Balancing Romance and Professionalism at the Work Place
Professionalism is a relatively recent value that has gained increasingly greater acceptance in the last few centuries after the industrial revolution. However, romance and love were programmed into the DNA with Adam and Eve. The subject isn’t black and white; there are several shades of gray. It is not uncommon to find someone attractive when both sexes rub shoulders at work every day. Over centuries, societal norms have evolved to handle these attractions within accepted guidelines that help keep societies stable. Similarly, most companies, certainly the large ones, have policies around romance in the office to help preserve the sanctity of a workplace.
The stand that most reasonable companies take is that office romance is perfectly alright provided it does not alter the professional dynamics at work or does not offend the sensibilities of colleagues at the work place.
If A reports to B and they find each other attractive, others team members who report to B will soon perceive A getting undue benefits or enjoying unconstitutional authority. This is perfectly natural. Hence this cannot be allowed to continue. If A and B still wish to pursue a romantic relationship, they must be moved to different teams where professional interaction between the two is minimal.
Is it alright to hire the spouse of an employee in a different function? If the employee is at a senior level (say a management council member) I would not recommend hiring the spouse for any role in the organization. If the employee is relatively junior and the spouse is considered for a role that does not call for a lot of interaction with the employee, then it should be alright.
In one of my last organizations, there was a case where a woman who was the HR partner for the marketing function had a romantic relationship with a marketing manager. Both were married and had kids. Most people didn’t know about this relationship until it soured. This raises two questions: a) was this relationship violating a professional code? And b) what should the organization have done when it came to know about it? An HR partner is in a position to influence the rewards of individuals in the team she partners with. She had access to all the sensitive information about the team and was also the trusted adviser to the head of marketing. Therefore, there is a violation of professional code.
In this particular case there was no voluntary disclosure and the relationship was discovered after it got messy. Both of them were called by a senior HR manager in the company and warned. They were told that they must discontinue this relationship or change roles. Both confirmed that they would behave in a professional way. The bitterness of the break-up was deep and the promised change did not happen. The bitterness permeated to other team members. Both had to be asked to leave.
Both were good performers but the attraction, and the subsequent mess, proved costly for their careers. It was a difficult call we had to take in the larger interest of the team and organization. A month later, I saw that the woman’s LinkedIn status had not changed. I reached out to her to check if she needed help finding a job. Her response put my worries and guilt to rest.
She explained very maturely that the love she did not have in her personal life, she found in the relationship at the work place. She had realized the futility of it when she understood that she had entered the relationship out of sorrow and emptiness, but the man was just having some fun on the side. Over 30 days, she had made peace with herself and found renewed happiness with her little daughter and husband. And she had got a job which did not reflect in her LinkedIn profile yet.
In conclusion, love, romance and infatuation are far deeper than professionalism, and therefore romance at the workplace needs to be handled with empathy and understanding.
A constructive way to channelize attraction for someone you work closely with is by transforming the attraction to respect.
The best way to nip romance that can hurt professionalism at the work place is through continuous education. Organizations do a poor job of this, and when such issues come to light some of them immediately begin to pronounce moral judgments and indulge in mud-slinging. While one needs to do everything to nurture and maintain a professional work place, it is equally important to deal with such cases without any moral prejudice, and with the confidentiality and grace they deserve.
This article first appeared in the Mint on 20 June 2019 : https://www.livemint.com/mint-lounge/business-of-life/opinion-walking-the-tightrope-of-romance-and-professionalism-in-the-modern-workplace-1560960856261.html
Global Head—Zoho for Startups at Zoho Corporation
5 年"A constructive way to channelize attraction for someone you work closely with is by transforming the attraction to respect." well said, Hari. Very deep. Also, given how "power-plays" work, the seniors in the organization should always be extra careful and aware of their behavior and conversation style with juniors, right? "Empowerment" gets more meaning with this post of yours.
CEO & Co-Founder At MentorAlly | Helping Startups To Grow| On A Mission To Help 100K People To Create Their Dream Career
5 年Very candid view Hari T.N ?? any conflict of interest it's always advisable not to allow work together for the benefit of organisation's larger scheme of things
Building brands that employees love
5 年I worked in an organization where the majority of the population comprised of men. For a single and straight man, Romance doesn't really fit the work place. The numbers do. This is with respect to the sales teams.
FounderScrum - Scrum Master for Entrepreneurs | Ex - Architect - B2B SaaS startup, Infosys
5 年A very candid view on a very sensitive but not uncommon topic, Hari. The first few lines puts things in the right perspective. Yes, while the focus is on workplace rules alone, the educational part for employees and orientation for HR and Senior Management on handling the issue in a right way is rarely discussed.?