Birds of a Feather...
EVER SINCE I stumbled across this marvellous little thing called page 3, I have tried my best to be a part of it. I have tried a lot of things - I tried making fashion statements, I tried making political statements and I also tried making plain outrageous statements.
Unfortunately, nothing worked. Apparently, you have to be somebody important or rich to be a member of the glitterati, literati or flitterati - or have a Maserati. Or wear an incredibly short dress. Now I haven't tried that, but I have a niggling feeling that that won't work either. A friend of mine was tempted to attempt it once. May his spirit, rest in peace.
So, in deep anguish laced with contemptuous looks from strange women in ill-lit waterholes, I have abandoned my quest for page 3 greatness and have instead decided to start a club of my own. I am going to call it the litterati.
Yes, there is a spelling mistake, but it is there on purpose. It is a call to all the bookworms of the world and not, as the name might inadvertently suggest, an invitation to whole-scale littering. You can join too. Apart from being an elite club comprising the cream of intellectual society, membership is absolutely free.
My point is everyone needs to be in a group of some sort. We are socially programmed that way. One of the first things we do when we walk through the gleaming portals of a new organisation is search for a cosy niche to fit in. We consciously or unconsciously seek like-minded people to have coffee with, to share our thoughts and opinions with, and if possible, share our work with.
Of course, as with every sweeping generalisation, this `we' is bound to exclude certain people; people who put individuality over everything else and care not to please the ravening mobs. To these people I offer my apologies. This isn't about them.
You see, being independent is not the natural state of being for a regulation-brained human. We need each other for support and succour. Society was built on a chain of hands, not by individual accomplishment alone. If Benjamin Franklin had not been able to discover electricity, would Edison (or was it Tennyson?) have invented the light bulb? I think not. To extrapolate this theory an inch, the world is a collection of assorted groups just like a group is an assortment of individuals, who in turn, are again a compilation of cells and atoms. And so on. This is the underlying principle that makes the earth go `round. Division of labour would not have been possible without it; five-year plans, parliamentary democracy, and the stock market would be meaningless without it.
So, why is it that groups and factions are so bad when it comes to the workplace? Can't we all live in peace and spread happiness and prosperity under its beautiful big umbrella? Apparently not. The crux of the problem lies in the fundamental concept itself. A group, by nature tends to create barriers between itself and other groups. It is the only way it can retain its identity and self-respect. So, what usually happens is this: factionism.
In its meekest model, it can be a good thing. It can lay the platform for healthy competition as with two groups trying to beat each other in being productive.
In its most virulent form, it kills. It makes hearts venomous and tongues acidic. It destroys morale and obliterates any hope of getting any work done. In some respects, it is a lot like a gang war - you know, the type they portray so vividly in movies with abandoned buildings and hooded ruffians and pistols et al. Okay, so we don't have that here but that is all the difference there is. The malice is equally murderous in intent. What is a constructive solution? There isn't one really. Hard as you may try, you cannot cut it out completely. And you shouldn't either. Your main objective must be to limit its unwanted side. How? One easy way to do it is to frequently change teams.
Since a lot of groups are based on the sort of work they do, what many companies do, and cleverly one might add, is have a pool resource. Employees are handpicked and welded together on a project-to-project basis. This extends the opportunity for an employee to get to know more of his colleagues and interact with a wider cross-section of the people toiling by his side in the same organisation. Result? Groupism is cut to a minimum.
Sure, there will always be people who are drawn together because they share similar tastes in different things or have the same values, but last time I checked that was a good thing. Apart from this, frequent social gatherings that involve the entire organisation also provide a platform for employees to network across work lines.
This now brings us to a question that I suppose should have been asked before. How does one get into a group? Again, there are no hard and fast rules. Generally, groups in offices are formed because the people in those groups have found something in common - be it something related to work, or outside of it. This is why we so often find ourselves gravitating towards a colleague or a friend - we have something to talk about. If, however, you find yourself standing alone on the craggy cliffs of your professional life and are either unable to find a suitable group or get into one, do not, irrespective of your temperament or habitual inclinations, try wearing a short dress. It never works and probably never will - if you are of the masculine persuasion.
ARJUN SENGUPTA
arjuns.hyd@cnkonline.com
Printer friendly
page
Send this article to Friends by
E-Mail
Opportunities
