Let’s say you’ve got a work meeting held over three days in a remote state park. Almost like a retreat, but mandatory.
The boss, knowing that she and others like to run, decides to hold a race on one of the park trails during the meeting. A three-mile race. To get people interested, she sends out invitations to everyone who’s going to the meeting (about thirty people), complete with a map of the course.
Does this strike you as a good idea? Cause initially, I thought, “Wow, that sounds cool”. But now the worry-wart, overly-cautious part of me is thinking otherwise.
The pros:
It’s one of those rallying-together activities that people will talk about for a long time.
The people doing it will think it’s fun, and people who won’t be participating can always stand on the sidelines and cheer.
There won’t be any prizes, just bragging rights, so it’s all in good fun.
It’s a “healthy” way to have fun.
The cons:
Even if most of the employees are runners, there will inevitably be those who can’t run three-miles. Even people who are in shape might not be able to do the three miles in the time period designated for the race. So it favors long-distance runners. Not very inclusive. If an employee decides not to participate, will they risk being seen in an unfavorable light by the boss, as either a lazy slob or loner? Will the employees who do participate be seen in a better light? What about the employee who does participates but shows up last?
It could be dangerous. Someone might twist an ankle or break a leg or have a heart attack. Since this activity is being scheduled during a mandatory meeting, would these be work-related injuries?
This isn’t an athletic related business, so the ability to run isn’t a part of the job requirement.
I’m just curious if I’m the only one who thinks this is a well-intentioned-but-may-come-off-badly idea.
If it is the first time this boss has done something like this I’d say it’s a little ambitious. If tsaid Boss has done something like this in the past, or if people know she is VERY fit and likes to exercise and there is a decent number of people in the office who are like minded, I see no reason not to do it.
It’s actually great team building exercise and one that can promote many facets of a good management team. I’ve been invloved with wilderness training [read corporate retreats in the woods] and they are some of the best ways to knock a couple layers off people (both figuratively and physically) and to strengthen a bond between coworkers.
I like the idea even if everyone can’t do it. I’d bet the boss - if she is a good one - has thought of this and has plans for people who cannot participate. At least a good boss would have a contingency.
That sounds like a terrible idea to me, but I’m not a runner. If I knew that the highlight of our mandatory, three-day long retreat was a race that I couldn’t participate in, I would feel excluded, inferior, and mad (those of us not in good shape really like to have our noses rubbed in it, don’t you know). I don’t even think it’s well-intentioned; it sounds very self-absorbed to me, with no thought given to people who aren’t interested in running.
Actually, the race doesn’t matter, since I would be sick that weekend and unable to attend the mandatory three-day meeting, anyway.
My advice to you, monstro, since your initial reaction was that it sounds cool is to go ahead and enjoy it without overthinking it. You’re an employee here, you have the good fortune of having something the boss thinks is cool be something you also think is cool. Cool. Next time it may be a 24-hour skunk-wrestling marathon for charity, so take take advantage while you can.
If I were in your HR dept. advising your boss, I’d probably advise her against it, for essentially the reasons you state. Or at least I’d make some suggestions to her, like a corresponding activity for non-runners at the same time that also allowed employees to network with a manager. Maybe a non-strenuous hike or nature photography outing. Yes, an injury almost certainly would be Workers Comp. since it is a required work event. A friend of mine just had knee surgery a few weeks ago from a mishap at a work-related bonding activity.
I only run to catch a train, but I wouldn’t be bothered by this. I would either show up and walk three miles, or stay back at camp and enjoy 45 minutes of peace. It would be better if the invite were open to non-runners, to walk or run as much of the 3 miles as we could, but I wouldn’t think about it too much if this were left out, it seems almost implicit.
I’ve been pretty lucky, I can’t think of a single boss who would be upset about an employee opting out of a stupid team run. So if this did cause a conflict, I think it would really be an indicator of larger problems.
IMHO it’s a bad idea, akin to a golf outing in which business issues will certainly be discussed, and those who cannot or do not participate are left out. Opportunities will arise for the fit and motivated that will exclude the unfit or unwilling. And the activity itself is not related to the business.
I think it’s a good idea, seconding the idea that she should say that whoever wants to can walk, or even ride a bike, or whatever. Whatever activity you plan, there will probably be someone who can’t/doesn’t want to participate. And I would think those who don’t want to would be happy for the “time off.” I do like to run, so probably my response is colored by that. On the other hand, I hate golfing, but I wouldn’t mind if there was a golf component, during which I could run or read a book or sleep.
BAH! A nasty idea. Why won’t these people get the idea that people like to work in work time and do running or any other hobby of choice in their own free time?
Grrrrrr. Grumpy person, me.
Not a bad idea, just not thought completely through. Harriet already mentioned the suggestion I was going to make. Have alternate activities for those who won’t be participating for whatever reason. Something besides cheerleader.
