'Group Work and Free Riders: Mitigating the Situation\r'

'In most universities, if not all, company organise aims to enhance the learning experience of students. This is primarily through through collaboration among the students in meeting particularized objectives for convocation activities. While crowd pee trains students in work-related skills, it also improves their personal inclinations to adjust to a assort environment where various(prenominal)ist tasks may be designated in order to meet the goals of the collective whole. However, base work toilette also serve potential problems to the theme in terms of fractions who be mere ‘ allay riders’.These loafers may not be of any wasting disease or help to the entire pigeonholing since they do not provide signifi batht contri besidesions. Instead of aiding the concourse in come abouting with the tasks at hand, the free riders start burdens to the chemical group, at that placeby giving weight to the tasks all the more. one(a) way to palliate this problem i s to give less(prenominal) intricate and less tedious tasks to the ‘free riders’ in the group while keeping a proximate eye on their performance. It freighter be express that collaboration among group members helps in easing the bigger chunk of the tasks involved.A reason equal to(p) distribution of tasks among members is â€Å"an advantage to a group essentially because it divides the general tasks required undeniable for achieving authentic goals (Barley & angstrom unit; Kunda, 2001, p. 78). ” Although the distribution of tasks may leave depending on several factors which include but is not limited to individual capabilities, it nevertheless creates the sense where from each one member has a definitive role and piece in the inte residuum of the group. By doing so, every(prenominal) member is also presumptuousness certain responsibilities to meet to a lower place a specified timeframe. More importantly, the distribution of tasks entails certain expec tations from the members.In the end, the overall public assistance and performance of the group exit have to depend on the members themselves. Since both the welfare and the performance of the group rely on the individual members, free riders among the group terminate pose estimable disadvantages not wholly to the entire group but also to those who are working appropriately with their designated tasks (Pelled, 1996, p. 616). For one, thither may be a psychological raise on the attitude of the other members when the ‘free riders’ ladder to give no consideration for their respective responsibilities.When there are members of your group who do not berth according to the group’s expectation, it is most liable(predicate) the model that the other members will have banish responses whether explicit or not. It can affect their individual inclination to perform their duties because they can be influenced with feign to their behavior in doing their responsibili ties. In order to diminish the problems posed by the free riders in the group, these group members should only be given less complicated and less tedious tasks.It should also be the case that the free riders should be given more fear or focus from the group members since the free riders are the ones who are most likely to give problems to the group in terms of the completion of tasks among others. Given a number of tasks involved in completing the group requirements, the division of tasks should be appropriated in such a way that the perceived ‘free riders’ are given the lighter responsibilities instead of the tedious ones (Phillips & angstrom unitere; Phillips, 1993, p.534). The roles to be given to these members should be the ones which, when removed or quarantined from the overall product of the group work, can only give minor disadvantages. These minor disadvantages can espouse in the form of the absence of peripheral separate of the group work. By doing so, take down if the free riders in the group are not able to inject their expected contributions to the group the overall group devise can nevertheless still stand on its own.Or it can also be the case that even without the minor contributions from the free riders the rest of the group can still be able to amend the place by fulfilling the peripheral tasks left behind. Moreover, the free riders should be given more focus by the group members so as to at least sack certain that their tasks are met and that no delays will immobilize the progress of the group work. This can be through by constant meeting with the group members so that the tasks can be done while every member is present.When each member of the group is present, there will be more chances for the group members to keep a close attention on what everybody else is doing (Formanek & amp; Sibley, 1991, p. 650). By doing so, the free riders will also be guided accordingly by the other members of the group in cases when the f ree riders are unable to efficiently perform their responsibilities. An early correction of the perceived problems can â€Å"greatly help in arriving at a thoroughly crafted products or goals at the end of the daytime (Parboteeah & Cullen, 2003, p.139). ” However, one problem that can get along even in the light of the elicitions offered to mitigate the apparent problems that may be encountered by the group with image to the free riding members is the problem of the total absence or non-participation of these members. If the free riders in the group do not actually attend meetings or turn tail from participating in the group tasks, even the suggestions to mitigate the perceived problems may not be able to fully address the problems.Nevertheless, one thing that can be done to avoid the eventual hurry of the group as caused by the free riders is that the rest of the group can choose to take accuse of the supposed responsibilities of the free riders as early as poss ible. After that, the rest of the members can then suggest to the teacher or the instructor in iron boot to relieve the supposed free riders from being members of the group due to the reason of complete lack of participation. In general, as long as there stiff the possibility of controlling the problem, mitigating the situation is still the scoop out option.In fact, the act of mitigating the situation in itself is already a task which requires a collective effort from at least the majority of the group. More importantly, mitigating the situation can win back the free riders as procedure members of the group, thus leading to fruitful results to the group as a whole and to each member of the body. References Barley, S. R. , & Kunda, G. (2001). Bringing Work Back In. shaping Science, 12(1), 78. Formanek, E. , & Sibley, D. (1991). The Group Determinant Determines the Group.Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 112(3), 650. Parboteeah, K. P. , & Cullen, J. B. (2003). Social Institutions and Work Centrality: Explorations beyond National Culture. Organization Science, 14(2), 139. Pelled, L. H. (1996). Demographic Diversity, Conflict, and Work Group Outcomes: An Intervening act Theory. Organization Science, 7(6), 616. Phillips, L. D. , & Phillips, M. C. (1993). Faciliated Work Groups: Theory and Practice. The diary of the Operational Research Society 44(6), 534.\r\n'