When I began supervising, I quickly identified my “go-to” RA. They always showed up, completed tasks, connected with the community, and followed through without reminders. When something was missed – a program, bulletin board, or interaction – I knew exactly who would step in.
And they always did.
At the time, it felt like good supervision. I ensured tasks were completed and supported the community. But over time, I noticed the same RA always took on extra work, while struggling RAs continued to struggle without intervention.
In residence life, there is always more to do. When something slips, we have two options, 1. Address the performance directly with a developmental conversation, or 2. make sure the work still gets done. Most of the time, especially when things are busy, we choose the second option. It’s faster, easier, and we know it will work. But that choice often comes with a hidden cost.
When we consistently rely on our strongest RAs to fill gaps, we create an unspoken system among our staff: some RAs are expected to do more, some are allowed to do less, and no one is really naming that dynamic. This reflects a broader organizational phenomenon: when task and opportunity distribution are seen as unfair, it can lead to emotional exhaustion and stress for those carrying more of the load (Hanley-Dafoe, 2024). Research shows that workload pressures and unfair distribution of work contribute to burnout and disengagement, especially when individuals are overloaded without support (Evans, 2025).
This is not usually intentional. It happens because we trust our high performers. It happens because difficult conversations take time (and they stink!). It happens because we care about our communities and want things to run smoothly. But over the course of a semester, an academic year, multiple years, this dynamic can shape the entire culture of a staff team.
At first, your strongest RA might not say anything. They might even be happy to help. But that does not mean it is sustainable. When high-performing RAs consistently take on more, a few things start to happen:
- They burn out: High achievers often carry heavier workloads without adequate support or recognition, leading to emotional exhaustion and decreased well-being (Deloitte Insights, 2025).
- Expectations become uneven: Even if it is unspoken, staff notice when some people are held to a higher standard than others. Unclear or inequitable systems can damage trust and inhibit growth for both strong and struggling performers (Deloitte Insights, 2025).
- Growth gets uneven, too: If struggling RAs are not held accountable, they miss opportunities to improve. Meanwhile, your strongest RAs are not necessarily growing; they are just doing more.
- Resentment can build: When workload imbalances become obvious, team members may feel resentment or tension as they compare contributions and perceived fairness (Liao et al., 2017).
- The community suffers: If your struggling RAs are not growing or meeting deadlines, where else is this showing up in their work? Most institutions have some kind of intentional conversation component to their curriculum or programming model. If RAs are not being held accountable, they will not grow, and the community members will not feel connected to the building, wing, floor, etc.
It is important to state this clearly: making your best RA do more work does not fix performance issues.
Louder for the people in the back: making your best RA do more work does not fix performance issues.
Relying on overloaded systems without clear expectations or support does not improve performance and can undermine long-term engagement (Deloitte Insights, 2025). If an RA is not meeting expectations, shifting their responsibilities to someone else may keep things running, but it lowers the team’s overall standard.
So, what should we do instead? This is where our role as supervisors really matters!
- Have the conversation you’ve been avoiding. Addressing underperformance is not easy, but it is crucial to staff development, morale, and fairness. Clear expectations, direct feedback, and follow-up go a long way and are central to effective performance management. Once you’ve had the conversation, document it in accordance with your department’s expectations.
- Pause before asking your “go-to” RA. Before you reach out to them, ask if you’re giving them an opportunity or if you’re giving them someone else’s responsibility.
- Protect your strongest staff. Your best RAs do not need more tasks. They need space to sustain their work and continue developing in meaningful ways (Hanley-Defoe, 2024). If these staff members are excelling in their roles and one-on-ones do not need to be just about business, find out what they are interested in and connect them to opportunities to develop their skills.
- Focus on consistent expectations. Equity in supervision does not mean everyone has the same experience, but it does mean everyone is held to the same core standards. Look at their job description, departmental expectations, and a collective bargaining agreement (if unionized) to determine the role’s core functions. Then stick to it!
- Develop the whole team. If only a few RAs are carrying the load, the team is not functioning as a team. Our goal should be growth across the board, not dependence on a few.
It is easy to reward reliability with more responsibility. In the moment, it can even feel like the right call. But let’s ask ourselves, “What message are we sending to staff?” If doing well means doing more work, we risk burning out the people we depend on most. If underperformance is quietly covered, we risk lowering the expectations for everyone else. Our best RAs are not there to compensate for gaps on the team. They are there to do their role as well, and they deserve a supervisor who protects them.
The next time something does not get done, choose to lead for growth. Instead of defaulting to a quick fix, ask yourself: “Will my response help my whole team develop, or just help me get through this week?” Take active steps to address the root issue and build a healthier, more sustainable team dynamic. Commit to being the supervisor who creates lasting improvement.
