Research Question: How does the relationship development literature apply to in-law relationships?
We have all experienced that first day at a new job - the nervousness, the anticipation, and vulnerability of being the new employee. As you begin your new job, you are probably assigned a mentor. Someone you hope will guide you through this awkward stage until you can become comfortable. Until you can find people who support you and have your back. Did you know that many friendships begin at the workplace? Have you ever considered how this happens and why you would become friends with people you did not voluntarily choose to bring into your life?
Patricia Sias and Daniel Cahill conducted research to answer just those questions. They interviewed 38 individuals about their perceptions of their workplace friendships. Their research showed that workplace relationships often develop into friendships, many of them close. Friendships in the workplace offer support and a system of allies.
Although it appears that we have no choice in our workplace friendships, Rawlins disagrees. He states, “Friendship cannot be imposed on people; it is an ongoing human association voluntarily developed and privately negotiated.” So, while I may not choose whom I work with, I do get a choice in those I befriend.
Then, how do I choose my friends at work? According to Sias & Cahill, there are three things that contribute to friendships at work. The first one is the proximity. We are spending all day together working on related projects for our organization. Maybe we are in the same department or our cubicles are side by side. Because of this we will begin to “size” each other up through day to day talk, looking for similarities (which is step 2) we have in common. Do you like sports? So do I. Do you have children? So do I. Are you quiet and reserved? So am I. This communication process allows us to identify with our co-workers. Many studies have stated that if we find enough similarities we progress in our friendship. We talk more and more freely. We begin to share ideas and feelings (step 3). Sias & Cahill found that this is not the only indicator of relationships development. When individuals who are dissimilar are given the opportunity to work together on tasks – they are given the opportunity to create a friendship that might not have otherwise blossomed.
Teboul and Cole have identified a more complex development process for friendship in the workplace. They focus on the evolutionary aspect of the relationship, which includes reciprocal altruism, preference for similarity, and sensitivity toward prestige hierarchies.
Reciprocal altruism is defined as the expectation of repayment. For example, a co-worker helps you finish your report that is due within the hour. They expect you will repay them when they have a need. This also helps control precious resources. Those resources can be time, talent, love, money, goods, services, and knowledge. Most co-workers strive to keep the favors in balance; no one likes a free loader. There are times when co-workers will expend valuable resources with no expectation that the favors will be repaid. This usually happens when the relationship has become very close.
Preference for similarity as discussed by Sias & Cahill incorproate some of the research of Teboul & Cole yet, they note that we look for similarities in order to coordinate our efforts. Like minded individuals will perform similarly. Think of groups who work well together – often they are individuals with common goals and values. It removes some of the doubt and frustration of working together in a group.
Sensitivity toward prestige hierarchies focuses on group status and power. Part of your day when you are a new employee is looking for individuals that will help you succeed. Do they have knowledge of the skills you need to learn? Are they in a position of power over me? Can they help me climb the ranks in the organization? You are deciding what relationships will benefit you. Once you have identified those who can help you, you many use one of these strategies according to Teboul & Cole when approaching those with influence. You might offer a favor, use friendship or loyalty, speak kindly to those in power, or ask for advice.
Social interaction helps employees regulate their activities and emotion daily. It is through joint effort that employees find relationships that help with the creation of individual well-being. This can be recognized through willingness to train or teach a new employee about their job. If questions are met with kindness and patience, there is greater likelihood that a friendship could develop.
Relationship development is not linear at work. Because relationships ebb and flow, it is more of a scatter approach to development. Teboul & Cole found that employees will choose friendships based on what the other individual has to offer them in addition to what they have in common.
When a relationship becomes a “best friend” relationship they are beginning to spend time together outside of work. There is freedom to discuss work-related problems and there is a feeling of closeness. Sias & Cahill found that employees turned to their friends for support and assistance when confronted with frustrations with their supervisors. They often sought advice from their friends. Many individuals will stay at their present jobs because of close relationships.
Relationships definitely develop at work and the research identifies several of the factors used by individuals as they initiate relationships. Those are proximity, similarity, reciprocal altruism, shared feelings and emotion, and sensitivity toward prestige hierarchies. It is clear that individuals have choice in friendship development at work.
With this discussion of friendship development at work some questions have occurred to me. It has become more common for individuals to work from home using technology, which means employees do not share proximity.
Resources
Rawlins, W.K. (1992). Friendship matters: Communication, dialects, and the life course. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
Sias, P.M. & Cahill, D.J. (1998). From coworkers to friends: The development of peer friendships in the workplace. Western Journal of Communication, 62, p. 273-299.
Teboul J.C. & Cole, T. (2005). Relationship development and workplace integration: An evolutionary perspective. Communication Theory, 15, p. 389-413.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHello Theresa,
ReplyDeleteThis is quite fun because you commented on my post earlier, and this post by you is right my research question's alley. I have read a few articles by Sias & Cahill throughout this semester so I am familiar with the work you are citing here. You coupled these findings with other research on the importance of friendship and personal health which was fascinating to me. Not something I have done up until this point.
