Gift Exchange
Overall, I think the articles are trying to demonstrate that in general, human beings are caring towards each other. However, when competition increases, it may force people to not act in line with their values. When people start to think that helping others can ruin their chances of being successful, our reaction is to protect ourselves. I enjoyed reading the article about altruism, and I think its explanation of how being altruistic can benefit the economy, government, and general quality of life was very interesting and eye-opening.
Gift exchange, the transfer of goods or services, is considered voluntary, yet it is expected. I think this idea ties into altruism, completing an act that benefits someone else without expecting anything in return. If it is voluntary, generally speaking, it is altruistic. For example, I have never seen a student not hold the door open for a student on crutches or try to pass a student on a wheelchair who is trying to get on a bus. Yes, when it is cold and the buses are full students may fight their way to the front, but whenever there is a disabled student, they will almost always let them go ahead. This is voluntary, yet expected.
When working on a team, this model of gift exchange and altruism can get confusing. The answer for how to be a good person and support yourself can be very challenging and hard to gauge in comparison to the previous example. I am involved with a service fraternity, Alpha Phi Omega, and since it is such a large group with around 300 students, holding officers accountable for their work can be difficult. Currently, I am on a committee in the leadership pillar, and whenever we host events including workouts, roundtables, etc, all attendees are required to fill out a feedback form. Feedback forms allow event creators to better realize what members are looking for and how they can improve upon the events they plan.
However, there can be personal motivations and simple gift exchange that goes into the quality of these feedback forms. These forms are also used to decide who will be on the executive board for the next semester. Positive feedback suggests that the person is doing a good job and is capable of leading part of the APO chapter. Generally speaking, I have gotten decent feedback on my forms: no one has really said my events have been bad, yet they provide constructive criticism on how I can improve upon my events. At the same time, I know that some people provide elaborate explanations explaining why they really enjoyed my event. Some of them are genuine; people enjoyed whatever activity we conducted. However, I know that some of the forms help set the expectation of giving positive feedback to everyone. In this way, people provide positive feedback so that they can also receive positive feedback. When I get a really good review from a member, I also tend to give them good feedback: I feel like it becomes an obligation.
Therefore, this is a good tactic to help members become eligible to serve on the executive board. When detailed positive feedback is spread, it helps people serve on the executive board. In class, I remember we discussed how Spotify could be pushing certain music in the Discover tab because they obtain more profits and benefits when a certain artists' song becomes popular. Similarly, people in APO may push for positive feedback because they themselves can benefit and climb to higher positions much more easily.
I think this idea also ties into a concept I learned about in an altruism class I took a couple semesters ago. Distinguishing between reciprocal altruism and true altruism can be very difficult. Acts that appear to be completed in a selfless way can actually have personal benefit. Tying it back to the feedback forms, people may really enjoy a certain event and not expect anything in return. This positive feedback form is simply altruistic appreciation for what a member hosted. At the same time, unknowingly, this may result in that member being pushed to a higher position.
Overall, I think it is hard to do gift exchange without personal motivations. Teams produce positive outcomes with competition: it inspires people to work harder and master more skills. At the same time, helping others is very important. The altruistic article explores the societal benefits. Although altruism and reciprocal altruism have different intrinsic motivations, they can still result in positive outcomes. Perhaps the difference between the two is not as immense as it may seem in certain scenarios.
Gift exchange, the transfer of goods or services, is considered voluntary, yet it is expected. I think this idea ties into altruism, completing an act that benefits someone else without expecting anything in return. If it is voluntary, generally speaking, it is altruistic. For example, I have never seen a student not hold the door open for a student on crutches or try to pass a student on a wheelchair who is trying to get on a bus. Yes, when it is cold and the buses are full students may fight their way to the front, but whenever there is a disabled student, they will almost always let them go ahead. This is voluntary, yet expected.
When working on a team, this model of gift exchange and altruism can get confusing. The answer for how to be a good person and support yourself can be very challenging and hard to gauge in comparison to the previous example. I am involved with a service fraternity, Alpha Phi Omega, and since it is such a large group with around 300 students, holding officers accountable for their work can be difficult. Currently, I am on a committee in the leadership pillar, and whenever we host events including workouts, roundtables, etc, all attendees are required to fill out a feedback form. Feedback forms allow event creators to better realize what members are looking for and how they can improve upon the events they plan.
However, there can be personal motivations and simple gift exchange that goes into the quality of these feedback forms. These forms are also used to decide who will be on the executive board for the next semester. Positive feedback suggests that the person is doing a good job and is capable of leading part of the APO chapter. Generally speaking, I have gotten decent feedback on my forms: no one has really said my events have been bad, yet they provide constructive criticism on how I can improve upon my events. At the same time, I know that some people provide elaborate explanations explaining why they really enjoyed my event. Some of them are genuine; people enjoyed whatever activity we conducted. However, I know that some of the forms help set the expectation of giving positive feedback to everyone. In this way, people provide positive feedback so that they can also receive positive feedback. When I get a really good review from a member, I also tend to give them good feedback: I feel like it becomes an obligation.
