The Awkward but Essential Art of Office Chitchat(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
The Awkward but Essential Art of Office Chitchat
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/17/style/the-awkward-art-of-office-small-talk.html
169 comments
one reason I don't like working remote is that when I'm in the office, part of the time there... I'm being paid to do improv, to freakin' use my grade 8 drama skills!
one reason I do like working remote is that I don't have to deal with others' grade 8 drama skills!
But then you have to deal with their 8th grade writing skills.
golf clap >>> Made me laugh, so thank you. But so true
[deleted]
Probably my most upvoted repeat HN comments are my recommendations of the book Impro by Keith Johnstone. It really is a brilliant breakdown of what Improv is beyond theatre games. I think it’s especially useful for coders in the workplace because it really nails the importance of understanding exchanges of “status” in these situations. So much of humour is building and then diminishing a person’s status in an artful way. Being aware of how you are displaying your status around others and being able to consciously manipulate that display for laughs goes a long way.
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.
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.
Yes. I have been doing improvisation now every week for past 3-4 years. And impro is definitely the best book I have read on the subject.
FYI, I bought the book and read it due to your HN comments. Thank you for making me aware of it.
I had a tab opened with this HN thread, and started reading your comment (at the moment, it was the first one).
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)...
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)...
Thinking about the reasons why people engage in smalltalk (in other areas of life too such as family and friends, dating, service providers, etc) helps (me) cope with its banality and even enjoy it; The irrationality is quite rational.
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"
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"
I think so. I love deep and meaningful connection and getting lost in that conversation but if you leave out all of the small talk that naturally happens in between, it’s easy to find yourself in a very lonely place. For a time I used to dislike it because it seemed pointless.
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.
I think so. I love deep and meaningful connection and getting lost in that conversation but if you leave out all of the small talk that naturally happens in between, it’s easy to find yourself in a very lonely place. For a time I used to dislike it because it seemed pointless.
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.
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 think the essential office chitchat issue is "being yourself" vs. "seeming like a high quality professional". I've found out the hard way that relaxing and aiming for a real conversation carries a high % chance of saying something unbecoming of a team leader. Better pay attention to appearances when you're at work.
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.
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.
> I think the essential office chitchat issue is "being yourself" vs. "seeming like a high quality professional". I've found out the hard way that relaxing and aiming for a real conversation carries a high % chance of saying something unbecoming of a team leader.
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.
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.
Saying objectively stupid or offensive stuff without reading the room is a bad idea wherever you are. But people already treat family, friends, coworkers differently, with different topics of discussion and jokes. So you have a different "face" or "recipe" for each of them anyway.
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".
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".
Thanks for this. This has become a realization of mine in the past couple of years. I already wear a neat shirt to work and do my hair neatly, because that's expected. I'm not going to change my personality however, because I am who I am and I don't want to pretend to be something I'm not.
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.
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.
I've been doing the same. I even tell recruiters and interviewers "if I was unemployed, you'd be getting a very different version of me". It adds more fuel to the notion of why employed people are so much better to recruit, because you get more signal and less noise.
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.
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.
Interviews are entirely perfomative anyway.
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.
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.
Honestly though, from what I see around me though, most people are acting when they're in interviews. Even if they don't 'really' need the job. Maybe that's because I mostly know young people and they don't have the confidence or the awareness yet, though.
100% this. The teams that I have been a part of that have had a lasting impact on me allow for authenticity. Sure, sometimes you get a disparaging remark that can escalate. But, in my limited experience, that downside is so minuscule to the upside of having authenticity creating happiness in the workplace.
I have foregone an opportunity to work for a very big company straight out of graduation simply because I just enjoyed my internship there too much, and it was in complete contrast to how my peers described their experiences with their internships, traineeships, or full-time jobs. I enjoy my upward mobility in a smaller company with some potential, working with people who don't take themselves too seriously (because they had to years ago anyway).
It's more comfortable, and it makes me want to go back to work on Monday.
It's more comfortable, and it makes me want to go back to work on Monday.
> I don't understand coworkers who say silly things at the lunch table without a second thought
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.
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.
> weirdly enough it's good to appear somewhat "incompetent", but still in reality be able to deliver
How so? To maintain lower expectations & set yourself up to surprise people positively?
How so? To maintain lower expectations & set yourself up to surprise people positively?
What came to mind first for me about this situation was this parable from Luke 14:
""" 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.
""" 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.