Proximity is the first condition for friendship that you mention Sias and Cahill talking about, and you complicate this by discussing computer mediated workplaces. An initial assumption of mine would be that proximity can be discussed alongside computer mediated workplaces. The definition of proximity would have to change, but people are still working more closely with one coworker than others. Do you think this goes in line with what Sias and Cahill were trying to say about proximity being a first step to friendship in the workplace?
Another thing I found fascinating that you discussed was the idea of reciprical altruism. This is true in all relationships, but especially in workplace friendships. Do you think their could be power structures related in this type of reciprocity? If my "friends" are constantly people that I feel I need to "owe" in the workplace, is this different than friends outside the workplace? This question comes from wondering about career development and the sense that I "owe" my friends? Could this notion of reciprocity become more important that shared interests or caring for others in an emotional manner? I would love to hear your thoughts. Great blog!
Jared,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comments. When discussing proximity, I believe that Sias & Cahill are speaking about physicality. Working closely with co-workers online changes the dynamics of the relationship. The amount of time you have together is diminished and how would you go about complaining about your supervisor. That seems to muddy the waters. It is a complicated thing to have those complaints written down. I do think we can redefine proximity in the workplace when it comes to the computer mediated relationships, but I think that definition will affect the development of relationships in the workplace.
Reciprocal altruism is an interesting idea in all relationships, not just work. I do believe that power is negotiated through altruism. For those that are owed, they have the ability to call in the favors, even though the timing of the request may not fit neatly into our plans. We tend to be obliged to comply. In good or close relationships, I think the power is lessened by our mutual interests in relationship maintenance. Power is an interesting thing because it influences our behavior. I think it is interesting that you caught the negotiation of power in my blog. I believe all relationships are in a constant state of negotiation. Don’t you?
I am writing reply
ReplyDeleteI certainly appreciated your article on friendships in the workplace, and especially in a new workplace. I can relate to the feelings you describe during those first days on a new job. I can remember looking out for who would be a friend of mine, who I would develop friendships with, etc. Sometimes the people you initially feel may be a friend turn out not such a good choice, and vice versa. At least that has happened to me on several occasions. Maybe I don’t read my first impressions of people accurately.
ReplyDeleteI believe the uses of computer mediated workplaces are certainly going to limit the amount of friendships that are developed in the workplace. I agree that proximity and space are needed in friendship development. Although, as I think about it, I guess you can make friends through internet interaction. People do it all the time. If you had someone you are in contact with on a daily or frequent basis, you would probably develop some time of relationship, I’m not sure you would call it a friendship. I would have to be able to see the person, or be with them at some point in order to develop more of a friendship relationship. Just a strictly internet/computer mediated relationship would not constitute a friendship to me. I think only those individuals that are very lonely would feel that was a friend.
Relationships are important in the workplace, but like you mentioned, many people now work at home alone, etc. Relationships and friendships develop through business networks, etc. People who do a similar work and if there is a group meeting or conference for that type of work, you would network and meet them. Other people who help in your work, such as delivery people, advertising or website design personnel could possibly become friends.
I believe you reach out to whoever is in close proximity and/or similar interests to you. This can be in a traditional workplace, home business or neighborhood community.
Nancy,
ReplyDeleteThank you for your comment. I think we can all identify with being the new employee. It is true that our first impressions about relationship choice will evolve. Once you have realized that you have not chosen wisely, you will move to terminate or reduce you interaction with that person. That brings with it interesting workplace relationship dynamics. Those whom you want to distance yourself from, may not feel the same way. As was discussed in Jared’s comments, there is an implication of power. Who has the power and what are the consequences for that withdrawal from the relationship? Since my research was about the development of the relationship, I did not research relationship maintenance or discontinuation. Nor did I look into power relations in interpersonal relationships.
I agree with you about mediated relationships. I would posit that Sias and Cahill would include physicality into their definition of proximity. Without physically being in a location, I believe the relationship development is different from the research that I cited. I still think there would reciprocity and hierarchy, as well as finding similarity. These would be negotiated via technology and I think the timeline for relationship development would be influenced by the amount of contact and the content of the communication. It is an interesting thought and I wonder what consequence society will have if relationship development is substantially different with mediated relationships.
Teresa,
ReplyDeleteIn our culture, we tend to spend so much time at work it only makes sense that we form significant relationships in that environment. It is a topic and discussion that a lot of people can connect with - smart choice. The steps mentioned in the first articles seem very similar to the stages of relationship development in everyday relationships. I think the second article provided a more unique perspective, and was therefore more interesting to me. Also, it read as if you were removed, or distant, from the material. You were reporting on articles you found and that's it. It may be the third-person perspective you used through most of the article. Put more "I" in there! :)
Hi Teresa, Like Jarod, these articles speak to me and my interests. Like Christine, I have some suggestions about how to make the blog stronger. At first I wasn't quite sure where you were going. I knew the topic was interesting, but I didn't know where you were headed. Is there a way to make it clear from the first few sentences what this blog entry is all about? Second, I kept thinking you were going to relate this material to the research question about in-law relationships, but I never saw it. Are you thinking of changing your RQ? I was especially curious about what "a scatter approach to development" meant. Maybe some examples would both clarify, and personalize as Christine is asking for. Thanks!
ReplyDeleteThank you Christine and Dr. Reeder. The feedback is helpful and I will work to improve my next blog.
ReplyDelete