In a nutshell, the problem with the "family approach" is how it puts a very powerful tool into the hands of one's employer they can hold against you: your commi

In a nutshell, the problem with the "family approach" is how it puts a very powerful tool into the hands of one's employer they can hold against you: your committal, loyalty or even reliance on others in the same situation. Should you ever want to switch places, you will likely have to rebuild your circle of friends, as they often do not take kindly to people "leaving the family" or simply lose contact due to no longer sharing anything big in common. Similar things tend to happen when one has a circle of "friends" related to a physical activity: when they stop or change clubs, they often lose most of those "friends", as often the only thread holding things together is a shared activity and location. At least by recognizing this, people can opt to not put all their eggs in one basket, which lessens any potential loss. Also, it allows them to look at different ways to establish friendships, in a way they can withstand more changes. Finally, there is no third party (the employer) that can use a potential insecurity against them (e.g. less financial growth because Bob is so afraid of rebuilding his circle of friends, he'll accept a stellar performance netting him 1% wage growth). And as others point out: forced participation into social activities is not something everyone is favorable towards.