A real-life situation in which I was the middle agent between 2 other agents is with the National sorority organization and my specific chapter members. I am the intermediary between these two groups and must try to reconcile differences that occur.
As President of my chapter I must balance the requests of the National Council and what the chapter wants. As some background information, National Council is the governing body of all of my specific sorority in the United States. They set the rules and are the ultimate judicial board if anything were to go wrong. They want to see all of the individual chapters excel but may have more of an "old-time" view on sorority life as all of these members range in age from 30-70 or so.
What my general chapter members want is to enjoy their sorority experience. Most of them do not even know who is on the National Council. It is my job to take what my chapter wants to do and make sure if falls within the National Guidelines.
In terms of how they evaluate "good performance" by me, the 2 other agents see things very differently. The National Council thinks I'm doing a good job if I excel at all of their requirements (ex. implementing ritual activities into chapter events, raising a certain amount of money at philanthropy events, getting forms in on time, etc). The chapter believes I am doing well if I allow for fun activities that may or may not have to do with ritual. A lot of times chapter members want to push the envelope on what is allowed in terms of social events but I often have to reign in ideas. It can be difficult to try to explain to the chapter that National wants us to do things a certain way because the chapter doesn't have a real concept of the National organization.
I have tried to explain to the chapter that the National organization is not here to punish us, but rather help us understand why we were founded and what we stand for. So far, I haven't been able to complete resolve this discord.
I try not to satisfy one group more than the other. My best effort is to allow the chapter to do as much as they want as long as it falls within the National requirements. Most events end up working out, but sometimes the chapter may become angry because I must veto an event they want to hold.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Can't we just all get along?
Different work situations call for different courses of action. Sometimes things go well and other times work relationships and friendships can be sacrificed. Both scenarios that will be described involve my organization and the executive board.
In the first scenario when things went well, my executive board had to deal with the problem of not allowing all members to live in the house. There were 60 girls who wanted to live in, however the house could only fit 55. We wanted to be fair in our judgements so we got to brainstorming how we could decide which members could live-in. Me and 2 other executive board members (the VP and the House Manager) discussed at length the different options. We all were able to keep calm even though this was a stressful situation because we were deciding where girls would potentially live for the next year. We decided to choose based off of points that they receive for going to certain events or achieving certain awards (GPA, philanthropy events, etc.). Having the three of us work together was best because the VP was able to gather all of the points, the House Manager was in contact with our House Director about an updates, and I (as President) was overseeing all operations.
We presented ourselves as a united front and knew that we would face some backlash. The girls who couldn't live in would not be happy with our decision but we felt that together we could explain or reasoning and help the girls find alternative housing as best as possible. Because of our diligent work and commitment to the sorority, we were able to resolve this issue rather quickly.
In a second scenario, the outcome was not the desired one. As President, it is my job to deal with any exec member who is not doing their job. While this may be difficult, it needs to be done for the best of the organization. The problem was that this executive board member did not have any of their events planned for the semester when I asked that it all needed to be completed, and in addition broke some of the organization's rules. Multiple members came to me because they felt this board member was not doing their job. It came down to me to address the issue. I sat down with this board member and explained that she had not completed any of the tasks that I asked her to complete and that I felt she needed to get everything done in the next few days or we would need to find a replacement for her. I gave her a chance to speak as to why the work was not completed, but I felt that she was just talking in circles. She started to get angry with me for brining this up, but I explained that it was not a personal issue, but rather a part of my job. This board member and I had been friends for a long time, but being in these power positions has torn our friendship apart. She no longer wants to be my friend and believes that I don't trust her as a person. I was not trying to make a personal judgement, I was just the messenger for what the entire organization was thinking. I believe that our conflicting work ethics and thoughts on procrastination got in the way of having a productive conversation. The situation has still not been completely resolved.
