Looking For Love in All the Wrong Places: Office Romances

When David Letterman admitted that he’d had sex with several of the women who worked for him, the national discussion about dating in the workplace that had been simmering for years finally exploded. Is it right to date a coworker? Your boss? Someone who works for you? Let’s consider whether office romances are consistent with ethical intelligence.

The Truth about Dating

Most romantic relationships don’t work out. Think about it: How many people do you know who are still in a relationship with the first person they ever dated? It’s a good thing that this is the case. After all, it takes time to find the right person. But what does “the right person” mean, anyway?

I remember a conversation I had as a young professor with my boss at the time. We were driving back from a workshop we’d given and were having a heart-to-heart conversation about marriage, since I was single then.

“Bruce, what do you think makes a relationship work?” he asked.

“Shared interests,” I said. “Mutual attraction.”

“Those are important,” he replied, “but shared values are what really matter.”

His words have stayed with me because I think he’s right. There’s no doubt that physical attraction jump-starts a relationship. Once that relationship gets going, it’s great to discover that both you and the other person love sports, traveling, or the films of Alfred Hitchcock. But what takes the relationship from a sprint to a marathon is a shared commitment to the things that matter most. That is, shared values. And values are revealed over time by how the person acts, not by what he or she says.

Since it takes time to get to know a person and what his or her values are, the office is the obvious place to look for love or for love to find you. With a fragile economy and increased financial worry, we’re spending more time on the job than ever before. Seeing someone every day gives you a good sense of what that person is really like, much more so than a few dates with someone does. The workplace does seem like the best possible arena for finding a lifelong partner.

But the fact that most relationships don’t work out is the reason why dating in the workplace is not consistent with ethical intelligence. If, after a few dates with someone you know from outside of work, you discover that you’re not interested in pursuing a relationship with that person and you call it quits, you probably won’t see him or her again (unless you live in a very small town). If, however, your romantic relationship with a coworker fizzles out, as it almost certainly will, you have to see that person day after day, and that’s where the problems begin. I know from personal experience how excruciating it is to sit at your desk stewing with anger, hurt, and bewilderment after you have a falling out with the person down the hall. It’s hard to focus on your work, and it becomes difficult to do your job well. You may wind up letting clients down, tarnishing the reputation of the company, and making it more difficult for yourself to move on. Dating a coworker is thus one of the surest ways to violate the first principle of ethical intelligence, Do No Harm.

How Office Morale, Clients, and Your Business Can Be Adversely Affected

A lawyer I know from a major law firm — I’ll call her Emily — told me about how an office romance threatened the firm’s relationship with a client. The couple in question — I’ll call them Jake and Isabelle — were prone to displays of affection around the office. One day, they were smooching after hours in front of a conference room, which they believed was empty. It looked empty from their cursory glance, but one of the firm’s clients was in the room and felt uncomfortable enough about what he witnessed to complain to Emily.

What kind of review do you think this client gave the firm to others in his organization? If someone asked him to recommend a good corporate law firm, do you think he would have suggested the one with Jake and Isabelle? If he was moved to bring up the matter then and there, one can only imagine how he spoke about the place to others.

Emily reported the matter to a senior partner, who then confronted Jake and Isabelle. Jake argued that he and Isabelle did their best to be discreet, but they were really in love and felt that their relationship should be respected.

It turns out that the client wasn’t the only one who was bothered by Jake and Isabelle’s romantic relationship. A lot of the people who worked near them felt uncomfortable as well, and they, too, had notified the senior partner. Nobody begrudged them their happiness, but when you are working hard to earn your pay, there is something disconcerting about knowing your coworkers are spending their work time kissing. When Jake went into Isabelle’s office and closed the door, some of their coworkers wondered, “Are they having a business meeting, or are they just making out?” The senior partner ultimately gave Jake and Isabelle thirty days for one or both to leave the firm.

A manager I once had told a few staff members at lunch one day that she and her boyfriend had been having sex all over the office — including on the round table where we were eating! She presented it as something funny, but I was troubled by her decision to sexualize the workplace. There was also the obvious hygienic concern: Who wants to worry about whether the desk they’re writing on had a couple of bare bottoms rolling around on it the previous evening?

The first principle of ethical intelligence, Do No Harm, is compromised in several ways by office romances: clients, office morale, and the business’s reputation are all at risk.

But there is one other aspect of Jake and Isabelle’s relationship worth mentioning: he was her supervisor. Isabelle claimed that she began dating Jake of her own free will and never felt pressured to remain in the relationship for any reason. Perhaps this was so. But, as we will see, dating a subordinate is inconsistent with ethical intelligence.

When Sex and Power Collide

Suppose you’re interviewing someone for a new position at work and you find this person quite attractive. I’ll assign the name Chris to this candidate to cover both gender possibilities. Several times during the interview, Chris smiles warmly at you, which makes you feel good. As the interview unfolds, you get the feeling that Chris is attracted to you. This is someone you’d love to have on your team. Chris isn’t wearing a wedding ring and makes no reference to a boyfriend or girlfriend. You sure would like to hire Chris — but how can you tell that your attraction isn’t compromising your ability to assess Chris’s abilities accurately? Chris may indeed be the best person for the job, but if one of the reasons that you want this candidate on your team is that you feel a romance is possible, you simply can’t be objective.

