NY Times Articles and Team Production (Gift Exchange)
One example that I can think of that is at least similar to gift exchange is covering for shifts. I am not completely informed about the specific example, as I am thinking of my aunt's experiences. She has worked in the University of Wisconsin - Madison's hospital. She works in a department involving blood, and I can remember her taking my and my brother there when she needed to work and she took our blood and we watched as she ran it through the machine to test it. I am basing this example mostly from things that she says when I see her, which is usually around the holidays when we have family gatherings. This would also be the time where I would assume there is an increase in people looking to find others to cover their shifts for them.
One thing she would complain about is the trouble she has finding coworkers to cover one of her shifts to be able to attend family gatherings. I am viewing the covering of a shift for a coworker as a gift, however I realize that in some cases it can be more of a transaction. For instance some people might look for shifts to cover in order to earn more money. The reason I am thinking of the covering of shifts in this example is that this is the way I believe my aunt viewed it. She usually mentions the difficulty she had finding someone to cover her shift to be able to see us at a family gathering. She also complains about why she would expect it not to be as difficult. She mentions that she has covered for specific people on multiple recent occasions to help them out, yet these people did not return the favor in some instances when my aunt would need help. This is similar to gift exchange, where when a gift is given it is usually expected to be reciprocated.
In the article "The Power of Altruism" the main topic is how a person's mindset can effect there decision making. Specifically, if lead to think of things economically they may take actions that are more selfish, while if this transaction mindset were not brought about then people will naturally make decisions morally. Although gift giving seems to be a moral action, when people start tracking the amount or value of the gifts that they are giving and receiving, the decision to give or take other gifts may become to be more of a transaction, and the person would start to view gift exchanges more economically than morally. My aunt was an example where she would become upset if she started feeling cheated, and would support these thoughts by counting the number of times she covered for somebody compared to the amount of times they covered for her. She would also sometimes talk about the things she covered them for, and whether the reason they needed to miss was more important than her current reason.
Another part of the article that I have found interesting, and have actually heard about in another class this semester was about how bringing costs into a situation can lead people to choose different actions. It further supports above the thought that people think differently based on situation and if there is money involved, making actions feel like more of a transaction. The article references how a day care tried to lower the amount of parents that would pick up there kids late by adding a fee. However, the amount of parents that started picking up kids later increased significantly. The believed cause was the introduction of money into the situation, causing parents to view the late arrival less as forcing the workers to stay later, but as a transaction that allowed them to pay for extra time with the daycare. The article does not mention it, but when I heard about this the first time I believe that even when the daycare then took the fee away, the parents would continue to come late even more, as they still viewed it as a transaction, and now it was an even better deal.
Using this information could possibly help my aunt in the future. However, because her coworkers would now view this as a transaction it is unlikely that they would stop viewing it this way. My aunt is actually getting a new job, so also new coworkers. I would advise her not to ask for people to cover her shifts in a way that would make it seem like a transaction. For example, do not say "if you cover my shift I will cover one of yours in the future." or "I covered your shift last week, can you cover mine this week?". Instead it may be better to ask it as a favor, which would not make it seem like a transaction and would appeal to the moral side of the coworkers decision making. If a coworker were to ask her in a way that implied a transaction, she could try to remove that by saying she would do it as a favor and that she is happy to help. She can still expect help from this person in the future, and it may be more likely. The only time I would bring up past favors and make it seem more like a transaction is as a last resort, but then it may hurt future chances at getting a shift covered.
One thing she would complain about is the trouble she has finding coworkers to cover one of her shifts to be able to attend family gatherings. I am viewing the covering of a shift for a coworker as a gift, however I realize that in some cases it can be more of a transaction. For instance some people might look for shifts to cover in order to earn more money. The reason I am thinking of the covering of shifts in this example is that this is the way I believe my aunt viewed it. She usually mentions the difficulty she had finding someone to cover her shift to be able to see us at a family gathering. She also complains about why she would expect it not to be as difficult. She mentions that she has covered for specific people on multiple recent occasions to help them out, yet these people did not return the favor in some instances when my aunt would need help. This is similar to gift exchange, where when a gift is given it is usually expected to be reciprocated.