Therefore, this is a good tactic to help members become eligible to serve on the executive board. When detailed positive feedback is spread, it helps people serve on the executive board. In class, I remember we discussed how Spotify could be pushing certain music in the Discover tab because they obtain more profits and benefits when a certain artists' song becomes popular. Similarly, people in APO may push for positive feedback because they themselves can benefit and climb to higher positions much more easily.
I think this idea also ties into a concept I learned about in an altruism class I took a couple semesters ago. Distinguishing between reciprocal altruism and true altruism can be very difficult. Acts that appear to be completed in a selfless way can actually have personal benefit. Tying it back to the feedback forms, people may really enjoy a certain event and not expect anything in return. This positive feedback form is simply altruistic appreciation for what a member hosted. At the same time, unknowingly, this may result in that member being pushed to a higher position.
Overall, I think it is hard to do gift exchange without personal motivations. Teams produce positive outcomes with competition: it inspires people to work harder and master more skills. At the same time, helping others is very important. The altruistic article explores the societal benefits. Although altruism and reciprocal altruism have different intrinsic motivations, they can still result in positive outcomes. Perhaps the difference between the two is not as immense as it may seem in certain scenarios.
Before otherwise commenting on your post, I think you need to explain whether the feedback forms for your RSO are done anonymously or not. That would seem to matter. Note that the course evaluation forms distributed at the end of the semester are done anonymously, in an attempt to encourage an honest assessment. (They fail, however, in that at the end of the semester the student has little reason to fill out the forms other than the obligation to do so. The student's own learning won't benefit from the effort).
ReplyDeleteThe example of holding a door for a handicapped student is a good one in that everyone can readily understand the social need being addressed and very few people would want it to be done in some other way, where there is no such obligation. On the other hand it is pretty minimal and is not directly work related. So let me suggest a couple of hypotheticals to see whether thy resonate with you.
Imagine you and your roommate are taking different gen ed classes that fill the same gen ed requirement and there is regular writing as part of the course activity. The writing is meant to be generalist, so not full of jargon specific to the course subject matter. One of you suggests to the other, why don't we should our first draft to each other to get some reactions and suggestions about how to improve the piece. On the one hand, doing this would upload the work for each of you. On the other hand, it might be helpful and improve the quality of what is being submitted for credit. Would such an arrangement work and be sustainable?
The other hypothetical is similar but here the two roommates are members of different RSOs, and each has some issues about their experience they'd like to air. So they agree to have discussions on a regular basis in which one sets the topic by talking about the issue at their RSO and then the other asks questions about it and gives reactions. In other words, they talk it through. It might be that one sets the topic more frequently than the other, but they both do it at least some of the time. You might call this being a peer-mentor. A critical thing in this situation is while understanding how RSOs work in general, the mentor has no stake in the outcome of the roommate's RSO other than that the mentor would like to see the roommates be happy. Would such an arrangement work and be sustainable?
The part of the RSO story that you told, which I didn't understand at all is the size of the group (300 members seemed very large to me) and if you actually know them all or not. In a more manageably sized subgroup, I can imagine gift exchange taking hold. In a much large group, then as you suggest some people might game the system for personal advantage.
The forms are anonymous, however, the people in leadership positions can see who wrote the feedback. Some people share names if it is extremely positive or negative, but in general, only a select group of people can see the name.
DeleteI agree with that idea that nearly everyone will hold the door open. With the hypotheticals, I think it is important to note that there are a lot of variables, so I did not include them because I thought they were difficult to analyze.
With the roommate scenario, I think that obtaining feedback is a great way to improve upon pieces. However, based on my experience of taking classes with friends, I know we tend to divide and conquer the work to save time. Yes, this form of actual collaboration would enable both of us to be better students. However, I know in most scenarios one person takes advantage of the other. For example, I took a philosophy general education course, and I know that when I mentioned I was writing about a certain topic, my friend thought that was a great idea and decided to write about the same thing. Obviously, we were careful not to plagiarize because the consequences are heavy, but I think college students care more about completing the work well, not the overall quality. I think we live in a grade-focused environment, which is not always a good thing.
With the second example, I think it is a great idea, however I am not certain if it would function. In my experience, I have asked my roommates for suggestions about RSOs I am in, and although they are genuinely trying to help, their feedback is not efficient. We are not involved in similar clubs with similar goals, so a lot of the ideas do not intersect. However, basic things like recruiting members is a great skill to share.
This RSO is extremely large, however, there are not that many people who are super involved with it. The people who join committees are the ones who are more interested in the club, and typically the people who want to have leadership positions. There are basic personal advantages to people who are not involved: they get to volunteer. However, it is difficult to game the system if you are not involved. You will not get nominated to have higher positions and will not really get the skills the club wants its members to have.