Williamson-like Critique

When it comes to attendance I believe that an attendance requirement would be a good idea to get more students to come into lecture regularly and participate. From personal experience, I find myself attending courses that have required attendance more than the ones that don't. When attendance is not required I have the mindset that I can learn the material covered in class on my own by simply reading the book and doing assignments. Also, as the year progresses I get more and more lazy and required attendance is a good incentive to get me to go to class so I don't miss on points. I understand that attending lecture and learning from a professor first-hand is much more efficient, but towards the end of the semester I get overcome by laziness. As far as bonus points, I see that as a bit ineffective. The students that attend lecture regularly are in no need of those points and the ones that are in need of those points, cannot be bothered to get up for a class with no required attendance even though it would benefit them. If a class has mandatory attendance, a student is bound to pick up on and learn some course material wether he/she likes the class or not.
With this attendance requirement I believe it would be consistent with teaching about gift exchange. A student would find himself attending lecture more and picking up on things that he otherwise would not have had he not attended lecture. The inexplicit gift that the student would receive in return would be a better overall grade in the course. The course and professor overall, would see a more diverse discussion that would benefit everyone that is in attendance more than with an emptier lecture. With the student realizing that he/she received a better grade in the course than if he had not attended, he would also get a better understanding in how gift exchange works.

I find that not being able to use portable devices causes the students that would either-wise be on them if this rule was not enforced to pay more attention on the discussion or maybe even participate in it. I think it is a good strategy to encourage more participation from students that would normally wouldn't at all. If a professor offers all the notes online, then I believe that a student has no need for electronic devices during lecture mode. He/she can simply take notes on paper and pen. This would discourage students from going on social media or other such websites during lecture. They would also benefit from this by picking up on something the professor mentions is important or crucial and what is not important.
Personally I benefit from such implemented or proposed rules stated above. One, because I am forced to pay attention and take notes on material I do not know and two, because it prevents personal distraction from other students watching videos, going on social media, or playing games on their electronic devices. Even though I try not to be distracted such things, they are bound to catch my eye's attention.
Overall I believe that like the most efficient organizations, a lecture should have a balance between strict and lenient rules that will lead to more efficient results by students as a whole. A professor can learn the balance of such rules by taking and comparing data of different rules from previous years and come up with the most efficient combination. 

Triangle Principle

The closest thing to a triangle arrangement that I have been a part of is when I was a student worker in my current apartment complex working as a housing consultant. I worked for an hourly wage but also received commission for any lease I signed. For corporate, their primary goal was to sign as many contracts as possible. They constantly expressed the need to close on anyone that walked through the door or called us for a tour. They always reminded us that constant following up with a prospect was the best way to get them to sign, even if we got annoying with the constant emails or phone calls.
For the most part the student workers and corporate principles seen eye to eye but there were several instances where it seemed like the tactics that they wanted us to use got to be a bit excessive and overwhelming. Corporate could not really relate to the students searching often for their first apartment like us, the student workers could. Most of the workers were attending university and have been on the other side of leasing so we understood the pressures and commitment of renting our first apartment. Although we wanted to earn commission as well, there were often times where the students we were touring were simply not ready to sign the lease. They also did not deserve to be constantly bombarded with frequent phone calls and emails that were expected of us by corporate. In my case, I put myself in the student's shoes and decided to do what I thought was the right thing and not pressure them into doing something they were not yet ready to do, even though I was very good at it. I sometimes ignored the policies that I was told to do and lied about it to corporate. In some cases the students picked up on me being genuine and ended up signing. In others, the prospect was simply lost; possibly to me not following up enough. At the end of the day, I understood that it was impossible to always keep both sides happy and made decisions based on my best judgment on what I thought was right and most efficient.
The times when I was ordered to do constant following up, often ended badly for both sides. A student would get fed up with the constant emails and phone calls and would tell us to stop contacting them and that they did not want to sign with us. I often expressed that this happened to management and they said they understood but there was nothing they could do because that is what corporate wanted.

One possible way to have resolved this issue would have been that instead of having a general policy for all prospects, to put more trust in the student workers themselves and allow them to make their own judgements based on the observations they noticed while giving a personal tour. Either way it is now I went against the common policy most of the time when I worked there and that worked for me. If corporate wants to become more productive and efficient, they should listen more to the hands on workers that they are currently employing and maybe they'll receive better results with new and improved policies.