article Int II

A Read the article and answer the questions . E/ 8 /143 Gramma E / (r Camaraderie over competence by Lucy Kellaway Functions The importance of liking people is the subject of an article in the latest Harvard Business Review, which has carried out an experiment to find out who we’d rather work with: nice colleagues or competent ones. Hardly surprisingly, the people we want most as our workmates are both: brilliant at their jobs and delightful human beings. And the people we want least are both unpleasant and useless. More interestingly, the authors found that, given the choice between working with lovable fools and competent jerks*, we overwhelmingly choose the former. We might claim that competence matters more, but our behaviour shows we cling to the people we like, sharing information with them, making the most of their meagre skills and so on. What companies should therefore do is get people to like each other more. The trick here is apparently to make sure staff come across each other as often as possible during the day, to make them more familiar with one another. They also should be sent on bonding courses and so on to encourage friendliness and break down hostility. In other words, more outdoor-activity weekends and communal coffee machines. Which inspires no confidence at all. The reality is that people either like each other or they don’t. You can’t force it. Possibly you can make offices more friendly by tolerating a lot of chat, but there is a productivity cost to that. In my experience, the question of lovable fool versus competent jerk may not be the right one. The two are interrelated: we tend not to like our workmates when they are completely hopeless. I was once quite friendly with a woman whom I subsequently worked with. I found her to be so outstandingly bad at her job (though she thought she was good) that I lost respect for her and ended up not really liking her at all. And the people I enjoy working with aren’t necessarily the people I like most. My best working relationships are with people whom I find hilariously entertaining. I also like to work with those who know all the gossip, and run the risk that what they are saying about me when my back is turned may not be that nice. However, if one does accept that the HBR is broadly right, then is there anything that companies should be doing about it? By far the most effective strategy would be to hire people who are all pretty much the same, given that similarity is one of the main determinants of whether we like each other. I think this is a pretty good idea, but no one dares recommend this any more without offending the diversity lobby. There is only one acceptable view on this subject: teams of similar people are bad because they stifle creativity. Which may be true, though I have never seen any conclusive proof of it. Not only do we like similar people, we like people who like us. So if companies want to foster more liking, they should encourage a culture where we are all nice to each other. The trouble is that this needs to be done with some skill. 1 Which statement best reflects the author’s opinion of the research? a) The results are rather obvious. b) The results are unexpected. c) The results should have a big impact on the way companies are run. 2 According to the Harvard Business Review research, which combination of characteristics would most people choose for their colleagues at work? a) competent, unlikeable b) nice, unintelligent c) proficient, unattractive 3 The research suggests that companies should do more to encourage workmates to like each other. How could they do this? (Tick the three methods mentioned in the article.) a) organise team-building activities outside the office b) encourage people to socialise outside office hours c) arrange the workplace so that people meet frequently and talk d) set coffee breaks at fixed times e) develop a friendly working environment f ) recruit staff who are all attractive 4 What kind of people does the author like to work with? (Tick three descriptions that reflect what she writes in the article.) a) close friends b) amusing, fun to be with c) respectable d) have interesting things to tell about other colleagues e) don’t talk too much f ) not completely incompetent 5 What is the main disadvantage of employing teams of similar people? a) They talk more and work less. b) They are more likely to argue. c) They generate fewer new ideas. 6 Does the author believe that companies can succeed in making colleagues like each other? Is she … a) generally positive? b) generally negative? c) neutral? Match these words from the article with the word or phrase of the same meaning (a–f). 7 brilliant a) charming 8 delightful b) outstandingly bad at their job 9 unpleasant c) clever 10 useless d) proficient 11 hostile e) on bad terms 12 competent f) disagreeable Answer these questions 13 Which word means the same as meagre? a) inadequate b) superior c) expert 14 Which phrase means the same as tolerating a lot of chat? a) encouraging humour b) relaxing the rules c) allowing informal conversation 15 What does the diversity lobby promote? a) recruiting staff from different cultures and backgrounds b) extending the company’s product range c) more variety of working styles and practices From Market Leader- Entry Test- Upper Intermediate