Behavior →
- 01 Feb 2010
- Research & Ideas
The ‘Luxury Prime’: How Luxury Changes People
What effect does luxury have on human cognition and decision making? According to new research, there seems to be a link between luxury and self interest, an insight that may help curb corporate excesses. Roy Y.J. Chua discusses findings from his work conducted with Xi Zou of London Business School. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 17 Dec 2009
- Working Paper Summaries
Integrity: Without It Nothing Works
"An individual is whole and complete when their word is whole and complete, and their word is whole and complete when they honor their word," says HBS professor Michael C. Jensen in this interview that appeared in Rotman: The Magazine of the Rotman School of Management, Fall 2009. Jensen (and his coauthors, Werner Erhard and Steve Zaffron) define and discuss integrity ("a state or condition of being whole, complete, unbroken, unimpaired, sound, in perfect condition"); the workability that integrity creates for individuals, groups, organizations, and society; and its translation into organizational performance. He also discusses the costs of lacking integrity and the fallacy of using a cost/benefit analysis when deciding whether to honor your word. Key concepts include: The personal and organizational benefits of honoring one's word are huge—both for individuals and for organizations—and generally unappreciated. We can honor our word in one of two ways: by keeping it on time and as promised, or if that becomes impossible, by owning up to the parties counting on us to keep our word in advance and cleaning up the mess our failure to keep our word creates in their lives. By failing to honor our word to ourselves, we undermine ourselves as persons of integrity, and create "unworkability" in our lives. Integrity is a necessary but not sufficient condition for maximum performance. There are unrecognized but significant costs to associating with people and organizations that lack integrity. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 25 Nov 2009
- Working Paper Summaries
The Devil Wears Prada? Effects of Exposure to Luxury Goods on Cognition and Decision Making
Gandhi once wrote that "a certain degree of physical harmony and comfort is necessary, but above a certain level it becomes a hindrance instead of a help." This observation raises interesting questions for psychologists regarding the effects of luxury. What psychological consequences do luxury goods have on people? In this paper, the authors argue that luxury goods can activate the concept of self-interest and affect subsequent cognition. The argument involves two key premises: Luxury is intrinsically linked to self-interest, and exposure to luxury can activate related mental representations affecting cognition and decision-making. Two experiments showed that exposure to luxury led people to think more about themselves than others. Key concepts include: Luxury does not necessarily induce people to be "nasty" toward others but rather causes them to be less concerned about or considerate toward others. Experiment 1 showed that when primed with luxury, people are more likely to endorse self-interested business decisions (profit maximization), even at the expense of others. Experiment 2 further demonstrated that exposure to luxury is likely to activate self-interest but not the tendency to harm others. Exposure to luxury goods may activate a social norm that it is appropriate to pursue interests beyond a basic comfort level, even at the expense of others. It may be this activated social norm that affects people's judgment and decision-making. Alternatively, exposure to luxury may directly increase people's personal desire, causing them to focus on their own benefits such as prioritizing profits over social responsibilities. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 10 Sep 2009
- Working Paper Summaries
Feeling Good about Giving: The Benefits (and Costs) of Self-Interested Charitable Behavior
Helping others takes countless forms and springs from countless motivations, from deep-rooted empathy to a more calculated desire for public recognition. Social scientists have identified a host of ways in which charitable behavior can lead to benefits for the giver, whether economically via tax breaks, socially via signaling one's wealth or status, or psychologically via experiencing well-being from helping. Charitable organizations have traditionally capitalized on all of these motivations for giving, with a recently emerging focus on highlighting the mood benefits of giving—the feelings of empowerment, joy, and inspiration that giving engenders. Indeed, if giving feels good, why not advertise the benefits of "self-interested giving," allowing people to experience that good feeling while increasing contributions to charity at the same time? HBS doctoral candidate Lalin Anik, Professor Michael I. Norton, and coauthors explore whether organizations that seek to increase charitable giving by advertising the benefits of giving are making claims supported by empirical research and, most importantly, whether such claims actually increase donations. Key concepts include: Happier people give more and giving makes people happier, such that happiness and giving may operate in a positive feedback loop (with happier people giving more, getting happier, and giving even more). At the same time, charitable organizations should be concerned about the possibility of crowding out their donors' proclivity to donate in the longer term by incentivizing them (via gifts, etc.) in the short term. While offering donors monetary or material incentives for giving may undermine generosity in the long term, preliminary research suggests that advertising the emotional benefits of prosocial behavior may leave these benefits intact and might even encourage individuals to give more. Future research is needed to disentangle the possible costs and benefits of self-interested giving. The authors are actively engaging charitable organizations to conduct these studies. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 20 Aug 2009
- Working Paper Summaries
A Decision-Making Perspective to Negotiation: A Review of the Past and a Look into the Future
The art and science of negotiation has evolved greatly over the past three decades, thanks to advances in the social sciences in collaboration with other disciplines and in tandem with the practical application of new ideas. In this paper, HBS doctoral student Chia-Jung Tsay and professor Max H. Bazerman review the recent past and highlight promising trends for the future of negotiation research. In the early 1980s, Cambridge, Massachusetts, was a hot spot on the negotiations front, as scholars from different disciplines began interacting in the exploration of exciting new concepts. The field took a big leap forward with the creation of the Program on Negotiation, an interdisciplinary, multicollege research center based at Harvard University. At the same time, Roger Fisher and William Ury's popular book Getting to Yes (1981) had a pronounced impact on how practitioners think about negotiations. On a more scholarly front, a related, yet profoundly different change began with the publication of HBS professor emeritus Howard Raiffa's book The Art and Science of Negotiation (1982), which for years to come transformed how researchers would think about and conduct empirical research. Key concepts include: Even as it has transitioned from decision analysis to behavioral decision research to social psychology, the decision perspective to negotiation has remained central to practitioners and academics alike, offering both practical relevance and the foundation for exciting new lines of research. Some of the most recent directions being pursued are surprises that early contributors to the decision perspective could have never predicted, as negotiation scholars engage with other disciplines and draw insights from diverse fields ranging from philosophy to neurobiology. Such collaboration is a healthy sign for an ongoing line of negotiation research. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 06 Jul 2009
- What Do You Think?
