5 ms·

From what I have understood of this topic: If the relationship continues, the power could be used to favour the subordinate over other subordinates (give them

From what I have understood of this topic: If the relationship continues, the power could be used to favour the subordinate over other subordinates (give them good reviews, etc). If the relationship ends poorly, the power could be used to spite the subordinate over other subordinates (give them poor reviews, etc).

fastball 8y ago
Right, so the it's an issue only if the power dynamic is abused. The power imbalance itself is not intrinsically going to cause problems.
- nAwYz 8y ago
  Such a "power dynamic" can lead fast to various forms of dependency
- toast0 8y ago
  It's a problem for the company even without misconduct. If a coworker claims a promotion went to a romantic partner instead of them because of romance, the company has to spend a bunch of time looking into that, even if there was no misconduct. It's the same thing with conflicts of interest. The clear possibility for misconduct is a problem that at least must be declared, and at best is avoided.
- jerf 8y ago
  I suspect you're imagining a single relationship in your head, and imagining that it could go well. Yes, indeed it could. But you have to think at scale. If you have ten of these sorts of relationships in your company, the odds of one of them going kerflooey in an expensive or damaging way is effectively 100%. Heck, the odds of five of them going kerflooey in an expensive or dangerous way has to be at least 90%. You can't write policy based on imagining single incidents. At scale, power dynamics will be abused, full stop.
tomp 8y ago
But really, how is that different from any other decision an employee might do that prioritises their own personal gain over their company’s benefit?
- jmull 8y ago
  I don't think it is different. Companies that are large/sophisticated enough to have formal policies of employee conduct generally ban a wide range of behaviors that prioritizes the employee's personal gain over the company's.
  - goobynight 8y ago
    Right, but what's being discussed isn't that the policies are there. It's if they make sense i.e. do they ban something that's actual bad or are they just arbitrary restrictions?
    - fareesh 8y ago
      They are there to reduce risk and to reduce unnecessary drama.
kanox 8y ago
It's also common for employees at the same level to give performance reviews to each other. This is better dealt with by having a higher-level manager adjust for relationships.

fastball 8y ago

Right, so the it's an issue only if the power dynamic is abused. The power imbalance itself is not intrinsically going to cause problems.

nAwYz 8y ago
Such a "power dynamic" can lead fast to various forms of dependency
toast0 8y ago
It's a problem for the company even without misconduct. If a coworker claims a promotion went to a romantic partner instead of them because of romance, the company has to spend a bunch of time looking into that, even if there was no misconduct. It's the same thing with conflicts of interest. The clear possibility for misconduct is a problem that at least must be declared, and at best is avoided.
jerf 8y ago
I suspect you're imagining a single relationship in your head, and imagining that it could go well. Yes, indeed it could. But you have to think at scale. If you have ten of these sorts of relationships in your company, the odds of one of them going kerflooey in an expensive or damaging way is effectively 100%. Heck, the odds of five of them going kerflooey in an expensive or dangerous way has to be at least 90%. You can't write policy based on imagining single incidents. At scale, power dynamics will be abused, full stop.

tomp 8y ago

But really, how is that different from any other decision an employee might do that prioritises their own personal gain over their company’s benefit?

jmull 8y ago
I don't think it is different. Companies that are large/sophisticated enough to have formal policies of employee conduct generally ban a wide range of behaviors that prioritizes the employee's personal gain over the company's.
- goobynight 8y ago
  Right, but what's being discussed isn't that the policies are there. It's if they make sense i.e. do they ban something that's actual bad or are they just arbitrary restrictions?
  - fareesh 8y ago
    They are there to reduce risk and to reduce unnecessary drama.

kanox 8y ago

It's also common for employees at the same level to give performance reviews to each other. This is better dealt with by having a higher-level manager adjust for relationships.