In the first scenario when things went well, my executive board had to deal with the problem of not allowing all members to live in the house. There were 60 girls who wanted to live in, however the house could only fit 55. We wanted to be fair in our judgements so we got to brainstorming how we could decide which members could live-in. Me and 2 other executive board members (the VP and the House Manager) discussed at length the different options. We all were able to keep calm even though this was a stressful situation because we were deciding where girls would potentially live for the next year. We decided to choose based off of points that they receive for going to certain events or achieving certain awards (GPA, philanthropy events, etc.). Having the three of us work together was best because the VP was able to gather all of the points, the House Manager was in contact with our House Director about an updates, and I (as President) was overseeing all operations.
We presented ourselves as a united front and knew that we would face some backlash. The girls who couldn't live in would not be happy with our decision but we felt that together we could explain or reasoning and help the girls find alternative housing as best as possible. Because of our diligent work and commitment to the sorority, we were able to resolve this issue rather quickly.
In a second scenario, the outcome was not the desired one. As President, it is my job to deal with any exec member who is not doing their job. While this may be difficult, it needs to be done for the best of the organization. The problem was that this executive board member did not have any of their events planned for the semester when I asked that it all needed to be completed, and in addition broke some of the organization's rules. Multiple members came to me because they felt this board member was not doing their job. It came down to me to address the issue. I sat down with this board member and explained that she had not completed any of the tasks that I asked her to complete and that I felt she needed to get everything done in the next few days or we would need to find a replacement for her. I gave her a chance to speak as to why the work was not completed, but I felt that she was just talking in circles. She started to get angry with me for brining this up, but I explained that it was not a personal issue, but rather a part of my job. This board member and I had been friends for a long time, but being in these power positions has torn our friendship apart. She no longer wants to be my friend and believes that I don't trust her as a person. I was not trying to make a personal judgement, I was just the messenger for what the entire organization was thinking. I believe that our conflicting work ethics and thoughts on procrastination got in the way of having a productive conversation. The situation has still not been completely resolved.
Thursday, October 17, 2013
Disfunctional Group Projects
An example of team production from my own life that I think a lot of people experience is group projects. Many times these projects are dread in school as the group usually follows a typical make-up: the A-student, the slacker, the procrastinator, and the arguer. While there may be some variation to this make-up, there is usually some combination of these types of students. When all of these people are forced to come together to create an end product, the process does not always go over smoothly.
Below is a summary of how one of my experiences went in a group project.
A-student: does most of the tough research, writes the introduction and conclusion of the group papers, edits the entire paper, plans the group meetings
Slacker: shows up to group meetings but doesn't contribute, the A-student ends up doing their part for them
Procrastinator: Always has an "excuse" not to come to the group meetings, does their part of the project but not until the night before it's due
Arguer: Comes to the group meetings just to play the devils advocate, is an average student and does assigned work but harms the group harmony.
In the end, all of the work ends up getting done, and the group all receives the same grade. While all the students get the same grade, each student "type" may have a different reaction. The A-student may not want to share the grade with the other members because they feel they did more work. The Slacker may be happy with the grade because they got more than the effort they put in.
If the students were able to give input into the grade, I think it would follow more along the lines of the sharing concept discussed in the article "how to Get the Rich to Share the Marbles". The piece discusses an interesting scenario about 3-year-olds and sharing. In the first case where both 3-year-olds had to pull on the rope to get a marble, the babies "equalized the wealth" about 75% of the time. In the second case where the marbles were already in the cup and no work was needed, the babies only shared 5% of the time. And in the last case where only one baby was required to pull the rope to get a marble for themselves, they only shared 30% of the time. The conclusion that was drawn is that the "'share-the-spoils' button is not pressed by the mere existence of inequality. It is pressed when two or more people collaborated to produce a gain."
To get the A-Student to want to share the grade, the other students would have to put in equal effort. It's not about the output of each member, but more about the effort shown. People are more willing to share and be supportive if they see the other person is putting in effort.
Below is a summary of how one of my experiences went in a group project.