Interesting. That kind of reminds me of the "two tokens" approach to guiding customer service conversations in a favorable direction, where something has gone wrong.
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"
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 someone makes an effort to present themselves as extraordinarily competent I’ll start watching them to try and figure out whether it’s true. If they’re extraordinarily competent then there’s not much to conclude. If they’re just normal but exceedingly interested in looking competent, I know they’re self-promoters and not really trustworthy.
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.
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.
Overt signals of competence are a huge red flag to me. I've been lucky enough to work with some brilliant people, and most of them seem like baffled slobs when one first meets them.
One who is especially talented may often have the appearance of not knowing what they are doing, if you watch them closely while they are learning the behavior of a system. I've seen it suggested that there is a certain pattern of inquisitive behavior that can be seen in this kind of person, that has almost the appearance of a "random walk."
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.
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.
Paraphrase of a quotation of some guy’s high school wrestling coach I read many years ago:
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.
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.
If you don't see it coming when someone explains it, you definitely won't see it coming when it's not being forecast in a public forum.
underpromise -> overdeliver
> 1. I don't care about "upward mobility".
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.
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.
1. Already happened and I wasn't laid off because of that, because apparently people are still making money on my work.
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.
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.
> 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?
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?
I'm not a team leader and have no interest in becoming one. Moreover, I spent most of my adult life hiding behind a professional persona and all it did was make me miserable because people only noticed me when they wanted something from me.
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.
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.
do you think professionalism was the main cause of people only seeing you instrumentally? if so, I'd be interested to hear more about your definition of professionalism
I honestly have no idea if my notion of professionalism was the main cause of others only seeing me instrumentally, but my idea of professionalism is to come in, do the job well, not talk about anything unrelated to the job, attend unavoidable company functions, and then go home. Anything not directly related to the job remained outside the office.
> I've found out the hard way that relaxing and aiming for a real conversation carries a high % chance of saying something unbecoming of a team leader.
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'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 see the general direction you're coming from, but in my own mental model I see the following divide:
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.
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.
It really depends on the context. I’ve found that some times being yourself and not overthinking communicates a lot authenticity and trustworthiness, and really helps in building strong relationships with superiors and clients. In those times many clients seems to appreciate a fresh no bullshit attitude, in contrast to a polished impersonal one (which sends all the bad signals associated with big IT projects).
weird- my observation is that people who "get ahead" (into middle management) tend to be unconcerned with what they say at the lunch table (unless someone two+ levels in attending).
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. :)
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. :)
>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
Seems like the standard "kiss up, kick down" mentality that is often present in corporate environments
Seems like the standard "kiss up, kick down" mentality that is often present in corporate environments
>I don't understand coworkers who say silly things at the lunch table without a second thought (...) doing so seems to risk your upward mobility
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...
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...
Your comments remind me why I pushed out all of the people on my team that are fundamentally anti-social. It becomes such an annoying drag. Thank god I did. I get one life to live and refuse to jump through bullshit hoops for people who think they are more important than what they really are - such as yourself.
You're confusing a basic drive to get ahead with self importance. If you're giving your life's labor to someone else's company, you better get the most out of it in return.
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.
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.
[deleted]
Relationships develop through the escalating exchange of mutual vulnerability. A few people commented that I seemed to make friends very easily, so I started paying attention to my interactions with strangers. I noticed that I enjoyed sharing vulnerable anecdotes with people before inquiring about their own, e.g. dates gone wrong from the night before. Sure, sometimes I put my foot in my mouth, but people seem to like that and trust me more for it. When I started researching how friendships are forged, this was on the button.
There is an art to presenting vulnerability; to not diminish yourself whilst doing so. It not only improves your own outlook on yourself but helps prevent others using it against you, all whilst still being open and truthful.
Its hard.
Its hard.
The strongest model I have for understanding the world is that your prefrontal cortex is a simulator that is always predicting. When something occurs that surprises you (like a glass breaking in a restaurant), the anomaly diverts your attention to the sound source so your visual system can feed more data to your model and rationalise the event.
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.
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.
This is very insightful.
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.
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.
I fail to see any strong connection to Kant or german idealism in general
Could you give an example?
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.
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.
> "I don't trust someone that I didn't get drunk with" is a sentiment I've heard repeatedly, both privately and professionally.
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.
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.
My answer to that question: "Whiskey"
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.
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.
