Nantahala Outdoor Center

Mathew Lear is an HR professional specializing in employee relations, recruitment, performance management and operational support. He combines HR management experience with a background in supply chain consulting, focusing on workforce development, organizational efficiency and employee well-being.

Preserving the Spirit While Setting Boundaries

‘HR is just there to ruin the fun.’ It is a sentiment most HR professionals have heard, and one that I cannot always disagree with. We are the ones who step in when jokes cross the line, traditions become liabilities, or workplace behavior creates uncomfortable situations. Yet, when employees feel mistreated, excluded or unsafe, we are often the first people they turn to for help.

It's an interesting contradiction. We are expected to protect the very culture we are sometimes required to challenge. Working in the outdoor recreation industry, I have experienced this balancing act firsthand. Employees are often drawn to these organizations for reasons that extend far beyond a paycheck. They are looking for adventure, friendships, community and the opportunity to work somewhere that doesn't feel like a traditional corporate environment.

Understand before You Change

Before implementing major policies or organizational changes, I believe HR leaders must first understand the culture they are working with. What is the organization's history? What traditions have developed over time? Why are employees drawn to the company? More importantly, why do they stay?

In outdoor recreation, employees often work, live and spend their free time together. The relationships they build extend beyond the workplace, creating a sense of community that can be difficult to replicate in more traditional environments. Those connections are often what make the organization successful.

However, they can also create challenges. When employees and managers develop close personal relationships, the lines between friendship and professional responsibility can become blurred. Decisions involving scheduling, accountability or advancement may be perceived as favoritism, even when that is not the intention.

“Understanding the culture allows HR to identify which practices need improvement and which deserve protection.”

The solution is not to discourage those relationships. It is to establish expectations that protect employees and ensure professional decisions are made fairly. Understanding the culture allows HR to identify which practices need improvement and which deserve protection.

Fairness, Not Control

I believe structure and standardization should be approached through one simple question: Is this fair?

Policies should not exist simply because other organizations have them. They should serve a purpose, solve a problem or create a more consistent employee experience. Without clear expectations, employees may be treated differently depending on their department, supervisor or personal relationships. What one manager allows, another may prohibit. Over time, these inconsistencies create frustration and can damage trust.

Fairness doesn't necessarily mean treating everyone identically. An outdoor guide, retail employee and accountant may have very different working environments, schedules and responsibilities. However, each deserves the same fundamental respect, transparency and opportunity.

Structure isn't about taking away freedom. It's about creating an environment where every employee has a fair opportunity to work, grow and thrive. When employees understand why expectations exist, policies become less about control and more about protecting the workplace experience.

Not Every Problem Needs a Policy

As HR professionals, I think we sometimes fall into the trap of believing every problem requires a new policy. Policies are measurable, enforceable and relatively easy to document. Culture is more complicated. It requires judgment, trust and understanding that not every situation needs a standardized response.

Sometimes our efforts to eliminate risk can create an entirely different problem: a workplace where employees no longer feel trusted. This doesn't mean abandoning accountability. Employees should still be expected to perform their responsibilities, maintain safety standards and treat one another professionally.

But we should recognize the difference between a structure that serves a meaningful purpose and rules that simply make an organization easier to manage. Before introducing a new policy, we should ask ourselves whether we are addressing a genuine organizational need or simply responding to an isolated situation. Sometimes the best solution is not another rule. It's better communication, stronger leadership or a conversation that should have happened earlier.

Protect What Makes You Different

While HR often focuses on identifying problems and reducing risk, we should spend just as much time understanding what's already working. What makes employees proud to work here? Which traditions bring people together? What aspects of the experience keep employees returning?

Ask employees. Listen to their experiences, frustrations and ideas. Employee surveys and informal conversations can reveal strengths that leadership may otherwise overlook. More importantly, use that feedback to make meaningful improvements.

Not every tradition needs to be formalized, and not every informal practice needs to be standardized. The unique qualities that make an organization attractive to employees should be treated as strengths worth preserving.

I believe that HR's greatest contribution is not necessarily the policies we implement or the procedures we standardize. It's our ability to recognize what makes an organization worth working for and help protect it. That sometimes means introducing structure where none existed. Other times, it means resisting the urge to fix something that isn't broken.

We don't have to choose between professionalism and personality or between accountability and freedom. The best structure doesn't change the soul of an organization. It protects it.