In the article "The Power of Altruism" the main topic is how a person's mindset can effect there decision making. Specifically, if lead to think of things economically they may take actions that are more selfish, while if this transaction mindset were not brought about then people will naturally make decisions morally. Although gift giving seems to be a moral action, when people start tracking the amount or value of the gifts that they are giving and receiving, the decision to give or take other gifts may become to be more of a transaction, and the person would start to view gift exchanges more economically than morally. My aunt was an example where she would become upset if she started feeling cheated, and would support these thoughts by counting the number of times she covered for somebody compared to the amount of times they covered for her. She would also sometimes talk about the things she covered them for, and whether the reason they needed to miss was more important than her current reason.
Another part of the article that I have found interesting, and have actually heard about in another class this semester was about how bringing costs into a situation can lead people to choose different actions. It further supports above the thought that people think differently based on situation and if there is money involved, making actions feel like more of a transaction. The article references how a day care tried to lower the amount of parents that would pick up there kids late by adding a fee. However, the amount of parents that started picking up kids later increased significantly. The believed cause was the introduction of money into the situation, causing parents to view the late arrival less as forcing the workers to stay later, but as a transaction that allowed them to pay for extra time with the daycare. The article does not mention it, but when I heard about this the first time I believe that even when the daycare then took the fee away, the parents would continue to come late even more, as they still viewed it as a transaction, and now it was an even better deal.
Using this information could possibly help my aunt in the future. However, because her coworkers would now view this as a transaction it is unlikely that they would stop viewing it this way. My aunt is actually getting a new job, so also new coworkers. I would advise her not to ask for people to cover her shifts in a way that would make it seem like a transaction. For example, do not say "if you cover my shift I will cover one of yours in the future." or "I covered your shift last week, can you cover mine this week?". Instead it may be better to ask it as a favor, which would not make it seem like a transaction and would appeal to the moral side of the coworkers decision making. If a coworker were to ask her in a way that implied a transaction, she could try to remove that by saying she would do it as a favor and that she is happy to help. She can still expect help from this person in the future, and it may be more likely. The only time I would bring up past favors and make it seem more like a transaction is as a last resort, but then it may hurt future chances at getting a shift covered.
The question I would have for your aunt is whether she has interactions with other who might take the shift for her that are themselves social, like going out for lunch. You wrote that post as if there is no way to reset the interactions from transaction mode, once awareness of that has occurred. I don't think that is a right conclusion, but I believe the reset function has to happen in a social context, not a work setting. So, for example, your aunt might take her co-workers out for lunch or maybe just have a good long chat with them over coffee. This has to be a genuine activity wanted for itself, not just a ploy to get them to take a shift.
ReplyDeleteGift exchange happens when the workers care about each other (and care about the employer). What makes people care? My hypothesis is that it happens via repeated interactions that are enjoyable. Your workmates become your friends. For friends you will do good things without feeling a need to be paid for doing it, just because they are your friends.
Finally, you might have tried to tie this piece to Coase. Transaction costs are definitely lower when there is gift exchange, which is why you might imagine that promotes productivity.
The ability of resetting the transaction mode coming from positive social interactions makes sense. I do not think she hangs out with her coworkers outside of work, but I think her relationships with them are better than what it seems when she is talking about them after going through the difficulty of them covering a shift.
DeleteI agree with Professor Arvan's comments on this post. I feel this is also why there is such an emphasis on cultural fit these days when you go to apply for a job. Employers want your work peers to also be your friends to a certain extent. I have noticed that before applying for highly desirable jobs I am made to complete a personality test of sorts to assess my fit with the company.
ReplyDelete