Personal Reputations

It is difficult to describe every aspect of one's actions that contribute to their reputation. A reputation is the perception that others have of an individual. It is not only built by that individual persons actions, but also by the response to those actions from the people in that particular environment. One person's reputation can vastly vary between social groups and different workplaces. One workplace in which I developed a strong reputation was at Grandpa's Bar & Restaurant, where I have worked as a busboy/bar-back for the past three and a half years.

At Grandpa's, I have always had a reputation as a hard worker, who never complains, and always works above and beyond whenever the opportunity presents itself.  I had initially gotten the job because my friend's dad owns the place. Many of my other friends had worked their in the past, because of this connection, and had developed a poor reputation due to the fact that they had different priorities at the time, and never really put their full effort into their work. So, before I had even started working, many of my co-workers expected the same poor work ethic that had previously been displayed by my friends.

Because of this prior misconception about my work ethic, I felt the need to get rid of this reputation as soon as possible. The first couple of weeks, I made sure to develop a strong personal relationship with each co-worker, as well as perform my assigned tasks in the most timely manner possible, as well as accomplish tasks that were not directly a part of my job description.

That summer I also worked at the beach, as a camp counselor Monday through Friday during the mornings, from 9  am to 3 pm, and then went to work at Grandpa's at night, from 4 pm to 10 pm. Because of this fact, coupled with the work I produced at Grandpa's, my reputation quickly changed, to what I  described earlier, as a strong worker.

As I quickly developed this reputation, it began to perpetuate itself. Since my co-workers had the expectation that I would come in and do solid work, I began to expect it from myself whenever I went to work. I enjoyed the personal, and work, relationships I had developed with my co-workers and I did not want to jeopardize these relationships by performing sub-par work.

Since I started attending college, I have gone back to work at Grandpa's over breaks, and during the summers, when I am home. Since that summer, it has been more tempting to stray from the reputation that I had built from the previous summer. Since I had already built the reputation of being a hard worker, I could deviate slightly from the work production that I had previously displayed, and  it would, for the most part, go unnoticed by my co-workers. At the end of the day, I would still be paid the same amount in hourly wage, and tips from servers. 

There was no real immediate personal gain from deviating from the strong work ethic I had shown in my first summer working at Grandpa's. While it may be noticed by my co-workers, I had already built a strong relationship with most of them that it didn't really effect that significantly. Overall the only benefit would be less effort needed from me, or providing less work for equal income.

Triangle Principle Agent Model

In many of my previous posts, I have referenced my military experience, to relate to many of the economic principles discussed in class. The a triangle relationship in the principle-agent model occurs in many situations. Many times it can even be a quadrilateral relationship. An example of this is in the Vietnam war, officers had the responsibility to work under the direction of their commanding officers, providing the best possible situation for their troops, as well as looking out for the well being of the civilians of Vietnam. This kind of responsibility to the people, as well as the broader governing body is typical of most government positions. One recent example of conflict arising from the triangle principle-agent model is the most current presidential election.

In modern presidential elections, in the United States, their is always a choice for voters between two candidates from either the Republican or Democratic party. Each side elects one candidate who is representative of the party's ideals, and political agenda. This has formed a triangular principle agent model in our political system, with the party being the principal, along with the individual candidate from that party, and the agent being the American people. In the past, very little conflict has arose between the two principals, the candidate and the party, as most often the sole reason that the candidate is elected is because of their shared ideals, and political agenda, with their party. In the 2016 presidential election we saw a different situation on the republican side.

Donald Trump ran under the republican title, with no prior experience in government, or any prior serious affiliation with the GOP. Many of his policies, and ideals, did not match up with the GOP, nor the democratic party. The american people decided on November 8th, and elected Donald Trump to be the next president of the United States. This means that in the next coming months work must be done between Donald Trump, the republican party, and the democratic party to come to a middle ground on the policies, and ideals, for the good of the american people.

There are several way that this tension can be, and must, be resolved. As we saw on November 10, President Obama, our current democrat president, sat down and had productive discussion about the best ways for Donald Trump, and the current administration to have an effective transition of power. This is a common organizational practice. In the presence of conflict between two principals, both principals meet, and have a civil discussion, to form a unite front, about what is the best plan of action for the agent.

Another way that this conflict  of ideals between parties, and presidential-elect Donald Trump, will be resolved, is through the system of checks and balances.  The congress and the senate are put in place, with representatives from the democratic and republican party to ensure that all actions taken by the government are in the best interests of the american people. This also occurs in organizational practices. when businesses have a CEO, and a board of executives who have to approve certain measures, to ensure that they are in the best interests of whatever agent they serve.

Their are several other ways that this tension will be resolved over the next several years, and it is clear that there is more than one effective way to resolve conflict between principles in a triangular principle-agent model. The actions of the american people are independent of what the government decides. Policies, and laws, can have an influence over the actions of the people, but at the end of the day the people act independently. So if conflict is not resolved, the agent (the people in this case), often act in accordance with one master while ignoring another. This especially apparent, in reference, to politics because of the political affiliation that most individuals attach themselves to. They will act in accordance with the intentions of their party. This happens in other organizations, as favoritism towards one principal, or another, is common, and causes the agent to act in a way more in line with their preferred principal.