I have observed that most of the people are always happy to create hurdles and happy to see others distressed. Have you also experienced such situation?
No, I cannot confirm this experience in the institutes where my career as a university teacher took place. The question sounds as if lowering staff or colleagues by creating hurdles is a general fact. In my experience and knowledge of the experience of many colleagues with whom I communicate, this is not the case.
There is teamwork in scientific research, of course, but there is no compulsion and no normative expectation to have to participate in a project. Unlike in many scientific fields, in philosophy, history or social science topics and research are often or even mostly tailored to a single person. The question discussed here, is therefore far too suggestive (Why do they hesitate to accept good work of colleagues). Here it is suggested that the one who works alone is a morally bad type, antisocial, without empathy. This is questionable and should be clarified by the questioner.
Of course I faced unexpected humiliation from one or two very seniors who aggressively and the other politely asked me to stop publishing papers otherwise "I will see how you get a permanent job" --- "what you are doing is not going to be good for your future" and the like.
For example I have published a new theory in sociology, in April 2018. I expected a strong reaction, criticism or support (no matter what is the reaction).
But I did not find the serious responses I was expecting.
Competitive individuals create hazards in any field. In some academic disciplines there are fixed ideologies based on hierarchies that construct a barrier to achievement, even in science.
To start a common project in my own research work was not a whim at the bar, but the result of the work areas, skills and motivations of those who then formed a team.
The fact that scientists who are willing to cooperate sometimes do not find the right climate for cooperation is often due to the tradition of an institute, which is largely determined by its management. In some university institutes in my field, cooperation is more developed than in others. Cooperation should neither become an unbearable constraint for every employee of an institute, nor should complete isolation prevail. In addition to the institute's management and the opportunity for informal contacts, the willingness to cooperate often depends on personal qualities: Some feel comfortable only as members of a team, others prefer to work alone, but love to discuss the results of their own research with other members of the institute.
I quite agree with Dr. Stanley Wilkin's submission. When someone has competitive spirit, he or she may find it difficult to appreciate other persons' effort or work.
No, I don't remember such situation. If I had problems of stress with my own reserarch I tried to solve my problems for myself, this was successful, also.
in addition. In normal research operations, it is more common to give younger colleagues the opportunity to work with us so that they can gain experience and produce publications. This is the exact opposite of resentment and competition.
I was the principal researcher for my research work to map and develop a fertility model. Three divisions within my ministry came together to do the project conceptualisation and field work. The persons involved in this project were helpful and contributed in a positive way. This was my first experience that impacted positively for everyone who were involved.
I wasn't so happy, even though I'm glad your impression is. I started studying at an age when others had already finished their studies and exams. Maybe I had some luck, but I didn't care about competition, even if as an assistant at an university institute you often compete with other assistants. If possible, you should go your own way and not obstruct the ways of others.