As a communication scholar (and a white collar professional who finds myself driving to a corporate office for work each day), I am particularly interested in the ritualized and socially perpetuated elements of relational communication within an organizational setting. Both verbal and non-verbal, the many nuances of interpersonal communication and social order within the workplace often have power-wielding implications for the individuals involved. In my role, I work as a communication strategist and coordinate the company's employee engagement initiatives. Due to the nature of my position, I work very closely with individuals from all professional levels of the organization.
My responsibilities and projects lead me to work with everyone from front-line employees and customer service representatives to the CEO and his senior leadership team. As a result, I am privy to many face-to-face interactions between employees across all levels of leadership and professional capacity within the organization. Needless to say, this provides me with many instances of personal entertainment, surprise, validation, reflection and social insight regarding my colleagues (and myself)!
It's more than just the mindless "good mornings" we find ourselves saying to people, and the empty "Fine, how are you?" responses we spit out almost as automatic reactions without even thinking. Regardless of whether it's actually been a good morning, whether "fine" is the appropriate word to describe us at a given moment, or whether we give two hells about how the receptionist's morning is going, more often than not we give responses like this when having quick and casual interactions with our co-workers. Is it superficial? Maybe. How about necessary for a functional, drama-free and productive work life? Basically.
What is also really interesting to me are the not-so-harmless (yet often as frequent) interactions taking place between members of an organization that are laden with politics, personal motives and other sticky undertones - the attractive VP in her navy suit who pretends not to notice the middle-aged, hourly customer service representative walking past her in an otherwise empty hallway... the boss who invites everyone in the department to lunch to celebrate the achievement of fiscal year-end goals, except for the administrative assistants... the department manager who only speaks to colleagues of equal professional stature while in a conference room filled with mostly front-line employees... the resentful career-ladder-climber who intentionally does not congratulate his colleague on a recent promotion. I see these interactions (or their absence) on a regular basis, and most would categorize them as social snubs. But they are often overlooked, unquestioned or even accepted by many members of the organization.
I don't know if it's because I find myself working on projects with both C-level executives and teams of warehouse workers, or if it's my background as a communication scholar (and a devoted, life-long people watcher), but these interactions strike me as interesting, telling and socially segmenting - all at the same time! Even the fact that secretaries will often not speak in meetings with members of leadership or at coffee bars in administrative areas unless directly spoken to - I see it as an indication of power (or lack thereof) when certain employees feel comfortable initiating a discussion or conversation, while other employees do not feel as if it is "their place." I've often attended meetings in which the clerical support staff member present sits quietly by herself, dutifully taking minutes and keeping notes (even when the rest of the group is breaking for lunch or engaging in a quick social side-step).
Because of situations like this that I've experienced within the workplace, Erving Goffman's examination of "Embarrassment and Social Organization" (1967) really resonates with me. It makes me think of those quiet, stand-offish administrative assistants from my leadership meetings - the same ladies I've overheard cackling and gossiping together like a bunch of school girls in the break room - when I read this specific line by Goffman: "...if there is to be talk, someone must initiate it, and terminate it; and these acts may awkwardly suggest rankings and power..." (p. 107). This really made me think of the "don't speak unless spoken to" mantra these women commit to in situations where they are surrounded by upper management.
The section also made me wonder if the VP who doesn't acknowledge the entry level employee in a hallway with just the two of them does this intentionally out of a combination of awkwardness and arrogance, or if it is unplanned, inadvertent coincidence? That is, until I read,
"In many large establishments, staggered work hours, segregated cafeterias, and the like help to insure that those who are ranked close in one set of relations will not have to find themselves in physically intimate situations where they are expected to maintain equality and distance," (p. 110).
Of course! It's easier to avoid someone's presence altogether than to uncomfortably relate to someone you have virtually nothing in common with (and who belongs on a different social rung, according to guiding structures within the organization) - even if only in passing. Hence, the "administrative coffee bar" where clerical staff become meek mutes (AKA the nice coffee bar with caffeinated beverages that don't taste like motor oil... like the one near my office) and the private bathrooms located conveniently by the C-suite offices so as not to result in socially painful run-ins with lesser staffers for top members of management.
Did Goffman observe interactions in mental institutions in the 1960s or at my place of employment during last week's round table discussion with leadership? This guy really tapped into, reflected on, and impeccably articulated (at length!) the "socially prescribed behaviors" (p. 111), rituals and rules that we use to ultimately structure our social lives. His ideas and assertions about face-to-face interaction are relevant to essentially every social being - perfect strangers, school acquaintances, co-workers, friends, enemies and, dare I say, frenemies. Easily and usefully applied to all these instances of social interaction, Goffman's work stands to continue informing communication scholarship (along with many other disciplines) for many years to come.
However, its usefulness and value is not limited to the world of academia and qualitative research as they relate to social interaction. I know plenty of people at my office who could take away a thing or two by thumbing through Goffman's essays on face-to-face behavior. His work makes you reflect not only on the behavior of others in social interaction, but also inward toward your own actions, perspectives and conduct. I understand and fully acknowledge the fact that we can't, shouldn't and wouldn't want to engage in lengthy (or even brief) conversations with every single person we work with. I don't stop and chat up every single colleague I pass on the way to the mail room in an earnest effort to socially acknowledge their presence. But after reading Goffman, it has certainly made me pay a little more attention to the things I do (or don't do) in instances of face-to-face interaction - both focused and unfocused interaction (p. 145).
At the very least, I'm thankful for two specific things: (1) I was born in the South, so I generally acknowledge others with a smile or a "Hey there," and (2) I'm an extrovert by nature, so it's much easier for me to strike up a conversation with someone who may not be considered by others to come from an "equal" social or professional standing. Because of these two things, it's not often that I find myself avoiding eye-contact with colleagues to eliminate the need to speak. But Goffman's observations and critical analysis of social interaction has definitely made me much more mindful of the social vibes I'm putting off and communicating to others, and how I interpret the contributions of others in face-to-face interaction.
Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Pantheon.
Beth Bartlett
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Beth_Bartlett