I agree with you, in that pretending to drink (e.g Tonic instead of Gin & Tonic) is probably what a lot of us do, and the obvious way out. But the point of drinking is not really being sociable, but making yourself vulnerable. Vulnerability and exploitability is the foundation of trust. By staying sober one undermines one of the core trust formation mechanism: by remaining sober and responsible, you avoid creating exploitable vulnerabilities that others can but don't exploit -- I trust X because X can exploit my being vulnerable w.r.t. Y me, but doesn't.
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.
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.
I'm not pretending to drink... I actually have a few, but have a few not alcohol too, I make no attempts to hide it when ordering. I'm generally pretty blunt without much filtering in general, I don't need alcohol for that.
[deleted]
One of the best way to make coworkers friends is to talk about drugs you’ve done. Now that you have mutual comprimate it will be very difficult for one of you to fuck the other without it backfiring. Another good way is to hang out with the smokers, even if you don’t smoke. I’ve noticed that people smoking together is a nexus of power, especially if a higher up or the CEO does it.
Beware of doing this, as it can easily backfire when abused by HR. Stick to exchanging stories that could not be deemed to have an impact on your job, or explain bad performance.
This is true, but ...
... 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.)
... 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.)
That defeats the point of the exercise. The fact that the information could be damaging is what makes it powerful.
It can be quite a minefield. I worked with a guy whose chit-chat policy was disconcerting - stating the bleedin' obvious.
"You are in early today!"
"You are in late today!"
"You are on time today!"
"Wearing the red shirt again, I see!"
"Got your hair cut!"
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.
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.
It's a minefield in your mind only. A mindfield.
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.
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.
So my problem with THIS is that it is a very unbalanced conversation. He makes the zero-effort opener, and then I have to perform the heavy lifting. (Of course, I could just get in first ;-)
But fair comment.
But fair comment.
>While this 'say what you see' served as a functional ice-breaker, as an introvert I found it strangely confrontational, almost like an interrogation
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"...
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"...
I would say it's something you should work _with_ not _on_. Being introverted means you gain your energy from time alone and you typically drain energy in social settings. It doesn't mean you can't function around others, but that your alone-time is not optional.
Learning that about myself and figuring out how to work with that has made life a lot easier.
Learning that about myself and figuring out how to work with that has made life a lot easier.
> In that case, his 'say what you see' routine would be a good testing ground to stop caring as much for the supposed "confrontation"...
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.
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.
Are extroverts supposed to work on it too?
If they are suffering from lack of attention, sure.
Sure. Excess in most directions is not very good for others and for one's self...
I try to deflect these types of statement with humor when possible. Comments about time are meet with the Gandalf quote, "A wizard is never late, [...] nor is he early; he arrives precisely when he means to."
"Got a hair cut?" "Nope, I got all of them cut."
"Got a hair cut?" "Nope, I got all of them cut."
Yes, but then you are somewhat assuming the mantle of the resident stand-up comedian, might be hard to live up to!
(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!)
(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!)
Given the level of sarcasm that goes on in my own household, I don't know if I'd be able to resist saying "Aye, Captain!" if someone habitually greeted me with obvious observations all the time. I'm used to saying that pretty regularly to my seven- and nine-year-old kids.
That's not sarcasm, it's sillines. Sarcasm is when you make false statements to annoy people.
That last approach would go down very well in some British offices.
For whatever reason, I can stand when people comment on what I've brought for lunch.
"Hey, that looks pretty good!""Smells good! What'cha got there?""Bring me some next time!"
"Hey, that looks pretty good!""Smells good! What'cha got there?""Bring me some next time!"
For one reason or another, I've developed a sort of office-eating-phobia. There was a period where, in order to feel OK and not pass out at my desk, I packed a tupperware container with Greek yogurt and almond butter. I think it tastes amazing, kind of like cheesecake, and with the high-fat/high-protein content, keeps me satisfied for 4 hours, so I don't have to think about lunch til 2-3pm, and even then I could just go for another snack. But I couldn't STAND what people would say to me or what they'd ask about my food. I felt very uncomfortable having to "explain" what I'm eating, it's something I need to work on.
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....
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....
Is agreeing with someone's compliment the hardest part of your job?
And are you hiring?
Yes, it actually is. I'm just a temp. I'm flattered that you asked that, but I'm in no position to hire anyone; I'm a deadbeat Slavophile trying to masquerade as an IT expert.
Agreed. Or when anyone comments on your food in general. Like at the grocery store, that's the one that irks me the most. "Ohhh someone is having a BBQ!!". "You know, I should try this wine". Stuff like that.
