Social loafing and division of labour

I can’t understand people. They say they don’t want to be treated like sheep, but they don’t do the work of the shepherd as well. They waste their time hanging around. Who gave them the right to waste their time and relax?

Social loafing.  We leave important things to be done by others. So, give me a single reason, why the one who did what it had to be done, according to his opinion of course, not to take advantage of his authority.

Finally, I tend to believe that the division of labour encourages social loafing. Although productivity is increased, our sense of responsibility is reduced. Thus, we become socially inactive, always waiting for someone else to take responsibility of a situation. 

About Unions

When a union takes place, for example a marriage or a merger, both parts obtain access to the resources of the other, but they are accountable for its obligations as well.

In the very special case of the EU, however, they attempt to make a political union (since there is a government) with the aim to manage more efficiently the union's resources and that's it. There is not such thing as union as far as obligations are concerned.

I am not specialized in such issues and maybe I am wrong, but in my mind it seems that either we should move on an absolute union with a single strong government or we should keep just the structure of a free trade union. The existing situation lies somewhere in the middle and it just creates counter-productive disputes.

My position is that we should move on, since so many structures are already made. What we should fix right now is the cultural issue. A union will never be realised as long as we have different values from our partners. There is the "north" and the "south" culture.

Indeed, using Hofstede's dimensions on culture, one can see the difference. I chose five northern and five southern countries and I estimated the averages on each dimension. Then I sorted the scores of the ten countries from largest to smallest for each dimension separately and draw a line to separate countries above and below the average.

In power distance dimension (PDI) they are perfectly seperated in southern and northern.

In individualism vs collectivism dimension (IDV), below the average there are only southern countries again. (Although France and Italy score high in individualism).

In masculinity vs femininity (MAS) dimension, southern countries score much higher, with the exception of Germany.

In the uncertainty avoidance dimension (UAI), there is a clear separation again into southern and northern countries.

In the long term vs short term orientation index (LTO), there is a mixed result. In this dimension there is no score available for Greece.

According to these simple observations, it is implied that we should work towards an alignment in PDI, UAI and MAS dimensions in general, while Greece and Portugal should raise their individualism score.

Is this feasible? We are talking about a huge change which needs certainly more than one generation in time to take place. Has this ever happened before in such a large scale? Of course not, but we also have to take into consideration that cultural changes are easier to happen mostly due to the web.

And this situation leads to another question raised in Hofstede's website.

"Will there be one big world culture in 50 years from now?"

I am not sure.

Generic strategies

It is said that there are two kinds of generic strategies: low cost or differentiation. I was thinking of how species apply those strategies in their reproduction. So if we consider the offspring as a product, then species like humans, which choose to produce a few children but to invest a lot of resources to secure their survival, follow a differentiated strategy. The other option is to produce as many offspring as possible, investing a few resources in each one (low cost strategy), and hoping for the survival of as many as possible.

A question that crosses my mind after my previous thought is whether we really choose a strategy, or it is imposed in reality by other factors. In my example, modern society doesn’t allow people to follow a low cost strategy; otherwise they will be sentenced to life in prison. Indeed, as I read in “Moral Minds”, by Marc Hauser, Jack and Sylvia Darner chose to follow this strategy. Due to the fact that only 2 of their 15 children survived, they found guilty for intentionally overproducing children.

The previous thoughts lead me to suppose that in a certain environment, in a certain context, there are forces letting only one kind of strategy to survive. The other one is sooner or later doomed.

About love

Some people consider love as something that you give and receive. If one is receiving, she thinks that the other one loves her. When she doesn't, then he doesn't love her anymore. Well, I imagine love as a separate existence; a third part where you put your investment: feelings, time, money, dreams, sacrifices etc; a third part where both put their investment. Sometimes maybe one of them puts more than the other; but always they put both. And each one of them withdraws love currency when in need.
In the case that one doesn't contribute to the love union, the whole building collapses. They get separated. I don't know if they get something back from their investment in this case. And I don't know if it really matters. The only thing I do know is that it takes time to make profit. So you 'd better find a good partner!

Gender’s lost IDs

Women claim that nowadays it is hard to find “real” men. By this, I suppose they mean that today men can’t take decisions and responsibilities just as their father’s did. And this may be true. But why this happens?

1.       Modern women have undertaken this role voluntarily. In contrast with the previous generations, modern women are free to do whatever men use to do. The point is how they do it. They don’t have an example set by their mother, so they have to imitate their father’s behaviour. As a result, they adopt masculine patterns of behaviour, according to the stereotypes of the past, and part of this is the procedure to undertake the decision and the responsibility.

2.      Modern men permit women doing so. The previous model of family where father was the boss seems to be unfair for the mother of the young boy. So, he rejects it and adopts a more democratic way of behaviour towards women.

Nowadays, a woman is looking for a man like her father, and either she can’t find one or she can’t have him since she wants to be in charge. On the other hand, a man is looking for a woman like his mother, but also either he can’t find one or he can’t attract her since he doesn’t try to be in charge.

Keep it short!

I'd prefer reading magazine articles in the form of bullet points. I struggle to get the information through the writing "sauce" of each author. So, please stop pretending to be an author of the previous century and give me the stuff!

What is communication?