An Analysis of Workplace Romance: Management Psychology and Strategies

This essay delves into the multifaceted topic of workplace romance, examining its prevalence, underlying causes, and impact on organizational dynamics. It begins by defining workplace romance and highlighting its increasing prevalence, supported by survey data. The paper then explores various policies and processes organizations implement to manage workplace relationships, including no-dating policies, notification policies, and love contracts, while also considering employee legal rights. The essay investigates the psychological drivers behind workplace romance, such as time spent together, proximity, similarity, and even hook-up culture, and analyzes both the pros and cons of workplace relationships, encompassing improved worker performance, motivation, positive work environments, and fewer distractions, as well as potential negative impacts like gossip, emotional distress after breakups, promotion challenges, and work-life conflicts. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for organizations to develop comprehensive and consistent policies to navigate the complexities of workplace romance and mitigate potential legal and interpersonal issues.

Student’s Last Name 1
Management Psychology
By (Name)
Course
Professor
University
Date

Student’s Last Name 2
Introduction
A recent survey by CareerBuilder.com which engaged 8,000 indicated that in every 10
employees, 4 have dated a person in the workplace. The survey further notes that 17% of them
have dated at least twice (Pierce, Karl, and Brey, 2012 p.238). By definition, workplace romance
occurs when two individuals working in the same organization develop or portray a relationship
based on mutual attraction. Multiple studies have shown that intermingling in the work in the
working environment may reduce productivity and morale at work (Schaefer and Tudor, 2011
p.97; Pierce, Karl, and Brey, 2012 p.239). Various theories have been submitted to explain the
pervasiveness of this trend in the modern business world with one of them indicating that the
number of single individuals in the workplace is growing day by day. Another theory explains
that the increased workplace relationships can be attributed to convenience and proximity, not to
mention the commonality and familiarity. Often are the times when employees engage in chit
chats and gossips. Revisiting the survey by CareerBuilder, 72% of employees engaging in
workplace relationships do not hide their escapades, compared to a relatively lower figure of
46% five years ago or thereabouts. Interoffice relationships, either among individuals in different
departments or equals in the workplace, presents significant negative reactions and
complications. On the same note, women are seemingly judged more than men, though both
genders engage in the activity.
Policies and Processes
Pierce, Karl, and Brey (2012) conducted a study aimed at unraveling what impacts
workplace romance procedures and policies have on job search intentions. 79 casino workers,
along with 103 business students acted as job seekers. They read one out of the five varieties of

Student’s Last Name 3
vignette dictating about an organization's consensual relationship agreement and policies relating
to romance and concluded measures of control and dependent variables. The findings indicated
that the nature of romance policy in an organization has an impact on an individual’s perception
regarding policy fairness and the extent to which a company would be a worthy environment to
work. Moreover, the nature of an organization's consensual relationship agreement impacts an
individual’s perception of the level of fairness in the organization. The results of the study also
point out that the perceptions of individuals on the fairness of a certain relationship agreement
and romance policy are positively related to the level they consider a workplace environment to
be fun. The positive perceptions make the organization attractive, which, in its turn, contributes
to positive job pursuit intentions.
In essence, every organization should put in place policies regarding workplace romance.
In the absence of a clear-cut policy, workplace romance can cause legal consequences to the
employer including charges of sexual harassment. Although some organizations have no policies
on workplace dating, that puts them in a liable situation if, for instance, a supervisor provides a
poor review to the former partner. For this reason, organization has found it needful to
incorporate various workplace romance policies. One type of a policy that has been adopted is
the no-dating policy. The policy generally prohibits romantic relationships between the
supervisor and the juniors. Various thinkers note that these policies can be problematic since it is
challenging to outline which behaviors will be banned. In the case of Ellis v. United Parcel
Service, the 7th Circuit appellate court validated a no-dating policy that prohibited managers
from engaging in intimate relationships with hourly workers, as long as it was enforced

Student’s Last Name 4
consistently (Boyd, 2010 p.326). In its perspective, however, the court maintained that the policy
might have stretched beyond limits.
Another notable policy that has been consistently applied by organizations is the
notification policy. This policy requires employees to notify the company whenever they engage
in a romantic relationship. Essentially, this makes it easier for the company to protect its
employees from sexual harassment charges if the relationship was not reported as consensual. If
employees are to report to the company when they enter into a romantic relationship, however,
they must also report to the company whenever they decide to terminate their relationship. This
is the major reason why notification policies are somewhat regarded as intrusive. For privacy
purposes, the manager who is being notified of the consensual relationship must try his/her best
to keep it a secret. The third type of policy, also often adopted by organizations is the love
contracts. This is basically a confirmation that is written to the management indicating that any
sort of relationship among workers is nothing but consensual (Mainiero, and Jones, 2013 p.326).
In some instances, the contract may include a written acknowledgment by the employees that
they have taken note of the dating policy as drafted by the company as well as the expected
behaviors such as acts of retaliating upon termination of the relationship.
The fourth type of policy applied by many organizations is the employee’s legal rights.
Looking at the case of Lawrence v. Texas, for instance, the United States Supreme Court aborted
a Texas regulation which prohibited consensual homosexual relationships. The court interpreted
the law as one which was aimed at denying consenting adults the right to engage in romantic
relationships. In other terms, it is wrong for employers to prohibit romance at the workplace as
this is an outright violation of the employees’ right to privacy as stipulated in the constitution. As