A-student: does most of the tough research, writes the introduction and conclusion of the group papers, edits the entire paper, plans the group meetings
Slacker: shows up to group meetings but doesn't contribute, the A-student ends up doing their part for them
Procrastinator: Always has an "excuse" not to come to the group meetings, does their part of the project but not until the night before it's due
Arguer: Comes to the group meetings just to play the devils advocate, is an average student and does assigned work but harms the group harmony.
In the end, all of the work ends up getting done, and the group all receives the same grade. While all the students get the same grade, each student "type" may have a different reaction. The A-student may not want to share the grade with the other members because they feel they did more work. The Slacker may be happy with the grade because they got more than the effort they put in.
If the students were able to give input into the grade, I think it would follow more along the lines of the sharing concept discussed in the article "how to Get the Rich to Share the Marbles". The piece discusses an interesting scenario about 3-year-olds and sharing. In the first case where both 3-year-olds had to pull on the rope to get a marble, the babies "equalized the wealth" about 75% of the time. In the second case where the marbles were already in the cup and no work was needed, the babies only shared 5% of the time. And in the last case where only one baby was required to pull the rope to get a marble for themselves, they only shared 30% of the time. The conclusion that was drawn is that the "'share-the-spoils' button is not pressed by the mere existence of inequality. It is pressed when two or more people collaborated to produce a gain."
To get the A-Student to want to share the grade, the other students would have to put in equal effort. It's not about the output of each member, but more about the effort shown. People are more willing to share and be supportive if they see the other person is putting in effort.
Wednesday, October 2, 2013
Illinibucks
The idea of Illinibucks sounds appealing at first thought. The idea that one could "buy" their way into getting whatever they want. This sounds a lot like the way capitalism works, where if you have enough money, you can get whatever you want. The use of Illinibucks could be for class registration priority, skipping to the front of the textbook line (which is notoriously long during the first few weeks of school), or for skipping to the front of the line at campus restaurants. The use of this "currency" should be for something that is an inconvenience to students and that they would be willing to pay money to overcome.
The strategic spending of this money is something students will have to consider. Do they allocate their Illinibucks so that they can use a little for multiple wants or do they pour all of their money into one particular thing they really want. It all depends on the elasticity of demand for the services that the Illinibucks can buy. I would imagine that getting priority class registration would be in extremely high demand as that is a major problem at U of I. At least from my experience, getting into the classes I want is a painful process.
The issues that would arise from pricing vary based on if the Illinibucks are over priced or under priced. If they are priced too high, only wealthier students would be able to buy them. This creates an income discrimination that could cause the University a lot of trouble. If they are priced too low, everyone would be able to buy as many as they want and the Illinibucks would become useless.
Another issue I see forming is that of a black market for Illinibucks. If they become scarce because of restrictions to the number sold, students who have the bucks could sell them for much more than the market value. This black market could be dangerous to the purpose of the bucks and would create fierce competition.
Overall, I think there are more problems with this idea than there are benefits. Too much would need to be worked out for this to work correctly. There aren't problems on campus that are that bad that they warrant this kind of program.
The strategic spending of this money is something students will have to consider. Do they allocate their Illinibucks so that they can use a little for multiple wants or do they pour all of their money into one particular thing they really want. It all depends on the elasticity of demand for the services that the Illinibucks can buy. I would imagine that getting priority class registration would be in extremely high demand as that is a major problem at U of I. At least from my experience, getting into the classes I want is a painful process.
The issues that would arise from pricing vary based on if the Illinibucks are over priced or under priced. If they are priced too high, only wealthier students would be able to buy them. This creates an income discrimination that could cause the University a lot of trouble. If they are priced too low, everyone would be able to buy as many as they want and the Illinibucks would become useless.
Another issue I see forming is that of a black market for Illinibucks. If they become scarce because of restrictions to the number sold, students who have the bucks could sell them for much more than the market value. This black market could be dangerous to the purpose of the bucks and would create fierce competition.
Overall, I think there are more problems with this idea than there are benefits. Too much would need to be worked out for this to work correctly. There aren't problems on campus that are that bad that they warrant this kind of program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)