Read on Twitter
Some companies think political discussions belong in any part of their work space. Others feel they get in the way of other communication.
A suggestion to reject false trade-offs: actively create spaces for these conversations.
A suggestion to reject false trade-offs: actively create spaces for these conversations.
At Asana, this primarily takes the form of employee resource groups. We have them for many kinds of identity, and some spaces are for those groups only and some are ally-friendly. They each have Asana team pages (with projects, e.g. to share articles) and Slack channels.
We readily create more dedicated channels in Slack like #americanpolitics, #climate-change, #coronavirus, etc.
(We also have #canadapolitics, but it's... not the same.)
(We also have #canadapolitics, but it's... not the same.)
When shocking events happen, people need to be able to share and process their feelings together. So we create dedicated live venues, like an open-mic zoom.
Before COVID, we did this in person (and encouraged smaller events in our other offices if someone was interested).
Before COVID, we did this in person (and encouraged smaller events in our other offices if someone was interested).
We do *nothing* to restrict speech elsewhere, but I rarely see it. The conversations that are happening do not get in the way, and everyone is more effective for having access to them.
People bring all their feelings to work, even if you don't let them show. Let them show.
People bring all their feelings to work, even if you don't let them show. Let them show.
I want to be clear, none of the above is about the company itself taking a stand. Asana chooses to, in certain areas, and many other companies do not, or choose different areas. I don't know where that's headed, but I see it as separate from how employees talk to each other.