Student’s Last Name 5
attorney Ray Gallo notes, forcing employees to make the hard choice of either engaging in a
romantic relationship or quitting their jobs is nothing short of privacy invasion. Instead,
organizations should make it a requirement for employees to report their relationship as this
would not be considered an invasion of privacy (Karl and Sutton, 2012 p.430). To conclude,
organizations need to follow a certain guideline when drafting their workplace romance policies.
Minimization of potential legal liability, for example, is essential when formulating such
policies. Multiple sources submit that one of the essential aspects to consider when writing a
dating policy is to limit or prohibit relationships involving supervisors and their subordinates.
Policies about workplace relationships should create a channel for identifying relationships that
turned sour, and on the same note, employers must be vigilant about any scenario that could be
termed as harassment. Policies should be consistently applied and also state distinctively how
decisions will be formulated.
Why workplace romance occurs
When the topic of workplace romance is mentioned, one of the main questions that
lingers in many people’s mind is why people date at work. On this note, Quinn took the role of
presenting a typology motive in 1997. Quinn’s work submits that people engage in romantic
endeavors for love (for instance caring and authentic love), ego (for instance to some romance
can be exciting), and job motives (for instance the need to get a career opportunity) (Jones, 2012
p.270). Given that, since 1977, there have been remarkable societal and workplace changes, there
is need to revise the workplace romance typology.
There are various drivers of workplace romance. One of the factors is time. Given the
fact that employees spend most of their time together, it is obvious that a relationship will

Student’s Last Name 6
emanate out of that. Most employees spend 12 hours or thereabouts together, and most of this
time is spent learning about each other’s lives (Lickey, Berry, and Whelan-Berry, 2009 p.206).
Also, it is more likely that if employees spend most of their time together, they will share
intimate details. The second reason why workplace romance occurs is due to ease of opportunity.
In other words, this means that the workplace environment offers a close proximity to fellow
colleagues. Taking the example of journalism coworkers, for instance, they cover war stories
together and thus they can be said to share the same memories. Moreover, some of the coworkers
share common interests which makes workplace romance inevitable. The third reason for
workplace romance is the similarity. Looking at this from a psychological perspective, people
embark on romantic relationships due to the similarities they unravel when working together. As
a consequence of the similarities, they become more comfortable in the working environment.
Some thinkers assert that similarity plays a greater role in workplace romance more than even
the first physical attraction (Cole, 2009 p.233). If individuals are attracted to each other or they
share some sort of similarity, then it is quite understandable is they spark something romantic.
The fourth cause of workplace romance is what is commonly referred to as hook-ups.
This means that people in the workplace environment may be driven into a romantic relationship
by sexual desires. Though it starts with something that is more of physical with no emotions
attached, it could materialize into something that will last forever. The many years of research
have uncovered that people are likely to embark on workplace romance due to multiple motives
(Ariani, Ebrahimi, and Saeedi, 2011p.99). Romantic relationships come with their fair share of
complications, but workplace romances are associated with unique challenges considering that
individuals spend the most time with their romantic partners/coworkers, and at the same time,

Student’s Last Name 7
struggle to control the coworkers’ perceptions. This means that people who are in a workplace
romance or those who are planning to engage in one should familiarize themselves with the
challenges and implications that come along with such relationships. Such implications should,
and can be, controlled. Also, HR professionals should try their level best to equip their offices so
that they are in a position to understand and manage romance in the workplace.
Pros and Cons of Workplace Relationships
Pros
There are many pros and cons of workplace romance as outlined in this paper. To start
with the pros, workplace romance helps people be good workers. Based on studies, people who
are in love and working close to each other are said to be the most productive. Second,
workplace romance provides people with motivation to start a new day. This is because the
thought of meeting each other at the workplace is really exciting. Third, workplace romance
enhances positivity everywhere. Institutions which have supportive policies about workplace
relationships enhance positive vibes and the atmosphere is filled with love (Pierce, Broberg,
McClure and Aguinis, 2014 p.66). Fourth, workplace relationships contribute to fewer
distractions. This is because people tend to focus on work and not calling their partners wherever
they are working (Lickey, Berry and Whelan-Berry, 2009 p.110). Finally, workplace romance
facilitates mutual understanding in regard to professional pressures.
An example of an advantageous work romance involves a couple working at a molecular
biology laboratory at New York. The wife was working as a technical support while the husband
was an engineer. The couple was very supportive of each other and they kept their relationship

