A recent article in the Sydney Morning Herald recommended the use of the 'office gossip network'. It stated that 'experts' consider office gossiping to be a healthy activity, almost like 'informal communication' and useful to understand your environment. It almost dignified gossip by giving it the status of networking.
It is true that every workplace has some level of informal information sharing. Sometimes 'off the record' comments can be beneficial, good information; while comments of no benefit are regarded as gossip. One person's gossip is another person's useful information.
The problem is, if you believe that some gossip is good, where do you draw the line? When does a piece of information pass from just plain interesting to gossip? Does it have to do with the motivation of the person passing on the piece of 'interesting information'? Does all gossip undermine your credibility at work? Or does it help you cope with your environment?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
There is a danger that if you make communication too formal people will be too worried and conscious of what they are writing or saying. We need a good mix of formal and informal.
ReplyDeleteI think gossip has no place at work. Any potential benefits are outweighed by the negative risks.
ReplyDeleteI think the problem is in the definition of gossip itself. How do you define it? Is there such a thing as good gossip?
ReplyDeleteI think this post can be linked to your post on social networking. How do you control office gossip on sites like facebook? Can you control it?
ReplyDelete