Hacker News Reader

Comment by simonsquiff | Hacker News Reader

It's amazing the effect a first drinking session make for a new employee. Countless times I've seen the difference after that 'first night out' for new staff - the next day they really are much more accepted into the team, and much less 'the new guy'.

If you've recently started somewhere, and feeling a little disconnected from the rest of the team, get down the pub or bar with them and you will definitely notice the difference the next day. It's also true to say the heavier the session the more the bonding.

View on HN

A bonding session doesn't have to involve drinking. It's merely a cultural custom. Drinking has a lot of potentially unhealthy side-effects and while I don't think anyone should drastically change their behavior as a result of one simple study, it's worth taking a step back to look at the role alcohol plays in your life and whether its benefits are really worth the drawbacks.

True, but in cities like London, going for a drink in the evening is the easiest way (as a manager) to "summon up" some kind of bonding session. All the other alternatives take either a lot more money, or a lot more planning.

If I say, "let's go go-carting," that requires planning weeks in advance, and a substantial budget. Most people will turn up, and it will be a good bonding session.

If I say, "let's go to the restaurant," that requires a little bit of planning (days ahead), and a decent budget. A number of people won't turn up, and it will be an ok bonding session, depending on the type of restaurant and entertainment available.

If I say, "let's go for a drink," that requires no planning, and hardly any budget (just enough for a couple of rounds). Most people will turn up for at least the beginning unless they already have plans, and it will be a good bonding session.

All in all, the drinking session is very good bang for your buck - despite the health side-effects. Because of that, as the article suggests, it's unlikely to be replaced by anything else any time soon. Alcohol is a great social lubricant, and yes, if you don't want to drink at all, your career progression may be impaired in some companies.

As the article points out, though, even in heavy drinking environments, there are ways to "cheat" and be a part of the drinking without getting drunk all the time. It's very hard to get away with no drinking though.

So have a couple club sodas and lime. As long as you're tolerant of how the people with a little bit of a buzz going are acting, you shouldn't feel particularly excluded. If people do make a big fuss about it, you should probably find drinking buddies with more interesting things to talk about. :-)

That's one answer for some people. Regardless, it's missing the point that this study isn't saying "stop going out with friends for drinks!" It's an examination of social customs and their effects. That I can order a Shirley Temple with a straight face while others drink straight Jameson is largely irrelevant.

Yes, there benefits of going out for drinks. Those haven't been disputed, that I can see.

I had a boss, an ex-bartender, who always said that he didn't trust someone until he'd seen them good and drunk. It's hard to hide the inner a-hole throughout a night of drinking.

Hmm, I think a lot of it really comes down to letting your guard down. When you go out after work, do others drink? I'm really wondering if someone can get by with just having some soda or juice instead.

There are plenty of good reasons why some wouldn't want to drink alcohol -- religion, an alcoholic in the family, being a recovering alcoholic themselves, etc.

With that said, yeah, drinking with your teammates is a great way to get to know them better. You can all rant about random little things, take absurd positions in arguments, and it's all ok! And everyone eventually gets a turn to make a fool of themselves, so we end up accepting each other more -- shared secrets & all :-)

> I'm really wondering if someone can get by with just having some soda or juice instead.

Generally yes. There might be groups that would give you a hard time, but in pretty much every job or social circle I've been a part of, there's been at least one non-drinker; some for religious reasons, some recovering alcoholics, some just for personal preference. I've never seen someone excluded because of that.

Seems accurate. Except at banks and companies like Enron where sensible people wouldn't want to work anyway, the "macho WASP" culture that mandates drinking is dead.

I can't be drunk for medical reasons, but I can tolerate a beer or two. I get one of my favorite beers (I'm only having one so I can make it an expensive one) and then drink water for the rest of the evening.

getting drunk is potentially incapacitating. your're essentially signalling that you trust this new group enough to let your guard down around them. the more helpless you get, the stronger the signal.

I don't think that it ever benefits someone to become helpless. Letting your social guard down is one thing, but throwing up and passing out is another.

The heavy drinking comes from ancien regime/Wall Street machismo culture, but keep in mind that most of these guys have been drinking for a while and many are overweight. If you can't keep up with them without getting yourself into a compromised position, don't try.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com