And I’d make sure that your work insurance covers all the possible things that can go wrong with this particular venture.
Terrible, awful, no good idea for the reasons already mentioned, to the point where I would wonder if the person suggesting it was brain-damaged or autistic to the point of being socially crippled something.
Kind of like life.
I personally think these boondogles are a waste of time and money, but if the company wants to pay be to go on a mini vacation for three days, who am I to argue?
I don’t think a three mile jog/run/walk is a big deal. God forbid you do something healthy for an hour instead of, say, a company happy hour or pizza and ice cream party. Events shouldn’t be dictated by the fattest and frailest of us.
That said, it shouldn’t be a forced march either. People should be able to go at their own pace or not at all (but they should be there as a spectator) and the boss shouldn’t be some over-enthusiastic idiot cheering on the urging people until they have a heart attack.
And of course the company may be liable for any injuries that occur during one of it’s activities.
Maybe not, but they should be considered, and it doesn’t sound to me like they were given any consideration by a boss who sounds like a fitness nut. The point of an activity for a diverse group of people is there should be something for everything, not just an activity that the boss happens to enjoy personally. I’d be just as pissed off if the only activity planned for a three-day outing was a Dungeons and Dragons tournament or a bible meeting.
Why don’t they have folks arm wrestle for yearly bonuses?
Add me to the list of meeting/retreat haters. ISTM that they might be able to include the run if they also encouraged people to walk, or made bikes available, and then did some BS about how each person contributes in different ways.
But like I said, I hate this kind of workplace crap.
Terrible idea. If any one has an accident, your firm will get sued up the wazzoo.
Will all of the runners have medical clearance to participate in a run? Has the course been approved by some sort of athletic organization? Is your firm going to supply trained medical staff to deal with emergencies? Is holding this run “in a remote state park” negligent? Is there a helicopter on standby?
This kind of event is what ambulance chasing lawyers have wet dreams about.
Tell them that although you aren’t a runner you are a very keen shooter. So before they set off you will position yourself somewhere along the route with your .256 magnum loaded with only one cartridge per runner. Let them know that to make things reasonably competitive you will only be shooting over open sights and only one shot per runner.
Unless, of course, you don’t have the stamina or the physical capability to go 3 miles at one stretch. For me, it would be a very big deal. I’m not talking about needing a handicap tag on the car, but as someone with spinal arthritis and sciatica, there’s no way I go 3 miles on foot without being in severe pain. And when I say “fit” I mean physical fitness for this activity. If we’re talking desk workers, no way does the ability to walk 3 miles have anything to do with job fitness. Such an activity offers networking and other advantages to a select group and excludes others.
IMHO these type of “team-building” activities are a crock. They confuse cause and effect. Somebody saw a group that functioned well together and noticed that they tended to socialize outside of the job and assumed that if all groups were forced to socialize outside the workplace they would also function well. In reality the reason for the socializing was that they worked well together, not the other way around.
I mean, this is such an awful idea that I’m starting to wonder if you left out the detail that this is somehow a running-related company or something. It’s just such a totally horrible, misguided idea on every level.
We are getting to be a scaredy cat society, aren’t we? The OP specifically said that not everyone had to participate. If people were forced or pressured to, that would be one thing, but if the people who want to do it, and those who don’t watch or do something else, I’d be fine with it. Sure injuries would be work related, but so are injuries from slipping on the stairs in the office. That there are no prizes make me think this is for the joy of running (for those who feel that joy) not for competition. I trust the time allotted will be enough to let even the slowest finish.
I’ve done team building exercises, which were more fun than I would have thought. I don’t think they did much for real team building, but one day not in the office is a plus. One company I worked at, when there was money, let us do group activities like paintball and go-kart racing, both a lot riskier than a run.
I’m all for it. I assume the boss has a purpose for spending this money. Sometimes it is good to have a break from being locked up with your computer or in meetings.
ETA: BTW, I’m not a runner, though I’m in reasonably good shape. So my support for this is not a case of my getting my regular exercise in on company time.
Regarding liability: I know of a company picnic that was held off site off hours (a Saturday at an employee’s home, IIRC) where an employee broke her wrist while playing volleyball. Because it was officially a work picnic, the injury was a “work injury” and subject to workman’s comp.
We’ve had similar questions regarding such trips at my place of employment. One group has a yearly ski trip that is only marginally for skiing with the majority of the time as a group meeting/review. It is held over two days. Hourly employees asked if they would be getting overtime. They were told that since the trip is not mandatory, they would not be paid overtime. They responded that they would rather not attend the non-mandatory event. Management told them that their attendance was required anyway and opting out was out of the question. Sounds mandatory to me. I believe HR got involved and the hourly empolyees in question did not attend.
