a focus on it in your company. The fact that they seem to have such a big focus on it there would lead me to believe that there is a problem that someone is trying to solve. Maybe you have some perspectives on that.

It sounds like you're shy or quiet. We grow when we are pushed out of our comfort zone. My suggestion is that you try and look at these situations as an opportunity vs. a negative thing that you are forced to do. What are the good things that you can gain out of it? There must be some positives.

 

[Galena]

Ask any teacher and they'll tell you that these sorts of tactics aren't for people like you. They're to avoid the awkwardness the teacher feels when watching someone look for a group when they dont have one. So the teacher just assigns seats to avoid having to watch the awkwardness.

The way you put it makes it sound like the exercises are mainly for the benefit of the teachers, as opposed to being for the benefit of the kids. Did I read that correctly? Where this focus lies is important to me.

 

[Venom]

The way you put it makes it sound like the exercises are mainly for the benefit of the teachers, as opposed to being for the benefit of the kids. Did I read that correctly? Where this focus lies is important to me.

Okay... Yes the SFJ teacher that does it probably does actually care and do it for the sake of the kid.... I was just saying from my mean ol entp perspective that's how I would justify wasting the time to make up assigned seats...

 

[Cellmold]

So often when I point out how counterproductive, illogical, or outright stupid some requirement or expectation is, I am told, "It's not meant for people like you".

Then STOP insisting that I do it and go bother the people it IS meant for!

But you know, that is just the defensive reaction from people who have just been shown the short-comings of their expectations and are now furiously back peddling in order to save face.

I would say they DO think it applies to you and everyone else, (otherwise they wouldn't bother in the first place and i'm sure you already know that), but they pretend it doesn't when you point out the flaws in the idea because the other option would be to lose faith in their own system of how something should be done.

It is usually a fail in logic,(although when concerning people and social rituals logic does tend to take a backseat anyhow), it is also a fail in an attempt at rigidly controlling the external environment.

As for being forced to interact with co-workers....I shudder at the idea. Of course I am able to get along with most people on a superficial level and have managed to cultivate an internal plan of social interactions in order to do so. So on the surface I look like I am engaging with others, when really there is almost no investment whatsoever.

At least when i'm at work.

 

[Chaotic Harmony]

I guess when I posted this, what set me off was the major clique was the one dictating that the other cliques needed to be broken up....but they all stayed together telling the rest of us what to do. It was just BS that they expected our cliques to be broken up, but wouldn't break theirs up. Seems a tad bit unfair.

 

[Coriolis]

But you know, that is just the defensive reaction from people who have just been shown the short-comings of their expectations and are now furiously back peddling in order to save face.

I would say they DO think it applies to you and everyone else, (otherwise they wouldn't bother in the first place and i'm sure you already know that), but they pretend it doesn't when you point out the flaws in the idea because the other option would be to lose faith in their own system of how something should be done.

It is usually a fail in logic,(although when concerning people and social rituals logic does tend to take a backseat anyhow), it is also a fail in an attempt at rigidly controlling the external environment.

A fail in logic, certainly. I see it also as a sign of laziness, and putting process over results (the means justify the ends).