Borrels (Netherlands)

Borrels 🇳🇱
Location: Netherlands
Definition: A practice of informal social gathering for a drink that takes place in a professional setting in the Netherlands
Keywords: Netherlands – sociability – social cohesion – instrumentality – networking -
Author: Jan D. Meijer, MA
Affiliation: Leiden University, Institute of Political Science

By Jan D. Meijer, MA, Leiden University, Institute of Political Science [[Category: networking]

The literal meaning of a borrel is a small glass of strong liquor (Van Dale, 2018 ). The oldest known reference to the word is in a play from 1685, others appear on tavern signs from 1693 (Sanders, 1997 in: Sijs, 2010 ). This meaning of the word has generally remained unchanged, although over time it has come to refer to alcoholic beverages in general, including wine and beer. Een borrel drinken therefore roughly translates as 'to have a drink'. Over time, the word borrel increasingly came to refer to the practice of having a drink rather than the drink itself (WNT, 1894a ). Rather than being a name for a particular type of event, borrels refer to a broad category of gatherings. The word is often contextualised to specify its setting, occasion and meaning. Examples include bedrijfsborrel (at work), afstudeerborrel (on the occasion of graduating from university or high school) and vrijdagmiddagborrel (Friday afternoon drinks) - although they could all be referred to simply as borrels.

There are three defining characteristics of the borrel in all its variations. Firstly, a borrel may be intended for a certain audience, but it is rarely an exclusive event. There are no personal invitations or guest lists, and anyone who identifies with the target audience is in principle welcome to attend. As such, the threshold for outsiders to attend is relatively low. Attendees are often encouraged to bring their guests (so-called ‘introducees’, akin to ‘plus-one’ but not reserved for romantic partners or limited to one person). Secondly, the borrel has a voluntary and unofficial character. There is generally no obligation to attend, although sometimes attendance is expected more than for others. It is common for people to arrive and leave whenever they see fit – there are no strict ending times. The borrel takes place without protocol. Thirdly, a borrel takes place in an informal and relaxed atmosphere, more so than a reception. At the same time, it is not a private event. Other attendees are generally colleagues or fellow association members. Interaction at a borrel, therefore, seeks an appropriate balance between mostly informal conversation and professionally acceptable behaviour. Where that balance strikes exactly is highly dependent on the culture of the organisation, the relation with the people present and the context, and is generally found somewhere in a grey zone in-between.

Borrels are typically organised by employers, associations, or event hosts and are common among white-collar professionals. They often follow large meetings or conferences and serve as opportunities for networking and socialising. An organisation may sometimes call for a borrel on a special occasion, for example, at the departure of an employee. Semi-regular borrels are, however, commonly organised without an explicit occasion. Usually, they serve as an opportunity for employees or members to meet and reconnect. This is often an important tool for associations to strengthen their member base, but also for companies to strengthen inter-colleague relations. The frequency of these borrels varies strongly per organisation: with some, they take place once a year, with others, every week. Regular borrels, such as Friday afternoon drinks (vrijdagmiddagborrel), help employees wind down and socialise at the end of the week.

Although intended for socializing, borrels also serve instrumental purposes, creating an ambivalent environment where sociability and productivity coexist. This ambivalence allows borrels to function as both social gatherings and opportunities for professional networking without explicitly committing to either purpose. The purpose of a borrel seems to depend highly on who organises it. A borrel is not a type of favour, and no favours are exchanged during a borrel. Furthermore, people do not speak of any direct benefits gained from attending a borrel. Rather, the instrumentality of such gatherings, without exception, pertains to indirect benefits, such as better connections in the organisation, increased visibility, a larger network, improved social cohesion and enhanced team spirit. Attendees appear to believe that such embeddedness can improve their chances for a promotion or a business deal, and impact company results overall.

However, one could argue that such indirect effects of borrels are at best uncertain, and at worst not worth the effort – especially considering that it is never clear who will attend and how long they will stay, and that no direct business is supposed to be discussed. Perhaps, a more effective way of ‘getting things done’ would involve strengthening relationship with the person of the highest potential benefit to them on an individual basis – for example with a dinner invitation? Why are the borrels remain such a widespread custom in the Netherlands?

The popularity of borrels and the strong belief in its instrumental value can be explained using the network theory. Granovetter (1973, 1983 ) distinguishes between strong and weak ties in an individual’s network. Strong ties are those with families and friends. Weak ties include those with more distant contacts, such as colleagues and acquaintances. The stronger the tie, the closer two people tend to be and the more frequent is their contact. Conversely, people with whom someone has weaker ties are more likely to be found in a different environment and network than oneself. For that reason, someone with whom one is weakly tied is more likely to have information one does not possess themselves yet.

According to Granovetter, weak ties fulfil a crucial bridging function between networks. There is considerable empirical support for the argument that people with more extended and diverse networks, based on weak ties, benefit from more job opportunities and upward mobility (Granovetter 1983 ). This effect is mediated by education that strengthens the positive effect of weak ties on job opportunities and income. Strong ties are not without merit: Ultimately they influence decision-making, while weak ties act as bridges for the flow of (new) information.

Borrels seem to function as occasions for white-collar professionals to establish and maintain weak ties within their immediate professional surroundings (direct colleagues) and beyond (indirect colleagues, introducees, conference participants). This is reflected in the instrumental objectives of borrels, which are, without exception, aimed at improving social relations with other people. The expectation is that weak ties will serve as a bridge between networks for information, although not necessarily of influence. The key characteristics of borrels support Granovetter’s findings as well: the inclusive nature of the borrels allows for the maximum number of potential new weak ties to be established at the gathering. Its unofficial and voluntary nature shows that commitment, i.e. strong ties, is not required, which in turn further lowers the threshold for individuals outside of a close network to attend. Finally, the informal and relaxed nature arguably allows for the easiest contact with a larger number of people on equal footing, without the necessity to engage in professional matters, complex subject and exclusive jargons.