If someone seemed to not like talking I’d probably do this a few times and then stop. However if someone seems untrustworthy/manipulative in work settings one of my responses is to say incredibly mundane things to them.
I’ve discovered that being quiet and/or not very responsive to inane chatter is both rather intimidating to some people, and makes you mysterious, so they continue to ask questions that seem obvious and/or inappropriately personal.
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.
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.
This.
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.
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.
Just a small tip since this entire thread is about socializing effectively, referring to yourself as extremely smart and others as morons bothering you with their attempts at friendship will not earn you points.
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”
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”
this was so unexpected to read here (though i suppose the presence of that song in office space allowed it to permeate into geek culture) but I really appreciate you using their words to make a salient point. rip bushwick bill
Excellent point, thank you. I agree. I meant 'idiot' in the pejorative sense and I felt my audience was the quiet computer types. Your point is well taken though because people can be smart in a lot of different ways.
Oh god this is totally me haha. I worked as a cashier for 8ish years before getting into tech so I think it is just ingrained in me to notice inane details and use them to start conversations. It sounds like this person is just picking really really boring facts to attempt to start the conversation with.
I am rubbish at small talk. For one I'm not really that interested in other people, and secondly I find it really boring. As such, all jobs I've had as a permanent employee, I've found myself completely stymied when it came to career progression, despite always having very good performance reviews. It very clear to me, that the people who float to the top of organisations, don't do it via their work performance, but by slapping each other on the back whilst sharing a pint or two down the pub.
It seems to me that you're undervaluing the value and importance of social and emotional connection with other people when it comes to getting work done effectively in an organization. Companies are like any other groups of people, and leaders -- i.e., people who "float to the top" -- need to be able to understand and motivate people, be widely liked and respected, command respect and authority from the company at large, as well as other managers and the higher ups.
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.
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.
I used to think much like you do. But as I’ve moved into leadership positions I’ve changed my view entirely. That sharing a pint or two is important. To be able to coordinate a group of people to reach a goal, soft skills are absolutely vital. Humans aren’t machines - hacking humans is a different skill, and being good at it is rarer than good engineers imo. That’s why it pays well, and why you’ll never progress far beyond IC without it.
IC?
Individual Contributor I believe, ie someone who doesn’t have direct reports
I used to think similarly but I found that both "other people" and "small talk" can be rather interesting if you approach them with a bit of an anthropological pov: Everyone is interesting if you dig just a bit (and I don't mean that in a hippy way but actually). You can make into your own game, to see if/how fast you can stir the conversation in an interesting direction. And even simple small talk is interesting because if you pay attention to the subtexts, you can see the "real" person peaking out.
At least that what I try to do.
At least that what I try to do.
I do like people and I'm fine with office chit-chat, but my major problem is I can't really steer conversations toward anything with any real depth in most situations unless I'm talking to people who like to debate or talk deeply about ideas.
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.
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.
`For one I'm not really that interested in other people, and secondly I find it really boring`
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
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
Hmm, this sounds a bit naive. I'm struggling with this for my entire life, and only a certain amount of alcohol helps me to do chit chat. But after the chit chat I always regret some things I've said, the whole thing is just rubbish. I simply don't like it to be forced to talk shit. I'm quite certain it's not a learned skill, it is pretty default for the most stupid people around us.
Concluding that something is not a learned skill because it comes easy to some is illogical. Human upbringing consist of a lot of social interaction (at least when done right), it is only fair that some people actually get good at it.
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
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
"Act as if others are interesting and you will eventually find them so." - Sarah Mei, quoted by Sandi Metz, when summarizing I believe Dale Carnegie's "How to Win Friends & Influence People"
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.
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.
The people who at the top of the organization generally manage other people.
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?
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?
It's really sad how people care much more about how you flap your gums at them than what you can do for them. Who cares if your pipes are burst, let's talk about it rather than actually fixing the damn thing! Who cares if it's dark, let's talk about light bulbs rather than install some!
I never said I wanted to manage people. I was merely making an observation. In the past, I have been a senior people manager, and hated it.
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.
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.
It seems like such a rude thing to feel, but I too struggle with actually taking interest in what my coworkers think. Is this what happens when you begin to see a different generation enter the workforce? I'm not too much older but I'm not their age, so the divide seems to be forming ever so slowly.
Two important capabilities of managers and leaders are communication and influence. Having a drink at the pub, or just making smalltalk on a regular basis, support both of those. It's easier to influence someone who trusts you, and who you know well.
