Parallel Group Experiences

               My parallel experiences were in two of my finance classes – Fin 221 and Fin 321. In each class we created groups at the beginning of the course and worked on various projects throughout the semester. In both groups, we divvied up the work and then got together to talk about the answers and check each other’s work. My experiences with these groups were completely different, however: my Fin 321 group experience was great, and my Fin 221 group experience was horrible.

               In my Fin 221 group, there were originally 5 other people working in the group. One of them dropped the course, leaving the rest of us hanging. At first the other 4 were fine to deal with, but as the semester went on, it got worse and worse. Group members either stopped doing their work or stopped showing up to talk about it and check it if they did do their work. Some group members stopped going to class altogether and relied on the other group members to tutor them on material that was necessary to finish the project. It was incredibly frustrating as someone who did go to class and understand the material to have to put in so much extra effort to get a good grade, when the people who were not only free-riding on the project but also not putting effort into the class in general would get the same grade I would. The people who got their work done were also aggravating, since they stopped putting in the effort to make sure that the other parts of the project were correct as well. The group didn’t get along because of differences in effort level, regardless of the level of talent or quality of production.

               In my Fin 321 group, we all got along for multiple reasons. First, we were all friends to begin with, so we were more predisposed to getting along. I don’t think that’s the primary reason that we got along in the context of this project, though. We formed a group in the first place because we all trusted each other to put effort into the projects and to help each other if we needed it. Luckily, that’s exactly what happened. We all did our parts going into our group meetings, and if we didn’t understand something the other group members all did our best to either explain it or help look up the answer if they didn’t know either. All group members were present throughout the entirety of the project, and we all felt that the grades we earned were appropriate for everyone in the group.

               I would like to note that while these group experiences were very different as far as enjoyment of the experience goes, they were both beneficial in one way or another. The Fin 321 group got me a good grade, but I got a great interview story out of my Fin 221 experience. Any time I’m asked to describe a time where I had to deal with someone who was challenging to deal with or in a group where there were team members who weren’t doing their part, I go right to this story and put it in a positive light. So, both negative and positive group experiences are valuable to have in one capacity or another.

Teamwork and Rewards

               The New York Times article “How to Get the Rich to Share the Marbles” talks about how the reward mechanism is a crucial input that determines how much effort people put into doing a task. The example given for when children automatically share marbles is when the only way that either child gets rewarded is when both pull on a rope. When both pull, one child gets one marble and one child gets three marbles, and an overwhelming majority of study participants automatically share marbles to make the division equal. In other scenarios, such as when children don’t work for their marbles or when the children don’t have to work together to get their rewards, the students don’t feel compelled to share.

               My experience with group productivity is very similar – I generally feel that if a group has done the same amount of work, everyone should receive the same amount of credit. The biggest example of this is when the Actuarial Science Club executive board plans events. In cases where it’s known that I’m the one who was leading the event, I usually get most of the credit for whatever happened, even if I got a lot of help from other board members. Whenever I get all the credit for something that multiple people worked on, I feel immediately compelled to give them credit as well.

               I agree with other aspects of the study as well. When people have not put in the same amount of effort, I usually do not feel that they should receive the same amount of credit. A prime example is group projects for classes. While most of the professors assume that each group member will do the same amount of work, some factor in that some group members won’t put in much effort, and let students help determine the other group members’ grades by rating them. In most situations students give each group member equal credit for the project – you’re considered an awful person otherwise. I have been in a situation where I really felt that one group member did not deserve equal credit for a project, though, and in that case I did give him a bad rating. This group member gave us an incorrect e-mail address in class multiple times, using a different one each time. As a result, we never got a hold of him. Most of the time he didn’t come to class, so we couldn’t talk about the project in person. We showed up on the day of our final presentation having done his quarter of the project the night before since he didn’t do it, and assuming that he wouldn’t do the presentation. When our group was called, he came up to the front of the room with us and was silent during the entire presentation, but then fielded all the questions (incorrectly) before any of the other group members had a chance to respond. I was so infuriated that when the group evaluation forms came around, I gave him the worst possible score. He did get some credit for the project by default (which in my mind accounts for his efforts in actually coming to the presentation at all) but I couldn’t in good conscience let his complete lack of effort for the rest of the project slide.

               For me, it’s a nice concept that everyone will put in their fair share of the effort and will then get an equal share of the profits. However, in most group work the labor isn’t distributed equally. There aren’t many situations in real life where every single person has to put in the exact same amount of effort in order for everyone to get some reward – most times the reward is given based on aggregate group performance. If there were more situations where each individual on a team had to put in the same amount of effort, I think inequality would essentially disappear from these situations and many group conflicts would be resolved.

IlliniBucks

There are quite a few things on this campus that hypothetical “IlliniBucks” would be useful for. The first thing that comes to mind, since it was mentioned in the prompt, is registering for classes. This includes registering earlier in the general registration process or registering for classes that are restricted to certain majors until a certain date. Depending on the person and their individual circumstance, this could be an incredibly valuable commodity. Personally, since I’m double majoring and double minoring, I find that getting into exactly the right classes in the right semesters to be incredibly important. I would definitely use my IlliniBucks (or actual money, depending on the circumstance and pricing) to ensure that I get into the exact classes that I want.

               Another use for IlliniBucks would be getting to the front of the line for Orange Crush for basketball games. As of now, students have to line up before the games – sometimes over 3 hours before – to get the best seats. I would be willing to bet that a lot of students would rather use their IlliniBucks to skip to the front of the line for a game that they really care about. That’s not something I care a lot about, but there are quite a few sports fans that would use this opportunity.

               The issue of inappropriate pricing is interesting. If the price is set too high, only the people who absolutely want the commodity the most will pay for it, and no one else will use them. This will lead to less social good than could have been created if the price was lower and more students could take advantage of the opportunity. On the other hand, if the price is too low, too many people will use their IlliniBucks for the commodity and it will dilute the value of it. If everyone uses their IlliniBucks to get to the front of the line for a basketball game, then it’s almost the same situation as when no one used IlliniBucks. The biggest disadvantage here is to the people who don’t use their IlliniBucks for a specific commodity – they would be put at a serious disadvantage when trying to get that commodity, and would be much worse off.

               An interesting situation to consider would be whether the IlliniBucks are specific to each person, or if they could be traded or bought. If IlliniBucks could be exchanged between students, we could use the prices that the IlliniBucks are trading at as a proxy for how much real money students would pay for each commodity. This would also have social implications – if wealthy students bought IlliniBucks from non-wealthy students, the result might be further advantaging those who already have more resources, and further disadvantaging those who don’t.