The Con of “Family” in the Workplace
CONvincing Employees to Transcend Peak Performance
As organizations wage a war on work/life balance, a tactic is gaining traction which is toxifying the battlefield: “We are a family.” There is nothing more terrifying than hearing those words in a workplace setting. In the words of Laura Dern’s character in Jurassic Park, Dr. Ellie Sattler, “Runnnnnn.”
Not only is this becoming front-line warfare, it is securing a foothold in American organizational culture more and more. On its face, it seems innocent enough. I have worked for several organizations where this type of language is bandied about. “Welcome to the family!” I would hear on my first day as I white-knuckled my journey through orientation, meeting hoards of other “family” members, grinning and echoing the sentiment. I do not pay my actual family members or have the power to turn off their income stream at a moment’s notice, but maybe that’s just me. I may be the outlier here but I would bet that I stand firmly in the majority on this one.
Although strange to me, the “family” reference from my boss and co-workers seemed harmless at first. It initially felt like a way to be inclusive, create connections, and make new employees feel at home. What’s wrong with that? Well, nothing if that’s all it is. Those are great qualities and funny enough, it did indeed work. I felt instantly welcomed and jazzed to be included. Let’s do this!
So with that, my indoctrination into the “family” successfully kickstarted my employment, and off I went. I had to hand it to them, I felt like I had been included from jump and was part of the crew. As time went on though, the polished veneer began to fade and the cracks started showing. They typically appeared shortly after other colleagues suddenly disappeared. Were they no longer part of the “family” then? How quickly that relationship is terminated…
But should that come as a surprise, or a shock even? People quitting, leaving, or being fired should be expected, that’s the name of the game. IT’S A BUSINESS and businesses aim to make money, first and foremost. If individuals are not contributing to the bottom line, then why keep them? This is where the concept of the business being a “family” should cause pause.
Generally speaking, an authentic family is typically connected beyond financial ties, and the glue that holds them together is made up of other factors. Britannica defines a family as “a group of persons united by the ties of marriage, blood, or adoption, constituting a single household and interacting with each other in their respective social positions, usually those of spouses, parents, children, and siblings.”1 Additionally, it is often commonplace to consider friendships and other close relationships as family as well. These types of non-traditional connections are often separate from and unrelated to financial gain, thus, signifying a distinction from employer/employee relationships.
Earlier uses and adaptations of the word family, according to Merriam-Webster, center around “a group of persons in the service of an individual.”2 Oddly enough, based on that definition, maybe “family” in the workplace is an accurate depiction…a group of employees working in service of the highest person at the top, the one that oversees it all. Sound familiar?
Obviously, things have evolved since that early use and the definition has expanded to include the nuanced complexity of modern-day application. That being said, this is not about the definition of family, rather, it’s about whether the term “family” is appropriate in the workplace.
If we truly are utilizing the “family” language to encompass the group servitude of an individual, then maybe it does indeed reside in our workplaces…but that is typically not the intention. This narrative is more commonly meant to bond and motivate employees to consistently transcend their peak performance abilities, resulting in unrealistic expectations and burnout.
If that’s the case, then why does this appear to be an increasing trend? In my experience, there are several factors at play which can lead to this scenario:
A startup atmosphere — the “family” vibe is most at home here where the employees participate in an “all hands on deck” style due to limited resources and the need to wear numerous hats. Since the team or teams are typically smaller, or even single individuals representing whole departments, it is easy to slide from “we’re in this together” to “we are a family.” It is a very fine line here.
The uptick in fully remote organizations — physical distance is often misconstrued with relational distance. Meaning, that because team members are not physically, centrally located, there is a perception that relationships cannot thrive or or even be built with distance in the mix. Of course, this is not true for every case and it could be a real obstacle for some companies. By adding the “family” layer, it is intended to create instant connection and relationship building.
Mental health and wellness taking center stage — work/life balance is a hot topic these days and is an active part of the conversation. The mental health boom is forcing employers to acknowledge the topic and at the very least, regurgitate canned work/life balance messaging to its employees, current and future. Integrating the “family” narrative combats the need for balance because you’ll do anything for your family…that’s the idea anyway.
Why is using the word “family” a potential issue in the workplace?
