July 6, 2013

by Dray Breezy

---

1. Pros of Dating
2. Sour Grapes
3. Input/Output Model
4. Gender/Sex
5. Sexism
6. Sexual Harassment
7. Love Contracts
8. Conclusion

Pros of Dating

While the Pros of dating in the workplace are subtle, the Cons are not. There are various reasons why people date inside the workplace but in “Mixing Pleasure with Work: Employee perceptions of responses to Workplace Romance” the main three have been narrowed down to love, job, and ego. (Malachowski, 2012) Malachowski writes that, “Job motives include advancement, security, power, and financial rewards. Ego motives involved excitement, adventure, and sexual experience. Love motives are marked by the desire for sincere love, companionship, and the possibility of marriage.” (Malachowski) Many times with workplace romances it is a combination of two or more motives. While true love is generally appreciated within the workplace, relationships based on job or ego are frowned upon. Studies show that almost half of employees have had a romantic relationship with a coworker.

Sour Grapes

(Malachowski) However what leads to many of these relationships ending sourly and created a negative workplaces is when companies have superior figures dating subordinate ones. This by far is the Achilles hell of workplace romance. Malachowski argues that there are various reasons why this type of relationship is unethical and should not be allowed in the workforce.

He does this in the form of hypotheses, the first being, “Organizational members will trust a peer dating a superior less than they will trust an organizational peer dating another peer, subordinate, or outside individual.” In order to break this hypothesis down we will reference or
John and Jill. Let’s say that John is Jill’s superior. Because Jill is in a relationship with John other subordinates to John will feel uneasy as to how much they can share with Jill due to her being in close contact with him. In many ways this presents a conflict of interest. Employees need to
have a honest and clear line of communication with not only their superiors but their peers because that will lead to a more productive environment.

Malachowski argues that this breakdown in communication is inevitable when a peer is dating a superior especially when peers view this relationship as motivated by job security or ego. The second hypothesis that Malachowski forms is, “ Perceptions that a)job b)ego c)love are driving to an organizational peer to engage in a WR (work relationship) will mediate the relationships between status of the organizational peer’s romantic partner and the likelihood of engaging in information manipulation.”

While this piggybacks on the first hypothesis, understanding that “information manipulation” does not necessarily have a negative connotation is essential. If all the employees know John and Jill are dating and these peers might omit certain critical or otherwise negative comments to Jill for fear of upsetting John. In fact many Jill’s peers might partake in blatant dishonesty in order to appease to her and partially to John. Therefore Jill is not working to her actual potential because her critical feedback is much rarer than the other employees. Once again this leads to the business being penalized due to a workplace romance. Malchowski’s next hypothesis states that, “Perceptions that an organizational peer will receive unfair advantages as a result of his/her WR will mediate the relationships between the status of the organizational peer’s romantic partner and the likelihood of engaging in information manipulation.” This element is highly important because it introduces the legal liability of a
company when dealing with workplace romances. If Jill’s peers believe that she is receiving benefits, whether financial or otherwise from being in a relationship to John that will negatively affect the workplace climate very strongly. That will lead to a climate of perceived unfairness and if further pursued can lead to lawsuits against a company.

Input/Output Model

In this hypothesis the author sets up the input/output formula within workplaces of all environments. Workers in a corporate setting naturally use an input/output formula to determine job security and whether or not they are valued as an employee. They input their workload and the output is determined by pay and benefits and other company rewards. If an employee notices that another employee’s lesser work input is being rewarded by a higher company output, that will cause the employee to a dissatisfied view of his/her work climate. As stated earlier this can lead to information manipulation in which the employee deceives Jill in order to lesser her work input. Peers believe that Jill’s work being poor will decrease her benefits through her workplace romance and place stress on the company to address the issue.

Sean Horan sums up the sentiment towards workplace romances extremely accurately in his work, “When work and Love Mix: Perceptions of Peers in Workplace Romances when he states, “ Individuals may perceive that when a peer dates a superior, he/she has renounced his/her loyalty to other peers and formed a new loyalty towards the superior.” (Horan, 2009) Ultimately employee loyalty should place the company’s goals first and all elements of the private sphere second.

Gender and Sex

In the words of the deceased James Brown, It’s a Man’s World. Because workplaces are often dominated by men, the view for what is acceptable regarding love and romance is formed in the male lenses. Malachowski writes, “In contrast to men’s bodies, women’s are seen as undisciplined and sexual as they experience pregnancy, menstruation, and emotion. Masculinity is privileged, as status is afforded more masculine job tasks and certain kinds of male heterosexuality appear to legitimize organizational power.” (364)

Sexism

What does this mean in regard to workplace romance? This means that women are given a much harder time when involved with workplace relationships than their male counterparts. In order to obtain information for his work, Malachowski conducted surveys from employees in various companies. When comparing how peers viewed male led romance versus female led romance, results show that peers are overwhelming more bias towards female led romances. He claims,“heterosexual women dating superiors versus peers were seen as less caring and less trustworthy by coworkers, whereas perceptions of heterosexual men did not differ based on the status of their partner” (465) Although great leaps have been made in terms of sex equality in the workforce, women that date superiors as still labeled a “seducer” and somehow not given the trust from peers that she is not using her relationship as a means of advancement within the company. While this may sometimes be the case, legally this places the company of uneasy ground because if her charted advancement is not actualized that can lead down the road of sexual harassment claims.

Sexual Harassment

Sexual harassment claims are a nightmare to every HR branch within a company. Many times these claims arise from a superior subordinate relationship. Back to our anecdote of John and Jill, let’s say that John is Jill’s subordinate and things go sour between them and they break up. It wouldn’t be a stretch if Jill was bitter about how things went between them and pursued the course that the relationship was not consensual and Jill went along because she feared she would lose her job if she didn’t. This can often become a he said she said argument which can prove lengthy and costly for all involved. While the truth is the sexual harassment does occur and should be prosecuted accordingly, workplace romances often blur the lines for both companies and mediators as to what should be ethically acceptable within a workplace.

Love Contracts

Conclusion

It’s inevitable that romances will blossom in a workplace. There are several reasons why, one being that at work is usually when most are at their best and most attractive. Workplaces, unlike other places of socializing are places of focus and direction, when you can see how someone interacts with others truly getting a grasp of a person’s true personality. As assistant
professor of industrial and organizational psychology at the University of New Haven Amy Nicole Salvaggio, Ph.D claims, “The social psychology of who we fall in love with, and why, makes total sense at work, That shared experience is a personal glue that holds people together.” (Porten) At work you see your peers at their highest and their lowest which for many is better method of dating than perhaps a dive bar or other social activity. While these relationships are bound to happen, the issue comes to how companies choose to regulate that activity. Do businesses want to take the position of Richard Branson and let the love flow, leaving regulating to the couple themselves, or do companies want to take the approach of non-liability requiring a love contract to be signed? These are decisions that all companies must make and then discover whether or not these rules fit into the ethical guidelines for the company. In order to make the most successful choice, these companies must weigh the pros and cons of both options and take employee input into account as well. These companies must
fit this policy into the larger ethical policy that the company projects seamlessly because a relationship policy that is combative with the ethical policy of a company will only alienate and discourage future and current employees. As stated earlier there is no blueprint for success however with the proper sensitivity towards the issue all parties can prosper, companies and employers alike.