Teamwork, Free Riding, and Altruism in College: Can Altruism Ensure Long-Term Success and Happiness?

Using the phenomenon of free riding in teamwork tasks that are common in college, we discuss why selfish behavior is detrimental in the long run, and explore the importance of selflessness and its personal and societal benefits.

 

We can often witness “free riding” during our college experience. This is when a group of people are working on a team-building task, and one of them doesn’t participate as hard and gets the same score. This situation doesn’t just affect the performance of the task, but also the trust and cooperation between people. In a modern world that emphasizes the importance of teamwork, the phenomenon of free riding is not just a part of university life, but an important issue that can cause problems in society as a whole. We call these people “free riders”. It’s understandably upsetting to watch. So how can we effectively eliminate this phenomenon? In this article, I’m going to discuss the solutions to the free-rider phenomenon and the reasons to live right.
What conditions must be in place for the free-rider phenomenon to occur? I believe two conditions must be in place. First, members must be graded equally regardless of their level of participation. While this is a step towards sexual equality, it can also undermine fairness. Second, all members should be on equal footing. This way, no one member can coerce or penalize anyone, and the grades will be the same in the end, which can lead to free riding by people who don’t care much about grading and have no conscience. This problem can be compounded in universities, where students come from different backgrounds and values. Therefore, placing restrictions on socializing activities to prevent these two conditions from occurring will reduce free riding.
There are many ways to do this, but we think the following may be one of the most effective. First, lower the weight of a group’s group score. However, it’s important to find the right ratio, as lowering it too much can dilute the meaning of the group activity. A roughly 6:4 ratio of group scores to individual scores would be an efficient system. A larger group score would allow for a non-negligible amount of individual points to be awarded without diluting the meaning of the group score, which could be used to recognize an individual’s level of activity or contribution. It’s also worth considering introducing an anonymous rating system for group evaluations so that each member can rate their own and other members’ contributions. This can be an effective way to promote honest feedback between members and discourage free riding.
Secondly, differentiate the status of each member of the group, i.e., make one member the leader so that he or she can evaluate the others, or split the group activity into multiple rounds so that everyone takes turns leading the group. This way, each member will experience responsibility and, because of the difference in status, they will be able to see how others are doing in each activity and compare their efforts to their own. This process can foster leadership and cooperation, and deepen mutual understanding and respect between members. This would certainly reduce a lot of free riding.
However, the free-riding phenomenon that occurs in the university’s organized activities is not just about itself. It is largely related to the attitude a person has towards his or her own life, i.e., do we have to live right, or do we have to do something if it’s convenient for us? Ethical dilemmas in the modern world are not just individual choices, but are deeply embedded in the structure and culture of society as a whole. I don’t think there is any reason why a person should necessarily live right, but I do argue that living right is necessarily better for the person than not.
In this context, the meaning of living rightly includes not only not doing evil, but also performing altruistic acts, and addresses people living in the modern era. The moral standards of modern people are more complex and multi-layered than in the past. There are two main reasons for this claim.
The first is the shrinking global society. Thanks to the development of communication technologies and social networking services (SNS), the distance between people is much closer than it used to be. In such a society, it’s unlikely that you’ll ever see someone again in your life, whether it’s a passing acquaintance or someone you happen to do something with, no matter how trivial, and even if you don’t, you can always find someone you know through social networks. Therefore, the importance of altruistic behavior has increased in a life where we interact with many people on a daily basis. If you act selfishly and then later run into that person or someone you know just a bridge or two away, it’s likely to come back to bite you in the form of a penalty. Furthermore, these networks can quickly spread a person’s reputation, which can have a direct impact on their workplace or social life.
Second, there’s the social “herding behavior” rationale. People go out into the world and work and live in many social circles and belong to certain organizations or groups, but in most cases, the members of these groups are not united by a single common characteristic, but are separated into two or more groups with different personality or attitudinal characteristics. In this case, we’re talking about altruism and selfishness. Let’s say a person A, who is altruistic within a certain group, witnesses a selfish behavior of person B. A decides that B’s tendencies are contrary to his or her own and stays away from him or her. The same will happen when other altruistic people deal with selfish people, and the result will be two groups. One selfish group and one altruistic group. It’s not just a split, it’s a group of selfish people who can’t belong to the altruistic group because of the exclusivity of the altruistic group. The selfish group will be reluctant to help anyone or cooperate with each other, which will not lead to increased efficiency and efficient allocation of resources through cooperation, causing the selfish group to die out compared to the altruistic group, and in the long run, the altruistic group will benefit.
So far, we’ve been thinking about free rides and the importance of having an altruistic attitude in life. After all, living rightly involves performing altruistic acts, and as I explained above, modern society is a society where it is difficult to live in the long run if you are selfish. In addition, this attitude is closely related to an individual’s mental health. If you live “right,” there will always be moments when this attitude will be helpful and beneficial to you.