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.
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.
I feel most of the hard problems from an organizational perspective just involve getting people on the same page.
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.
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.
The vast majority of office chitchat is like a carrier wave in radio. It doesn't transmit much information other than I am a normal human who you can turn to when it is needed. There is a fair amount of politics etc that is conveyed more through body language and dominance dynamics rather than the actual words exchanged.
Except they don't care about you. Someone could burst through the door and skin you alive, but your coworkers won't be in the least bit perturbed unless:
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.
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.
Sounds like a wild place to work at.
Also sounds like a great way to end up isolated and alone. Even at work, you sometimes need people in your corner.
Also sounds like a great way to end up isolated and alone. Even at work, you sometimes need people in your corner.
Except the incentives are aligned to be a Hobbesian war of all against all. There is no incentive to collaborate or team up at all.
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.
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.
I'm fascinated to see if you just work in bizzare confrontational companies or are just paranoid. Pretty much everywhere I've been I've gotten on well with my coworkers, chatted about videogames, beer, gone to various resturants for lunch, and generally enjoyed myself. To do anything else would seem almost unbearable - and this comes from a 100% introvert.
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.
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.
I may be paranoid, but I can't grok as much social information as my coworkers can. I've had to memorize what different emotional states look like, and I come from a working-class background where emotional dishonesty is not a valued thing, going to an office environment where it is.
Apologies for the Star Trek reference, but it feels like being a particularly dense Betazoid working in an office of Vulcans.
Apologies for the Star Trek reference, but it feels like being a particularly dense Betazoid working in an office of Vulcans.
Maybe there's an argument that if you go full Machiavelli you can rise higher in the corporate world, but what's the point? Sure, I could become the Senior VP of Whatever, but that won't make me happy, and sacrificing my personal values will make me unhappy.
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?
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?
WRT Puerto Rico, I've actually been wanting a game like that for a while, I'll have to get it. Thanks for the recommendation!
It's not all or nothing. I may like the guy I'm sitting next to and try to help him out where I can, but I'm not going to sacrifice my career if he makes a mistake that dooms him.
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.
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.
remind me to never work for your company.
I hope that all-remote work environments will rise in popularity and level the playing field. Not only for introverts, but also for people with disabilities that make it difficult to participate in casual conversation. I dream of an environment where a deaf person, a person with a severe speech impediment, an autistic person, people with other disabilities that don't prevent one from making small talk (e.g. blindness), and yes, some people with no severe disability can all work together, without necessarily even being aware of each other's conditions, because they're all working remotely and using text to communicate and get their work done.
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.
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.
My wife is amazing. She can walk into a Wal-Mart, and within minutes some stranger will be telling her their life story.
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.
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.
For me and my wife that works basically the same, but I have found method to the madness.
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.
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.
I know you probably meant "continuous" instead of "continence", but I can't help but chuckle at the usage.
:) You are right, thanks for pointing that out.
After looking up continence it fits like a glove :)
After looking up continence it fits like a glove :)
One can never have too much of either form of improvement. Also, I am the same way at parties. As an introvert my battery gets charged fairly quickly. My wife is the extrovert.
Honestly its probably all body language.
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.
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.
> Every day around the world, an estimated three billion people go to work and 2.9 billion of them avoid making small talk with their co-workers once they get there.
Wait, how are 2.9b people avoiding chitchat? I almost more interested in this.
Wait, how are 2.9b people avoiding chitchat? I almost more interested in this.
I read the first part of the sentence as an estimation, and the second part as a joke.
:) the entire article's subtle humor is refreshing. I had a literal laugh-out-loud about the sharing streaming services login joke; ironic b/c such services are usually consumed en solo, which runs contrary to the thesis of the whole article in general
I quiz people on how their part of the company is going. "So, are we making our quarter"? "What does the world think about our company?" "Did we really get the CD system working like it's supposed to?"
People love talking about their areas, and I get some intel on the company I work for.
People love talking about their areas, and I get some intel on the company I work for.
I used to mostly keep to myself but think I balanced being social enough to be a well adjusted office worker. This completely changed as I rose into management positions, and now I feel compelled to chit chat with everyone, which is really exhausting for me.
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.
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.
> Jamie Terran, a licensed career coach in New York City, said that small talk between colleagues and supervisors builds rapport, which in turn builds trust.
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.
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.