Student’s Last Name 8
secret. The couple even went for dates and they were completely available for each other.
Clearly, the couple says that it was their remarkable moment and they really enjoyed working at
the same place.
Cons
In analyzing the cons it is evident that workplace romance commingling the personal life
of a people. It means that their life cannot be secret anymore (Amaral, 2006 p.10). Every
individual in the organization wants to gossip about the relationship. Second, workplace romance
makes people keep wondering what would happen if it ends. People who romance in the office
find it pleasing to see their partners every day (Aguinis and Pierce, 2008 p.1400. However, if the
relationship ends it becomes a nightmare to see your partner every day. This feeling makes a
person not to want to report to work. Workplace romance may affect promotions at work (Riach
and Wilson, 2007 p.80). In case one partner is promoted they have to exercise professional
responsibilities which may require the two to remain casual. It may create difficult time between
the two in case there is a promotion. Fourth, workplace romance may cause a situation where
work cannot be evaded in case there is a fight between the partners (Biggs, Matthewman and
Fultz, 2012 p.273). It is obvious that personal fights will be carried at the workplace and creates
an uncomfortable environment. Finally, workplace romance can be viewed in the perspective of
too much of something is poison (Gautier, 2017 p.8). To explain further, spending much time
with a partner make result in a boring relationship. The excitement of partners when they meet
each other at the workplace may end with time.
An example of a disadvantageous workplace romance is a story given by Olivia. Olivia
used to work with her boyfriend at Nuclear Power Company. However, Olivia says it was quite

Student’s Last Name 9
uncomfortable for them to work at the same place when they the relationship ended. Olivia says
they had to work avoiding eye contact and communicating with each other even when they had
an important matter to address.

Student’s Last Name 10
Bibliography
Aguinis, H., and Pierce, C.A., 2008. Enhancing the relevance of organizational behavior by
embracing performance management research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 29(1),
pp.139-145.
Amaral, H.P., 2006. Workplace romance and fraternization policies.
Ariani, M.G., Ebrahimi, S.S. and Saeedi, A., 2011. Managing workplace romance; a headache
for human resource leaders. International Proceedings of Economics Development and Research,
19, pp.99-103.
Biggs, D., Matthewman, L. and Fultz, C., 2012. Romantic relationships in organizational
settings: Attitudes on workplace romance in the UK and USA. Gender in Management: An
International Journal, 27(4), pp.271-285.
Boyd, C., 2010. The debate over the prohibition of romance in the workplace. Journal of
Business Ethics, 97(2), pp.325-338.
Cole, N., 2009. Workplace romance: A justice analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology,
24(4), p.363.
Gautier, C., 2017. Managing romance in the workplace. Journal of Employee Assistance, 1,
pp.7-9.
Jones, G.E., 2012. Hierarchical workplace romance: An experimental examination of team
member perceptions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, pp.1057-1072.

Student’s Last Name 11
Karl, K.A. and Sutton, C.L., 2012. An examination of the perceived fairness of workplace
romance policies. Journal of Business and Psychology, 14(3), pp.429-442.
Lickey, N.C., Berry, G.R. and Whelan-Berry, K.S., 2009. Responding to workplace romance: a
proactive and pragmatic approach. The Journal of Business, 8(1), pp.100-119.
Lickey, N.C., Berry, G.R. and Whelan-Berry, K.S., 2009. Responding to workplace romance: a
proactive and pragmatic approach. The Journal of Business, 8(1), pp.100-119.
Mainiero, L.A. and Jones, K.J., 2013. Workplace romance 2.0: Developing a communication
ethics model to address potential sexual harassment from inappropriate social media contacts
between coworkers. Journal of business ethics, 114(2), pp.367-379.
Pierce, C.A., Broberg, B.J., McClure, J.R., and Aguinis, H., 2014. Responding to sexual
harassment complaints: Effects of a dissolved workplace romance on decision-making standards.
Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 95(1), pp.66-82.
Pierce, C.A., Karl, K.A. and Brey, E.T., 2012. Role of workplace romance policies and
procedures on job pursuit intentions. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 27(3), pp.237-263.
Riach, K. and Wilson, F., 2007. Don't screw the crew: Exploring the rules of engagement in
organizational romance. British Journal of Management, 18(1), pp.79-92.
Schaefer, C.M., and Tudor, T.R., 2011. Managing workplace romances. SAM Advanced
Management Journal, 66(3), p.4.