The value that informal personal groups can add to the workplace
Utopia can become reality
Workplace teams are usually formal or semi-formal. They may exist permanently as part of organization structure or temporarily, as project teams. Beyond this lies a vast informal realm. Informal self-organizing teams develop between members who have a common interest and natural interpersonal affinity. Such teams can make for very fulfilling personal, and professional relationships.
How can informal personal groups add value to a workplace environment? What characteristics do they have? How do they emerge? To find answers, I reflect on my own memorable experience of one such team.
Forming
We were working on a project. The team was newly formed. Everyone was new and had never worked with or known anyone else before. Four of us sat together, near a corner of an irregularly shaped space. We were getting used to our desks and were starting to “recognize” each other. The project had special-expertise personnel. Our work, while inter-dependent overall, was independent at an individual level. The project was complex, with lots of ambiguity. No one knew what anyone else did. It was very early in the project. We were still trying to find our own bearings!
A call for coffee started the journey.
One day, (an extroverted) member made a call for coffee. We went to a cafe downstairs and enjoyed a coffee while getting to know each other. Then, to our surprise — the organizer offered to pay for everyone!
The next week, a call for coffee was made again.
We had quite different responsibilities so this was another great opportunity to get to know our immediate workmates better. Also, having received a ‘free coffee’ last time, there was perhaps a slight moral obligation to ‘repay’ the favour? We met again for coffee. This time, someone else offered to pay for the group. The first meeting set the ball rolling. The second meeting perpetuated that motion.
The week after that, the nascent Coffee Club met again.
This time someone else offered to pay for everyone. The norm of one person paying and collecting the stamps on the, now, ‘group’ coffee card, was established. The payment process became loosely structured. The loyalty card was rotated informally — the person who felt it was their turn next, kept the card at the end of one meeting. At the next, they would order collectively, gain the stamps, and transfer the card to the next volunteer.
A “coffee club” was born.
We soon started to develop rules. Some were rigid. For example, we always went away for a coffee — it had to be a break. Some were flexible. For example, we would meet depending on availability. If someone was busy, they’d skip. It was a work environment. That priority was clear.
A couple of people slipped in/out, but in the end, a core of 4–5 people became regulars. The “one-payer” system ensured that the group remained small and reinforced the collective nature and collective responsibility of the group.
“If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people together to collect wood and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.” — Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (The Little Prince)
Performing
The Coffee Club was a self-organizing group. There was no formal need for it. There was no gap in the organizational structure (or project communication mechanisms) that this group was trying to address.
It was an informal time for us to share our perspectives, questions and comments on many things. Being a workplace group, naturally, a lot of discussions was around topics related to the project in some way, either directly or indirectly. Personal discussions also almost invariably centred around technology (as we were all technophiles). Congeniality, however, was our core premise. We had a genuine interest in the subject matter of the project. Common interests and compatible personalities made the club a natural fit — and an instant hit.
Over coffees, we developed a broad cross-functional understanding various functional aspects, knew each other’s workload, understood our overall constraints better and equally could see opportunities for synergy. We knew more as we had obtained a wider context around our work. We understood each other better and through that understood our operating environment more insightfully. Our group was diverse. We belonged to different sub-teams and reported to different managers. Our ‘domains’ were quite different ranging from technology, through to policy and financials. This diversity allowed us to think holistically and indeed even abductively. Not surprisingly then, as the project progressed, the club assumed increased importance.
What started as a personal “break-time” became a performance enhancer, much like an extracurricular activity that sharpens academic results.
“The best teamwork comes from men who are working independently toward one goal in unison.” — James Cash Penney
Sustaining factors for personal groups
The Coffee Club was a personal network that effected better work and personal relationships. What made it special? What made it different from other self-organized personal groups in the workplace that I’ve seen or been a part of? Upon reflection, four factors were instrumental to this utopian combination.
The Right Way
I’ve seen several attempts at creating social bonds. There is random coffee with a (new) person. Some organizations are embracing this. There are also regular coffee sessions for teams (e.g. team coffee day or collectively venturing out to grab a coffee etc.). They try to spark the right things — social connections founded upon personal rapport. These attempts, however, are usually, dyadic (i.e. not a ‘team’), limited to a team (not cross-functional) or not bound by overarching common norms. For this reason, few are sustainable and even fewer are truly meaningful at influencing either extraordinary productivity or deep social cohesion.
The first (and hardest) step is being organic — and starting as a personal or social network as opposed to being a “nudge” for social cohesion within a formally established team.
Strong norms
A group I know was planning something similar and said they would love to have something like our (coffee club) set up. However, the idea of one person paying for a group, even on a rotating basis, was unacceptable to them!
The Coffee Club had strong norms., that required trust-based commitment. The main one was that it was a break so by definition it meant leaving our desks for a break — i.e. not ordering takeaway. The second was the payment system which had developed, where one person paid and everyone (voluntarily) took turns. Paying for 4 coffees and then getting the next three paid for by others is the same as a person buying a coffee for themselves. The difference here was the commitment and trust in a shared system.
Different routes but one destination
The project was multi-disciplinary. All of us had distinct and very different responsibilities but were bound by a tangible common objective. Despite different routes, there was one destination.
Informal personal networks in the workplace require a tangible common goal to maintain cohesiveness. If a network is too heterogenous, then after some initial meetings, the lack of a common goal at a tangible granular level will be evident, eroding the value of such networking. It can still be valuable as a personal network or as a ‘formal’ or ‘semi-formal’ personal network but not as an organic personal network that also adds value professionally. If the network is too homogenous, it risks becoming a substitute for routine meetings and interactions. Balance is crucial. In that sense, projects — which are cross-functional with a set objective and timeline, maybe inherently better suited for such networks to emerge?
Fun
If there is no fun, then nothing else matters. Self-organizing personal groups in the workplace must satisfy a personal outcome — even if it simply is a desire to take a break.
“Coming together is a beginning, staying together is progress, and working together is success.” — Henry Ford
Within any type of team, there is a virtuous tipping point — where collaboration makes a quantum leap from great to exhilarating. This point can be reached through two routes. We can have a formal team that introduces social mechanisms to try and reach this ideal state. Alternatively, we can have an informal team which comes together organically and uses the power of its natural chemistry to achieve goals beyond its original remit. The former has an extrinsic stimulus, is deliberate, and can have a ceiling. The latter has an intrinsic stimulus, is natural, and has unlimited potential.
Informal personal networks that develop organically and add value both personally and professionally, represent a utopia. They are rare. While they have some distinctive characteristics, we cannot design for them. They emerge — organically, as a result of various factors and personalities, coming together in a particular setting, at a particular time. When they do materialize, the difference is exponential and the impact is transformational.

