Jonathon Haidt's article on team verse individual production and it's relationship to the share of reward was an article I really enjoyed and enlightened my view on current politics and procedures. One particular part, about how in history leaders have called upon their people in times of crisis to join together and pull equal weight to reap rewards, really stuck with me. This concept of team productivity and reward distribution is one that I have never really considered before, but thinking back now, affected the dynamic of a summer camp program I was a part of this past summer.
Like with most organizations I have been a part of, teamwork and leadership has always been an important aspect when it comes to running an efficient entity. Being a counselor for a cultural summer camp this past year, I learned how to function with people from all ages and levels of experience. Parent committees, directors, counselors in training, and my fellow counselors all had different priorities and different roles. However, when it came to the logistics of this one week of camp, we all came together during preparatory meetings and workshops and brainstormed what needed to do done, by whom, and how. Each and every person had an instrumental role in our planning and everyone knew what everyone else was doing. So when it came to the actual week of camp, no one was left unoccupied or unfocused. Regrouping at the end of the week opened my eyes to the levels of satisfaction hard work had given us. Parents on duty talked about how they stopped a camper from running through heavy traffic on a rainy night, counselors in training spoke of their first experience juggling fifteen screaming nine year olds as they complained about the afternoon activity. Looking around and hearing what everyone had to say, it became apparent that everyone had come with the same goal in mind, to provide a week long experience for the campers of this organization to make long-lasting and cherished memories. Along the way, each and every one of us got our own satisfaction out of it too. Although our roles may have been different, we knew that each one was important to the whole of the goal. So yes, Jonathon Haidt did convince me that team production is for the greater good. Because, that week, our team production produced a week of success and drive that wouldn't have been able to do done with each and everyone's undivided devotion and effort.
I think you took something of a different meaning from the article than was intended. The article is not to meant to laud the benefits of shared production. It is intended as a way to get our willingness to share the spoils when we have the lion's share. Haidt argues that we are much more willing to do this if everyone has put in a good effort that contributed to the whole. But when it appears they either did not put in a good effort or if they put in effort but it didn't impact the whole, then we are much less likely to be willing to share.
ReplyDeleteThe summer camp example seems to me more like what I discussed with Akerlof Gift Exchange model. There is a feeling of camaraderie in group production situations like that. You captured that idea with your example.
Though your interpretation of the article was different I think you make a good point. Benefit can indeed be greater when there is a group effort behind the production of a good or service. I think in this particular example the benefit (having a good experience) would be shared easily between individuals if everyone's effort and willingness to participate was the same.
ReplyDeletePerhaps in your preparatory meetings and workshops you had more of a marble sharing experience. In group meetings that I have had for RSOs, a lot of the talking is done by one or two people that have a lot to say. When I come out of these meetings, I always feel that the benefits of the meeting are not being shared by everyone. Those that do the most talking (and/or arguing) tend to walk away with the most. If, instead, a small group meeting were more balanced in interactions, I think all the members and their interests would be better served.
ReplyDelete