Are You Ready to Manage in an Irrational World?
It is becoming clear that human behavior is much less rational than we assumed, says HBS professor Jim Heskett. Judging from replies to this month's question, there are many nuances to managing in an irrational world. (Online forum now closed. Next forum begins August 7.) Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 17 Feb 2009
- Research & Ideas
What’s Good about Quiet Rule-Breaking
If your company quietly allows employees to break some rules with the tacit approval of management, that's a moral gray zone. And your company is not alone. When rules are broken but privileges are not abused, such unspoken pacts between workers and management can allow both to achieve their respective goals of expressing professional identity and sustaining efforts in positive ways, says HBS professor Michel Anteby. Q&A Key concepts include: Moral gray zones in organizations rely on trust. Even if monitoring of employees increases, such gray zones are here to stay. Moral gray zones test middle management's ability to manage and to prevent abuses of mutual trust. Strong communities within occupations provide the unstated but necessary guidelines to ensure proper use of moral gray zones. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 14 Jan 2009
- Working Paper Summaries
Smart Money: The Effect of Education, Cognitive Ability, and Financial Literacy on Financial Market Participation
(Previously titled "If You Are So Smart, Why Aren't You Rich? The Effects of Education, Financial Literacy and Cognitive Ability on Financial Market Participation.") Individuals face an increasingly complex menu of financial product choices. The shift from defined benefit to defined contribution pension plans, and the growing importance of private retirement accounts, require individuals to choose the amount they save, as well as the mix of assets in which they invest. Yet, participation in financial markets is far from universal in the United States. Moreover, researchers have only a limited understanding of what factors cause participation. Cole and Shastry use a very large dataset new to the literature in order to study the important determinants of financial market participation. They find that higher levels of education and cognitive ability cause increased participation—however, financial literacy education does not. Key concepts include: The relationship between education and savings is difficult to measure, because both are affected by many factors (motivation, ability, etc.). This paper documents an important causal relationship between education and financial market participation. A set of financial literacy education programs, mandated by state governments, did not have an effect on individual savings decisions. It is imperative to conduct rigorous evaluations of financial literacy education programs to measure their efficacy. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 03 Jul 2008
- What Do You Think?
Are Followers About to Get Their Due?
Online forum now closed. Leadership may be much-discussed, but followership merits equal attention, suggests HBS professor Jim Heskett. As a follower, what advice would you give other followers who want to have an impact on their jobs and organizations? As a leader, what do you do to foster good followership? Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 11 Jan 2008
- Working Paper Summaries
See No Evil: When We Overlook Other People’s Unethical Behavior
Even good people sometimes act unethically without their own awareness. This paper explores psychological processes as they affect the ethical perception of others' behavior, and concludes with implications for organizations. First, there is a tendency for people to overlook unethical behavior in others when recognizing such behavior would harm them. Second, people might readily ignore unethical behavior when others have an agent do their dirty work for them. Third, gradual moral decay leads people to grow comfortable with behavior to which they would otherwise object. Fourth, the tendency to value outcomes over processes can lead us to accept unethical processes for far too long. Key concepts include: Most people value ethical decisions and behavior, and strive to be good. Yet psychological processes sometimes lead them to engage in questionable behaviors that are inconsistent with their own values and beliefs. It is common to fail to notice or act on information when dealing with ethically relevant decisions. Organizational leaders must understand these processes and make the structural changes necessary to reduce the harmful effects of human psychological and ethical limitations. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
- 03 Oct 2007
- Research & Ideas
Dealing with the ‘Irrational’ Negotiator
"Negotiators who are quick to label the other party 'irrational' do so at great potential cost to themselves," say HBS professors Deepak Malhotra and Max H. Bazerman. Their new book, Negotiation Genius, combines expertise in psychology with practical examples to show how anyone can improve dealmaking skills. In this excerpt, Malhotra and Bazerman describe what to do when the other party's behavior does not make sense. Open for comment; 0 Comments.
- 06 Jun 2007
- Research & Ideas
Behavioral Finance—Benefiting from Irrational Investors
Do investors really behave rationally? Behavioral finance researchers Malcolm Baker and Joshua Coval don't think humans are such cold calculators. One proof: Individual and even institutional investors often give in to inertia and hold on to shares in unwanted stock. And therein lays opportunity for investment managers and firms. Key concepts include: Far from acting in their own best interest, many individual and institutional investors are more inertial than logical when it comes to emptying their portfolios of unwanted shares. Behavioral finance replaces the traditional and idealized idea of rational decision makers with real and imperfect people who have social, cognitive, and emotional biases. The resulting inefficiencies in the capital markets can create opportunities for investment managers and firms. Closed for comment; 0 Comments.
To What Degree Does “Identity” Affect Economic Performance?
Summing up comments to his March column, Jim Heskett says perceptions vary widely on the issue of "identity" and economic performance, particularly as it applies to the U.S. What will it take to turn around negative trends in employee identity? (Forum now closed. Next forum begins April 2.) Closed for comment; 0 Comments.