The article "How to Get the Rich to Share the Marbles" focuses on the concept of "share-the-spoils" and the concept of egalitarianism. According to Merriam-Webster egalitarianism is "a belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs". The article references some experiments involving toddlers and marbles and ropes. It comes to the conclusion that it is "pullers keepers" in almost all situations and the "rich" want to keep what they have earned. In real life this equates to the rich wanting to become richer while not wanting to give up any of their wealth to the poor which further separates the gap between the rich and the poor.
This is a very real concept in the business world and in society as a whole. People have a tendency to have a very "me first" attitude and tend to make decisions that benefit themselves. But what people also have to understand that sometimes it takes teamwork and organization to be successful and it is not always done by one's self. There are some very concrete example of this in the sports world. NBA superstars such as Lebron James and Michael Jordan are considered some of the best players in the history of the game but they might not have been able to accomplish as much without the help of their teams on their own. This is evident when Lebron was unable to carry the whole team on his back while in Cleveland originally and win a championship but when he joined up with the "Big 3" and had a more solid overall team he was able to win multiple championships. Also, Michael Jordan may not have been able to but up the numbers he did or win the amount of championships he did without his fellow superstar teammate Scottie Pippen.
Some personal examples of this come up a lot while on group projects for various classes. If you are in a group that everyone comes prepared and works well together and does their part the project will more times than not go very well and you will get a good grade on it. On the other hand I have had times where I was in a group where people did not pull their own weight and I had to put the group on my back and do the project essentially on my own. Although I still may have gotten a good grade on the project, it always could have been better if more people would have contributed their ideas to it. When the group works together as a whole the "gift-exchange" in is that everyone better understands the material and receives a good grade on the assignment. If they all work together and want to achieve he same goal it makes the team more successful, rather than having a group of people with separate interests. In that situation the "gift" really has no meaning and individual you would be better off striving for your own goals. Overall I believe that teams and individuals can both achieve success but the way to approach it depends on the situations and the overall attitudes of those involved.
On the Bulls and there many championships when Michael Jordan was a player, let's remember that Phil Jackson was the coach during all of those and that much of what Phil did was to get Michael to elevate the play of his teammates who were not all-stars. The Bulls did have other great players, but it was everybody playing their role that made them so tough. BTW, Phil Jackson learned his basketball from Red Holzman, so some time to basketball when I watched the Knicks in high school.
ReplyDeleteOn the group projects you do for classes, yours is a very familiar tale. My question as a professor who has used such group work from time to time is whether the laggard is a hopeless case or if some early intervention can get the person to pull his weight? It seems faculty think that's possible but students don't often see it that way. The faculty perception is what justifies giving the equal grade for each team member. So I wonder whether team members feel it is their own obligation to take on that early intervention. What do you think about that?
Honesty I believe that it depends on the group dynamic from the very first meeting. If one or two people come on too strong in the beginning and want to take over the project it almost enables the others to become lazy and not do their part if they don't feel inclined too, without too much repercussion on their grades. That's because if they believe that the people taking charge are going to to a good job one way or another, they do not have to worry much. If the group evenly splits up the work in the beginning it really helps the dynamics of the group and creates a much better environment to work in.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand it seems when professors require groups to fill out evaluations of their group members that actually count towards the grade, people are usually inclined to step up and do their fair share to ensure that they are not penalized for slacking.