3 ms·

curiously, although the article mentions that american research is more critical of swearing than uk research, it doesn't consider cultural differences. as a b

curiously, although the article mentions that american research is more critical of swearing than uk research, it doesn't consider cultural differences. as a brit working in an american company i have learnt that swearing is much less tolerated over there. after being met with stony silence a couple of times i no longer do it. would love to see nationalitites added to posts here. i suspect many posts at this hour (early for the usa, and generally pro-swearing) are from the uk....

stoolpigeon 14y ago
He doesn't really cite or give evidence of any American research about profanity in the work place. The first link is to an interview with "Vistage speaker, Craig Weber" which credits authorship to Vistage and Weber consulting. It's an opinion piece. The second link is to a study that consisted of surveying 30 men and 30 women about the efficacy of speeches given to basketball teams by a coach. The speeches were fictional and some included profanity and some did not. Apparently the 30 men had a tendency to rate the speeches with profanity (if they thought the audience was women) as less effective. That's it. It had nothing to do with the workplace or the language used by employees or even team mates. It's primary focus and a lot of the research that study cites has to do with gender roles and profanity. Not really anything to do with what role profanity plays in the work place. It does cite a Dutch study that found profanity makes witnesses more believable in legal proceedings. But again - not really anything about the work place. The English research is a single paper that used case studies. I'm not paying to find out the details but the fact that their press release for the study says, "Prof Baruch said their aim was to challenge leadership styles and suggest ideas for best practice." makes me wonder about the value. That, to me, sounds like they went into the study with a desired outcome. I'm sympathetic with the article from a common sense approach but I think that dressing any of it up as being based on science is a bit of a reach.
thisone 14y ago
American in the UK. I've had sexual harassment training in the US, and a lot of standards are different between the two countries. At least 5 things happen at work every day, that if they happened at one of the companies I worked for in the US, the people involved would be brought to HR. I find workmates in the UK to be more matey at work, where as in the US, you are co-workers at work, and mates only when you leave work.
- koralatov 14y ago
  Depends very much on the workplace, and a lot of companies are becoming increasingly `American' in their attitudes. it tends to be a function of size as well: bigger companies are generally much stricter than smaller ones.
- Nursie 14y ago
  As a Brit who was in Australia for a few years I found the same sort of thing, I was amazed at how far it went (and not just the guys). Perhaps a USA->Australia emigration would be particularly eye-opening!
arethuza 14y ago
I once got read the riot act by an Intel attack lawyer when I tried to employ humour in a conference call many years ago (I believe my exact words were "I have no idea what a quad-pumped AGP port is but it sounds splendid - I'll have two"). I'm very careful about employing humour with lawyers these days.

stoolpigeon 14y ago

He doesn't really cite or give evidence of any American research about profanity in the work place. The first link is to an interview with "Vistage speaker, Craig Weber" which credits authorship to Vistage and Weber consulting. It's an opinion piece. The second link is to a study that consisted of surveying 30 men and 30 women about the efficacy of speeches given to basketball teams by a coach. The speeches were fictional and some included profanity and some did not. Apparently the 30 men had a tendency to rate the speeches with profanity (if they thought the audience was women) as less effective. That's it. It had nothing to do with the workplace or the language used by employees or even team mates. It's primary focus and a lot of the research that study cites has to do with gender roles and profanity. Not really anything to do with what role profanity plays in the work place. It does cite a Dutch study that found profanity makes witnesses more believable in legal proceedings. But again - not really anything about the work place. The English research is a single paper that used case studies. I'm not paying to find out the details but the fact that their press release for the study says, "Prof Baruch said their aim was to challenge leadership styles and suggest ideas for best practice." makes me wonder about the value. That, to me, sounds like they went into the study with a desired outcome. I'm sympathetic with the article from a common sense approach but I think that dressing any of it up as being based on science is a bit of a reach.

thisone 14y ago

American in the UK. I've had sexual harassment training in the US, and a lot of standards are different between the two countries. At least 5 things happen at work every day, that if they happened at one of the companies I worked for in the US, the people involved would be brought to HR. I find workmates in the UK to be more matey at work, where as in the US, you are co-workers at work, and mates only when you leave work.

koralatov 14y ago
Depends very much on the workplace, and a lot of companies are becoming increasingly `American' in their attitudes. it tends to be a function of size as well: bigger companies are generally much stricter than smaller ones.
Nursie 14y ago
As a Brit who was in Australia for a few years I found the same sort of thing, I was amazed at how far it went (and not just the guys). Perhaps a USA->Australia emigration would be particularly eye-opening!

arethuza 14y ago

I once got read the riot act by an Intel attack lawyer when I tried to employ humour in a conference call many years ago (I believe my exact words were "I have no idea what a quad-pumped AGP port is but it sounds splendid - I'll have two"). I'm very careful about employing humour with lawyers these days.