Dealing with a Lazy Coworker
A working collective can include many types of members, from responsible trustworthy to chaotically parasitic. Of course, the range varies from group to group, especially according to the degree of decision power involved in recruitment. That is, where there is a manager or a committee that decides who is admitted or hired - usually by applications that include interviews and skills tests - the group will be productive and cohesive, while in groups where the entrance is based on volunteering or the admission demand is much lower than the offer the productivity and general collective feeling suffers in consequence.
In any case, in an efficient work environment each worker is assigned a certain amount of work and tasks according to the position and skills. While it is normal for coworkers to help each other out in healthy doses, there is a high risk of abusing the goodwill of one's coworkers. That said, the idea of a lazy coworker can mean many things: from a person who is generally laid back, or somebody who has issues meeting deadlines to the ones who deliberately pass their burdens to a coworker that for some reason cannot say "no." Therefore, before labeling a coworker as being lazy, one must first determine the context and, according to that, define what exactly lazy means for that particular person. For example psychological issues can be masked as laziness: the lack of ambition, apathy, the lack of goals, the lack of enthusiasm and motivation can all be symptoms rather than negative character traits.
The word lazy itself can mean a myriad of things, depending on the one who is defining it. Somebody who is more productive when burning midnight oil could be seen as lazy by somebody who is used to do their work in steady and stable slots of time. Therefore the word could very well be defined according to every individual's idea of speed and time management. The word could also describe a Huckleberry Finn type of character, who apparently does nothing but relaxing, especially to somebody who is used to the corporate or conventional work rhythm. In other words, somebody who is lazy could very well not share the other's work rhythm or philosophy, but at the same time, giving in to the negative connotations of the term, it could very well be a parasite to his or her coworkers.
Then, one should determine if that coworker is deliberately being lazy (or unproductive), has a different work ethic or simply doesn't know how to work by the clock and/or in a team. If the situation can be corrected in any way by the coworker, and if the named lazy person admits there is an issue, the collective could reach some sort of consensus. In any case, if possible, the team should organize some sort of meeting to discuss work ethic and rhythm and determine if there is actually a issue. That is, there are people who could be described as lazy by their attitude, but they hand in their work or meet the requirements - the only difference being the way in which the work is done. In an ideal world, coworkers should be open and tell the others what bothers them - if they have valid arguments, and the others might also reply with their own arguments or make corrections if needed,
Fixing issues caused by a lazy coworker - if it means simply somebody who avoids work and thus creates trouble in the collective - is rather complicated, especially if the one that suffers from it (even psychological distress) is not in charge. The worst thing to do would be covering for that coworker: even if that would give the collective a bad image or generate problems. The situation would go from bad to worse because that person would start believing it's their right to do so and claim more and more from whoever is doing their work. If turning to management is not an option, the coworker in distress could simply do their own slice of the work and then stop where their responsibilities end - of course if the projects or tasks are not collective themselves.
All in all, if the environment cannot be changed, the best thing to do is minimize the damages caused by inefficient and/or parasitic coworkers. If that person is popular or is supported by management there is little or nothing to be done about it, and if that person is the boss there may be no solution at hand. If the person in distress is in a leading position, then dealing with such a person is easier, there are a number of sanctions that could be applied if requirements are not met, leading to the most extreme one, removing that person from the collective.