Let’s take it a step further. Others on the interviewing committee believe Chris would be a terrific fit at the company, so Chris is hired. You decide to wait to ask Chris out, just so that you can see whether there is indeed a mutual attraction. You learn that Chris is single. You ask Chris out, but Chris refuses. In fact, Chris appears mortified that you would do such a thing. You explain why. Chris replies, “I’m afraid you’ve misunderstood me. I’m just a friendly person. I smile a lot. That’s the way I am.” How will this new development in your relationship affect Chris’s work and your relationship with Chris? The outcome may very well be negative for all concerned. You now question whether it was a smart move on your part to hire Chris in the first place. None of this is consistent with ethical intelligence.

But suppose that when you ask Chris out, the answer is yes. How can you be sure that Chris is accepting your invitation out of a genuine interest in you? Chris may be doing so for fear of alienating you, which doesn’t bode well for anyone in the long run. Or Chris may agree to go on the date because Chris’s long-term goal is to advance in the company, and this is a sure way to do so. This, too, suggests unpleasant things are in store.

Let’s imagine now that Chris has agreed to go out on a date because Chris is indeed attracted to you. The relationship goes great for a while, but ultimately it doesn’t work out. Shortly thereafter, the company has to do some downsizing, and you’re called upon to do some of this unpleasant work. Chris is one of the people you decide to let go. How can you or Chris know that the unhappy personal relationship wasn’t a factor in your decision? You can’t, and neither can Chris.

Even if the relationship is genuine and not put to the test of downsizing, there is the issue of appearances. Chris’s peers will reasonably wonder if Chris is getting advantages they aren’t getting because they’re not sleeping with the boss. That’s not fair to Chris’s peers or to Chris.

Sexual harassment laws were promulgated to prevent just these kinds of nasty situations from occurring and to provide redress when they do. Two forms of sexual harassment exist under the law: the creation of an offensive or hostile environment (which may follow if Chris becomes unwillingly entangled in a romantic relationship with you) and quid pro quo, literally, “something for something” (which could exist if you offer Chris some kind of benefit at work in exchange for sex). Because of its brazen violation of the Do No Harm principle, sexual harassment is obviously inconsistent with ethical intelligence.

But an office romance between a boss and his or her subordinate doesn’t have to involve sexual harassment for it to be something that ethically intelligent managers and those who work with them avoid. The waters are simply too perilous to proceed on such a journey. As difficult as it is to “just say no,” this is what the ethically intelligent person does when considering whether to date someone at work.

But If You Must...

If, however, two people simply can’t resist the call of Cupid, and there is not an imbalance of power between them, ethical intelligence calls for each person to be on a different team at work. Since preventing harm is an important corollary to the first principle of ethical intelligence, smart lovebirds at work, and those who manage them, will ensure that coworkers, clients, the company, and the lovers themselves are not at risk for getting hurt and that the couple’s first responsibility on the job — to do their work well — will not be compromised.

I know (and I’ll bet you do, too) several couples who met on the job and are now happily married or in a long-term, committed relationship. Two of my professors in college met their wives in class, which seems to provide some evidence against the argument that romantic relationships characterized by an imbalance of power are perilous. Human beings aren’t automatons, and as these examples suggest, it is indeed possible to conduct a love affair at work or in school with ethical intelligence.

But the fact that some folks can avoid the pitfalls of an office romance does not mean that this kind of relationship, generally speaking, is smart. In his memoir, Red: My Uncensored Life in Rock, Sammy Hagar talks about his love of driving fast on the freeway.1 He has been pulled over for speeding over forty times and once exceeded 150 miles an hour on Highway 101 in California. Fortunately, his passion for exceeding the speed limit hasn’t harmed anyone (yet), but even the man who wrote “I Can’t Drive 55” could hardly say that such a policy is a good idea.

Bottom line: Office romances are generally not consistent with ethical intelligence. Dating a coworker may seem to be a great way to apply principle 2, Make Things Better, to one’s own life, but this is likely to compromise relationships with coworkers, clients, and the employer. When Freud said that the two essential ingredients for a happy life are work and love, he didn’t mean that they’re to be found in the same place.

However, if two people at work do fall in love, the ethically intelligent thing to do is for managers to ensure that they don’t work together and for the lovebirds themselves to be as discreet as possible.

About Bruce Weinstein

Bruce Weinstein, PhD, is the host of “Ask the Ethics Guy!” on Bloomberg Businessweek Online’s management channel, where he also writes an ethics column. He regularly gives keynote addresses to businesses, schools, and nonprofit organizations across the country.He lives in New York City. More information at www.TheEthicsGuy.com.

Additional Self Growth Articles You Might Find Interesting:

Visit our Facebook Fan Page