1. It can be a tactic to squeeze out every drop of productivity. The “family” messaging is an apparatus for convincing employees to work longer and harder. Instead of just meeting expectations, team members should strive to consistently exceed expectations. Constantly giving 200% and going above and beyond is the norm rather than simply performing the job as expected, no more no less.
2. It can create a false sense of security. Most individuals would not cut their family members out of their lives due to employment reasons so this lulls folks into thinking they will be protected. Unfortunately, at the end of the day, the business will always choose the business first over the individual employees.
3. The terminology can often be an artificial means of inclusion. What about individuals part of marginalized communities? Is everyone actually welcome and part of “the family”? Sadly, that’s not always true. At a previous organization, predominately white and heteronormative, a black colleague openly questioned the “family” terminology, stating it made her feel uncomfortable and she didn’t feel included. She added that she had heard the same sentiment from other people of color in the department, so she wanted to share that feedback with the hopes of tweaking the language to be authentically inclusive. The leader receiving this feedback broke down in tears, not over the lack of real inclusivity, but rather, over the idea of not being able to use that term any longer and the belief it would negatively impact that organization’s culture. Truly, one of the wildest things I’ve seen.
4. It no longer fits the way younger generations think about and treat employment. Younger generations are questioning the system and have a different perspective. Why are we living to work and why does work consume so much of our lives? Shockingly, workers have been revealed to be human beings and they have real needs, wants, and desires outside of laboring day in and day out. Gasp! But for real, human value and worth is no longer directly tied to employment. Or it shouldn’t be at least. The upcoming generations are making that clear: the human experience is the priority over serving industries and employers until we die.
What I’ve found:
— The initial intention was likely an innocent one. I hope so at least. Organizations needed a way to quickly bond their teams and create a welcoming and collaborative atmosphere. I completely get that.
— The use of “family” probably does encourage instant gratification and initial positive outcomes. In my experience, ushering new employees through the door for expedited onboarding does seem to be assisted and supported by the familiar bonding strategy. But is this a long-term solution that has legs and carries on years later? I don’t think so.
— The larger the organization gets, the more hollow this language sounds. It may have been true when the organization was a tiny startup but once the organization grows and scales, folks don’t have any clue who Marsha in accounting is. Enterprise and corporation level orgs should no longer cling to their prior small company roots as tightly. Acknowledge that things have changed and grown.
— The “We are family” mindset should not be considered the org culture. Expecting employees to believe in and hold this as a value, is completely absurd. Most people are here because they have to earn a living somehow, not to find a new family. Also, it just muddies the water and irritates those who have been around long enough to see through the facade. And those folks who’ve bought in, emphatically screaming “Welcome to the family!” from the mountaintops, good for you but shhhhhhhhh please pipe down. Forced bonding does not a family make.
— Engineered familial relationships are not a benefit and shouldn’t be advertised as such. If a business includes “we are a family” or a family environment as a benefit of working there, it’s probable because they fail to offer other things people really need. Perhaps better health care, 401k matching, fewer hours, more time off, extended paid leave, diverse people and minds, full maternal/paternal benefits, more money, lower expectations, budgeting for additional resources rather than forcing employees to work for three…just a few items off the top of my head. If you do indeed develop a version of a family in the workplace that you love and fight for, that’s awesome and I am happy for you, but that’s the exception.
— The “family” tactic needs to be put to bed. We tried it and it failed. On to the next. There are other ways to build your TEAM.
And with that segue, “Team” should be the default word used. It might seem stiff and may not represent the deeper sense of belonging being cultivated within some organizations, but it conveys the message without blurring into personal. By dropping the “family” language, it doesn’t mean we can’t enjoy our time in the workplace, and doesn’t mean we can’t build meaningful relationships either. We can still have profound, fulfilling relationships with our colleagues and TEAM members. But the “team” terminology will leave room for us to set boundaries and stick to the task at hand which is meeting expectations and getting the agreed-upon job done.
Team may not be your favorite, but “family” isn’t the ticket.
Barnard, A. John (2024, April 19). family. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/family-kinship
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Family. In Merriam-Webster.com dictionary. Retrieved May 13, 2024, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/family