In theory, professional relationships imply a certain distance. However, it’s not uncommon for workers to take a few liberties with their closest colleagues, notably by giving them nicknames. For example, Catherine might become “Cat” or Alexander “Alex”, making the workplace feel more friendly.
But sometimes, employees think up more elaborate nicknames for their colleagues, like “Number Cruncher” for Matthew in accounts, or “Ice Queen” for Karen, the fierce manager feared by her subordinates.
At first glance, nicknames might seem to help make the atmosphere more relaxed in the workplace. But this is not necessarily the case, as the use of these monikers at work can be a marker of power differences and distance between groups.
Researchers Zhe Zhang and Shuili Du demonstrated this after conducting several experiments involving over 1,000 American employees, who were asked to put themselves in the shoes of an employee who had just joined a new company.
They were divided into four groups: members of the first group were told to call their new boss “Panda”, in reference to their black-and-white attire. Those in the second group were told that their manager had taken to calling one of their subordinates “Panda” for the same reason.
Participants in the third group were told that their new colleagues called their boss by name, and those in the fourth were informed that the same boss called their colleagues by their respective first names.
The volunteers were then asked to answer a series of questions assessing how powerful, respected, and psychologically safe they would feel in the work environment described to them by the researchers.
The findings, published via the pre-publication site SSRN, indicated that employees felt more at ease in their new fictitious company when the use of nicknames was reserved for employees. They viewed it positively, for instance, when a boss agreed to be called “Panda” by his subordinates.
“When someone in a position of power invites others to call them by a nickname, it makes them seem down to earth and in touch with the people around them,” the researchers explained in the Harvard Business Review.
Conversely, calling a subordinate by a nickname seems far more reprehensible: this familiarity is perceived as a lack of respect, not as something fun or good-natured.
Furthermore, the experts found that the use of nicknames can be more or less well perceived depending on the organisational structure of the company. Nicknames are associated with flexible, horizontal and egalitarian relationships, but they have no place in a pyramid-shaped organisation, where managers stand apart from the “managed”.
Generally, it’s best to refrain from giving nicknames to the people you work with; it’s always preferable to call colleagues by their given or preferred name, or possibly by a shortened version of it if they’re happy with that.
Of course, it all depends on the broader culture of the organisation or its geographical location. In Brazil, for example, the use of nicknames, or “apelido” in Portuguese, is much more widespread than in many other countries. Indeed, the country’s president is better known as Lula than as Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva.
Still, if you don’t live or work in this kind of culture, it’s probably best to keep workplace nicknames to yourself.