I get what you’re saying, and I don’t think you’re entirely wrong — you build trust by doing your job well, repeatedly. But it’s also a demonstrated fact (and almost a tautology) that people trust people that they like, and chit-chat is a great way to move from “stranger” to “friendly acquaintance.” If you eat lunch with someone once a week, they’ll think you’re better at your job. That’s not an anecdote, that’s a repeatedly confirmed facet of human social psychology.
You are completely right, for all our history of working in the same buildings, in person.
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.
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.
The cherry on top doesn't make a difference between 2 otherwise identical pieces of crap (or shouldn't, at least...). But it will make a difference between 2 otherwise identical cakes.
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.
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.
> it will make a difference between 2 otherwise identical cakes.
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.
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.
None of the reasons you wrote are nearly as reasonable as your boss(es) seeing you as a reasonable person, a team player, etc. as evidenced by your open discussions. Some things they can't glean just from the fact that you solved a ticket quickly.
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. ;)
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. ;)
Where I work, chitchat during lunch break is main communication bus. Since I am preparing my food at home, I don’t go to the canteen and I am the black sheep in the office. I am the last one to get the news. It’s seriously wrong, because there are no written agreements at all.
...so go to the canteen anyway and talk while you eat together? I can think of plenty of times where a shared lunch with some co-workers was a mix of people bringing food and buying from the cafe.
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.
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.
You are perfectly right, in that this is a real thing.
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
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
You are right, I should do it. It’s very important to participate in office politics and decision making process. I think, other companies have separate meetings for this. But I am not going to stay here for 5 years.
I can 100% guarantee you that if you find yourself at a company that has a dining room available for lunch, business planning will happen there, one way or another. It is human nature to discuss things while breaking bread.
That chit chat can be about “delivering, being consistent, and helping out.”
I think there's some salient points here, but I don't think fully takes into account the classic schism of maker vs. manager schedule. The makers might be fine all plugging along with minimal office interaction--especially if they're working remote.
In some big corps, in order to be a maker you have to know people in different departments to speed up things and take some shortcuts. You can also slowly have your technical solutions adopted.
It takes coffee breaks and some jokes to reach that. And I think it really boosts your productivity.
It takes coffee breaks and some jokes to reach that. And I think it really boosts your productivity.
Counterpoint:
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.
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 was hoping for an honest exploration of full-on misanthropy, and all I got was a crappy satire blog. I'm disappointed.
Careful! The Smalltalk people are going to jump in here and start talking about how message passing between lightweight processes is the best way to write efficient programs.
Am I the only one who thinks this article is total nonsense. Really? You “need” to do small talk in order to get promotion and be liked around the office. How about we leave this to the individual’s personality. If you are in the right culture fit then you don”need” to do anything. You will love to chichat with your colleagues and if not that is okay to. Some people just love to work on their craft and small talk is just a distraction.
No, you aren't. I also see it as distraction, which is even worse to programmers who have to keep laser focused on their work.
I should show this to the head of engineering at my last company! I got a verbal warning for talking too much to coworkers when I first started. People were just introducing themselves! That is the disadvantage of having a desk right next to the big boss's office. After that warning I tried hard to avoid any conversations.
Is there a way to see this site while remaining in private mode? There are 13 trackers blocked ffs
I use https://www.eff.org/privacybadger for all websites, seems to do the trick for me.
Sadly this is true in my current and previous jobs.
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.
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.
My goto topics for office chitchat are TV shows, video games, and sports in that order. Most people have at least some show they watch and will talk about, and others typically have a video game of some sort they play. Sports used to be first, but I've run into many people who have zero interest or knowledge in any sport personal or otherwise.
Topics I love to talk about but avoid, diet and exercise. Topics I avoid completely, politics.
Topics I love to talk about but avoid, diet and exercise. Topics I avoid completely, politics.
Small talk is an extremely high-risk low reward activity depending on your status with the company, especially if your manager has told you your status is utterly fixed.
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?
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?
[deleted]
That's a sign of a toxic workplace. Far better to just move on and find a place that respects human beings.
> “I’m good. I just started a book/podcast/TV show
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.
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.
As someone who worked a lot of low-end and blue collar jobs before getting into software, small talk with coworkers is a whole lot easier in the former environment.
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.
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.
Highly recommend reading The Gervais Principle by Venkatesh Rao for a more in-depth discussion of office talk, and much more.
journalctl(1)
For whoever it doesn't work, it wastes a whole of their time, and their life. Not to mention it completely wastes the chance to use their talents to take the society forward.
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.