Shared experiences, big or small, can transform how coworkers interact. (Dragana Gordic/Shutterstock)
In a nutshell
- Shared memories, even difficult ones like strikes or firings, can unite employees across department lines, transforming workplace divisions into coordinated collaboration.
- Initial resistance between occupational groups often stems from conflicting narratives about workplace history, with each group holding different memories of their roles, status, and past treatment.
- Even small, memorable experiences can help foster cross-departmental trust, making employees more likely to support each other and work together effectively.
BINGHAMTON, N.Y. — Ever been caught in the middle of workplace drama where people who normally avoid each other suddenly band together? Maybe it happened after a round of surprise layoffs or when a beloved boss got fired. A new international study shows this isn’t just random office politics; it’s actually a powerful psychological phenomenon that can transform how different departments work together.
The study, published in the Journal of Management Studies, is based on data that researchers gathered from years of studying a South Korean broadcasting company. They found that when management started firing union leaders during a labor dispute, employees from completely different departments, who typically avoided or even disliked each other, suddenly started coordinating like never before. The secret ingredient? Shared memories of what they’d been through together.
“Once there was a common word called strike, we started to speak a common language,” says one administrator, in a statement.
And these findings aren’t limited to high-stakes situations. Even something as simple as grabbing pizza with colleagues could help form those crucial shared memories.
How Workplace Divisions Form
Think about a typical workplace. Accounting probably keeps to themselves, marketing has their own lingo, and IT seems to operate in a different universe altogether. These divides aren’t just about different job descriptions; they’re rooted in how each group remembers its place in the company’s history.
At the broadcasting company, reporters saw themselves as the heroic founders who had protected the organization through difficult times. Meanwhile, engineers, producers, and administrators remembered being treated as second-class citizens by those same reporters. One technician put it bluntly: “When I hear ‘techies are also journalists,’ it doesn’t really sink in.” He explained that during previous company protests, “it’s the journalists on TV at the center of the frame. We were in the background.”
These competing memories initially made cooperation impossible. When reporters first tried to rally other departments to their cause, they hit a wall of resistance. One producer summed up the feeling: “They’ve made their bed, now lie in it.”
The Power of Shared Experience
The turning point came when reporters realized they couldn’t succeed alone. They started acknowledging the importance of other departments and promising to stand with them.
This strategy got people in the door, but what really transformed the situation was when management fired union leaders from different departments. Suddenly, everyone had a powerful shared experience, a memory they all participated in together.
With this shared memory as their foundation, the different groups started actually working together. Entertainment producers created eye-catching flash mobs and YouTube content. Reporters brought in influential figures to join rallies. Engineers showed up in numbers to fill demonstration spaces.
Groups even began appreciating qualities in each other they’d previously criticized. Engineers’ tendency to move as a collective unit, once seen as rigid and hierarchical, became valued during the strike to unify participants.
Creating Shared Memories in Everyday Office Life
“One major takeaway from this research is that, for larger projects involving people in different occupations or experience levels within the same company, you’ll need some kind of shared experience that enables them not only to work more effectively together but also be more comfortable sharing their ideas,” says study author Matthew Lyle from Binghamton University.
But Lyle cautions that this phenomenon can have downsides. It has the potential to be a “double-edged sword” because it could also disrupt established groups in the office. After the strike ended, a divide emerged between those who participated and those who didn’t.
“Now, there’s a new group after the strike, with some people saying they could no longer see colleagues who chose an opposite side in the strike as good people,” says Lyle.
While the study focused on a dramatic workplace conflict, Lyle believes the lessons apply to everyday office interactions too. Even seemingly trivial experiences, like someone burning their mouth on hot pizza during a lunch outing, can create meaningful shared memories.
“When you’re in the in-group, you’re more likely to help each other out and have each other’s backs,” says Lyle. “We know we can create those things artificially, but why not create them around some shared experience that makes a memory, that makes people want to work together?”
Shared experiences between coworkers could be the bridge that turns different departments from rivals into allies. And maybe that awkward moment at the pizza place isn’t just an embarrassing story, it might be the foundation of more effective teamwork to come.
Paper Summary
Methodology
Researchers conducted a qualitative case study of a South Korean broadcasting company (TelvCorp) during a 170-day strike. They collected data between January 2010 and December 2013, conducting 55 semi-structured interviews with 44 informants from six occupational departments: reporters, current affairs producers, camera journalists, entertainment and drama producers, engineers and technicians, and administrators. The researchers supplemented these interviews with observation at 12 rallies and public campaigns, plus newsletters, newspaper articles, and social media content. They analyzed the data by identifying recurring themes and developing theoretical codes to create a model of how cross-occupational coordination evolved.
Results
The study found three phases leading to cross-departmental coordination. First, “cross-occupational mnemonic disunity” occurred when reporters tried to impose their nostalgic view of company history on other groups, who resisted based on their own negative memories of interactions with reporters. Second, “occupational evangelizing” emerged when reporters acknowledged other departments’ importance and promised to support them, gaining their participation but not true coordination. Finally, “cross-occupational mnemonic unity” developed after management fired union leaders from different departments, creating a shared traumatic memory that transcended occupational boundaries and enabled genuine coordination. This process formed a new “mnemonic community” that maintained its identity even after the strike ended, though it also weakened traditional departmental relationships.
Limitations
The study focused specifically on coordination during a labor strike, which may limit how applicable the findings are to other workplace situations like product development or technological changes. The researchers acknowledged that while they examined memory processes at the group level, organizational factors (like hiring practices) and individual differences likely influenced their findings. Additionally, since the study examined a single company in South Korea, the results might not fully apply to organizations in different cultural contexts.
Funding and Disclosures
The research was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A5A8042404), Yonsei Business Research Institute, and Yonsei Signature Research Cluster Program of 2024-22-0167.
Publication Information
The paper, titled “‘We Can Win this Fight Together’: Memory and Cross-Occupational Coordination,” was authored by Sung-Chul Noh from Hitotsubashi University, Matthew C. B. Lyle from Binghamton University, and Boram Do from Yonsei University. It was published in the Journal of Management Studies on September 29, 2024 and is available under open access terms.
