back
30 comments
This is pretty interesting in light of my hosting Hacker and Founders in Silicon Valley and San Fran (Meetup on thursday if you're interested http://hackersandfounders.com ).

We've tried a lot of different formats: coffee shop, lectures and presentations. None of them work for us quite as well as going to a bar and chatting. We've thought a lot about this over the past two years.

People instinctively understand that when they go to a bar, they are there to relax and have a good time. A lot of times, people are really stressed out from a long day at work, and would like to have a drink, unwind and chat. People don't tend to unwind in a coffee shop or a restaurant. While I've certainly enjoyed the lobby chat at conferences I've been to, but bar talk with the geeks at hackers and founders tends to be a lot better imho.

I'd also say, that the best business relationships that I've developed have involved social alcohol. I grew up in a teetotaler household, and I've made a point of learning how to drink socially and responsibly. Frankly, it requires practice. I think it's actually a pretty valuable social skill to have in the startup world.

Final point. We've pretty much standardized on having alcohol at every Hackers and Founders Silicon Valley, and I have yet to see a single person get drunk, or concern me that they were going to be unsafe while driving.

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.

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.

What a fantastic way to extinguish through overanalysis any joy that might have been had from the simple pleasure going for a quick drink after work. I realise that drinking cultures might vary enormously but I just don't recognise the fraught environment that is being presented here; I have never seen anyone put under pressure for not drinking, and "White wine won't mix with the whiskey crowd"? Really? I like to go out with work colleagues on occasion. I find that if you are going to spend eight hours a day with some people it helps to get to know them personally a little bit, and this in turn eases the working relationship. This doesn't have to be achieved by going to the pub; that's just a social norm. In some cultures a convivial gathering might mean drinking sweet tea and smoking a hookah, but in mine it involves booze.
It's not overanalysis. The fact that drinking and losing sleep is physically unhealthy, along with the fact that there's widespread social pressure to partake, means that the question is worth exploring. You don't have to agree with the answer, but your dismissive and defensive attitude is exactly why a study like this is worthwhile.

If you aren't someone who prefers not to drink, you probably don't really understand where the pressure comes from.

Every single time you go out with new people, people make comments on your lack of drinking. Either the fact that you ordered a 7-up or that it's been 3 hours and you still haven't finished your first beer. Plus the bar itself is designed to sell alcohol, so there's inherent pressure just by being there.

My primary career (IT) doesn't involve a lot of people going out drinking on a regular basis. But I sing for fun, and in that field people are constantly out late, and yes there is pressure to drink. EVERYONE who goes out drinks more than me, and even people I've known for a year or more still make comments. And lately I've had to skip the drinking night because I have to be up at 6:30 AM the next morning for a meeting. I feel much better physically and mentally but I'm socially out of touch.

Plus, there's the matter of being at the bar when your regular bedtime passes and your melatonin starts kicking in. All the drinkers don't even notice and sit around yammering for another hour or four while you sit there yawning.

"If you aren't someone who prefers not to drink, you probably don't really understand where the pressure comes from."

Some of us who do choose to drink at times also choose not to drink on certain occasions - e.g. weeknight w/ workout or yoga at 0630. There's definite social pressure to drink at a "drinking establishment" but I don't recall anyone ever wedging my jaws open and funneling beer down my throat.

Hold your own frame and never let your reality be dominated by the throwaway comments of others.

If you want to use a decoy, get a 1/2 cranberry / 1/2 soda with a wedge of lime. Looks like a "real" drink.

I don't recall anyone ever wedging my jaws open and funneling beer down my throat.

That's really why I made the post. Just to explain that this study fully understands that most people do not have beer forced down their throats and instead examined broader trends. My point was to show that there is a whole spectrum between not feeling any pressure and being threatened at gunpoint.

It seems that socializing over alcohol is the lowest common denominator for after work activities. Personally I would rather socialize over a nice meal or go play some multiplayer games or plan an outing to an airsoft field. But after work, in a metro area, the bars are plenty and accessible.

I wish someone taught me the strategy of socializing over drinks. As an introvert, I avoided these kind of events and really didn't get anywhere in terms of progressing through the corporate ranks. Realizing that I needed to change me behavior, I started joining these events. It really is a good opportunity to grease the bureaucratic wheels found in corporation to get things done during the work day. It's a teachable skill.

Now my work day really doesn't end when I leave the office. It's "business beers" in the evenings.

I'm a practising Mormon and so don't drink but often hang-out after work with others. My career has been progressing very well in my opinion and not drinking hasn't had an effect as far as I can tell.

I think that being it is being sociable with others that helps you move up rather than specifically drinking.

I have to agree - although I've done the business drinking thing myself, a very little, I think most of the pressure is people wanting you to validate what they know is stupid behavior. If you laugh with them and make it clear you don't care that they're killing their own brain cells, most of them won't hold it against you. Self-deprecating humor is best.
The point that surprised me the most was the study about lower salaries for non-drinkers (-12.8% for men and -25.5% for women). While the study is from 1988 I'm curious how much has changed in the meantime. Although I'm in doubt that the sole reason for this discrepancy is the willingness to drink.

Maybe you earn more in the investigated industries if you are an outgoing "people person". And maybe you are more likely to drink if you are outgoing. It's the old causation/correlation thing. But still interesting.

I am REALLY suspicious of statistics like that. Are we including people too young to drink (21 in the US) who will be on much lower pay anyway? Let's see it as "people in industry X in city Y age Z" and I bet it's not so much.
Maybe non-drinkers simply have different priorities. My recollection is that more education is strongly correlated with less smoking and that it is a stronger correlation than the one between more income and less smoking. In other words, well educated people who don't make a whole lot of money are still less likely to smoke. Often, well educated people who don't make much money have consciously chosen to pursue some other priority which they value more than a high income.
The pub is part of our interview process. Before taking anyone on we take them to lunch and they meet everyone in the office they will work with. It's an opportunity to meet people and see how well they get on. When we get back we have a discussion about the candidate and whether or not we should hire them, if they don't fit in, no hire.

I appreciate it's an unfair test and that only the dumbest candidates wouldn't realise that this is part of the interview process but being outside of the office, having an opportunity to talk with the people that you'll work with gives the candidate as much of a view of whether or not they want to work with us as the other way around.

There's much less pressure to drink at lunch than at happy hour.
What about interviewees who don't drink (for personal or religious reasons)?
Presumably if they go along to the pub, have a soft drink, and get along with everyone, they pass the test.
If the mangers can't stand working with someone their going to favour another person who they like to work with and fits their mood and culture. Even if the other person is a better candidate for the position, we don't work in a bubble, the relationships between people are going to play a part.

There would be workplaces which work the other way, where people abstaining from alcoholic fueled after work events look more favourable.

Correlation does not equal causation.
There is no ladder.
It seems like this applies to people who want to ascend to upper-management in large companies, where drinking the right drinks and playing the right sports matters.

On the other hand, I know a lot of small businesses that have been hit very badly by a partner or early employee with drinking, gambling, or other character issues. They tend to be much less into the alcoholism. Social drinking's one thing, but the "3-martini lunch" is ridiculous. Software isn't like Mad Men.