At sometime in your training or career, you will be in a supervisory role. There are lots and lots of books and posts about being a good supervisor. This is my take on some nuances of the subject.
Traditionally
In industry the bosses don’t fraternize with the workers.
In the military, and still today, officers are forbidden from fraternizing with enlisted and those of lower rank and can be punished under UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice, the laws that military personnel have to live by).
Kings don’t mingle with the common folk.
We’ve all heard of instances where a good friend gets promoted and suddenly they change and the friendship becomes strained. The one left behind blames the promoted one of being aloof, arrogant and full of themselves.
So, why is that? Long standing customs are there for a reason. Sometimes the reason is wrong, but not often.
The company, the military or whoever wants the executive to be able to implement orders without undue influence affecting them in their duties. The executive is being paid to represent the company, and not the worker. Some will be able to fraternize and maintain their friendship with the person that is being ordered (fired, reprimanded…). Most will not. Therefore the organization, or military or whoever implements a rule that the uppers can’t fraternize with the underlings, preventing the possibility of relationships developing and preventing the possibility of undue influence in the wrong direction.
If an executive and a worker present complaints to the company or the executive presents the complaints for the workers, the company now has to decide if the executive is looking out for the company or the worker? The company hires executive level employees and expects loyalty to them, not to the workers.
Surely one can see the military’s need for separation of tier. Life vs death.
Currently
When fraternization is discouraged
See the comments above about traditional industry and military standards. But, courts have upheld the rights of workers doing whatever they want during off-work hours (in industry but not the military).1,2 So, here fraternization comes down to mean sexual harassment, public display of affection or intimate contact while on the clock. Using these definitions, it is easy for the employer to craft rules against them.
A contentious divorce/break-up/domestic dispute is not something most people want to watch, much less at work.
Appearance of impropriety can be as destructive as the actual inappropriate act. Tongues will wag and soon the appearance becomes widespread reality.
When fraternization is encouraged
At these institutions fraternization is viewed as close working relationships that improve cohesiveness, sharing of knowledge and skills. It is felt that these relationships improve the product and therefore the business.
But if there is a mix of tier levels, ingratiation of a lower level to the upper level may backfire.4
In the late 1860’s, a confederate ship roamed the high seas and was captained by Captain Waddell.3 At that time the captain was an autocrat and had supreme power over the ship and crew. Well, up to an extent. He certainly didn’t want to swim home, so his rule had to be somewhat acceptable to the rest of the crew. But, early in their voyage, he had a round table discussion with his Lieutenants and took the majority advice on what to do about a particular problem. Thereafter, for the rest of the voyage, his crew was close to mutiny. By allowing his command to be dictated by lessor members, he had shown weakness.
Leadership
Audy Murphy was a great American Hero of WWII. He is known for being the most decorated soldier of WW II, an actor and wrote an autobiography.4 One of his approaches to being a platoon leader was allowing his men to complain all they wanted, if they did their job. The take home lesson from this is that the leader should not over manage his team. If it works and a change isn’t going to improve the chore, don’t change.
Lead from the front, you can’t lead from the rear. Don’t expect one of the team to do something you won’t or can’t.
Show Respect
Should one praise a worker for doing an adequate job? Or, only if they do an exemplary job?
Should one critique a worker in the presence of his co-workers, expecting peer pressure to influence the outcome? Or, punish the group with the same expectation? Hoping the outcome is what one wants and not a unified rebellion.
Your Uncle Dave’s opinion
Inspired by Madison.
1. https://smallbusiness.chron.com/dangers-fraternization-workplace-36544.html
2. https://www.todaysworkplace.org/2007/02/06/the-underrated-importance-of-fraternizing/
3. http://www.tomchaffin.com/book/sea-of-gray/
4. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/300674.To_Hell_and_Back