My friend Weez has been writing about gossip this week (here, , here, and here) and in response, she’s gotten some relatively predictable comments about gossip as a “bad” thing—and the people who indulge in it as “those kind of people.”
So, as an inveterate workplace gossip, I felt some need to come to my own defense. And as a former research librarian, I turned immediately to “the literature.” I wasn’t surprised to find that gossip is a topic that’s of great interest to researchers in a number of fields—sociology, psychology, anthropology, and organizational behavior.
(Most of what I found was in proprietary journal databases, rather than freely available on the web, so all I can do is cite and quote, rather than linking.)
The most interesting (to me) and accessible piece was a 1993 article entitled “News from behind my hand: Gossip in organizations,” written by Mike Noon and Rick Delbridge, and published in Organization Studies.
Early in the article, Noon and Delbridge quote a 1961 article by J. Loudon entitled “Kinship and crisis in south Wales.” (British Journal of Sociology 12: 333-350):
Gossip is undoubtedly the most important channel for constant reaffirmation of shared values about behaviour. Those who cannot join in gossip about their neighbours, friends and relatives…soon find themselves excluded from conversations at local gatherings.
That resonated with my sense of the role of gossip in the organizations I’ve been in—that in large part, it’s about reaffirmation and development of shared values.
The bulk of the article’s argument, however, was even more on target (probably since it was focused on “office” gossip). Here are some portions, interspersed with my comments.
For the individual, gossip can be a powerful tool. It provides a person with the opportunity to pass on information about key members of an organization, with the potential to influence opinions and attitudes. One’s own position may be enhanced because one is seen as a gate-keeper of ‘important’ information, and because the gossip might seek to lower the prestige and standing of the ‘victim’ in relation to oneself as gossiper. In this sense, gossip may be related to careerism within organizations; gossip is a central feature of networking as one seeks self-promotion, information control and the denigration of competitors.
Yeah, that’s probably part of it, much as I hate to admit it. This would be the part of my own gossiping behavior that I’m least proud of. I’d like to think that the power it generates is used for good, not for evil…and I’m relatively certain that many of my colleagues, for whom I’ve put that power to work, would agree. And my rationalization is that if I don’t do it, someone with far less admirable goals and motivations will fill the power vacuum.
Alternatively, gossip might be the only means of influence available for those excluded from the formal power structure within the organization. Kanter (1977) notes the important ‘power’ positions of secretaries because of their access to information, which had the effect of opening up channels of communication across the organization which were otherwise closed. Moore (1962) suggests that the circumstance of knowledge without formal power creates a ‘shadow’ organization through which individuals can exert influence. This might undermine the formal hierarchy by denigrating those in positions of authority. Alternatively, it could provide social mobility/influence for individuals who might otherwise direct their energies to confronting and challenging the formal hierarchy, thus the structures of power are preserved, whilst the personnel is in a state of flux. Gossip can therefore help to perpetuate the organization by protecting it from direct challenge and attack.
Ah. Now, that sounds more like what’s going on. Few of my colleagues would deny that we have both a formal hierarchy and a shadow organization, and that often more good is done by and with the latter than the former. Gossip, it seems, is the power tool of the untenured. I like that. :)
And finally…
More fundamentally for the individual, gossip can be fun. As with humour, gossip gives an escape from the monotonous drudgery many workers experience for hours on end during the working day. Whilst the effects of such ‘lightening’ factors as humour and gossip can be over-stated, so too can they be under-emphasized. As aspects of ‘play’, they may provide ‘release’ both from routine or stress. Elimination of gossip, were it possible, may therefore not only make employees’ lives more boring, but might also give them greater opportunity to ponder the futility and overarching tedium they are often obliged to endure in their work tasks.
Now we’re talkin’ Yes, yes and yes!
So, yes, I’m a gossip. An unrepentant one, at that. But Weez is still my best friend, so clearly that characteric’s not a deal-breaker. I’m glad. :)
www.flickr.com
|
