BIG PICTURE OF ECON & MANAGING
(Class 1 is a consideration of the connection between economic analysis and managerial insights at the broadest level)
2. Case of Chapman President, James Doti, on what economics can do for managers
2.1 This piece touches on some ideas that we will cover again, in more detail in later classes but provides a nice perspective on econ and managing from someone deeply knowledgeable about both
2.2. Importance of understanding and applying the econ concept of comparative advantage; Doti’s discussion shows that this is really the way that the organization links up with the marketplace in the way most valuable to the company.
-- Chapman’s emphasis on film studies based on location advantage;
-- Interdisciplinary topics/focus based on serendipity
2.3 Importance of incentives; in many ways, economics is the study of incentives and how people respond to them and changes in them.
-- Preferences matter for choices along with incentives; in an organization basic people differ in their personality composition, such as ethical integrity; however, preferences do not
often change a lot or rapidly so that incentives are the real lever to influence outcomes -- Incentives are a way of connecting to value of people (attracting-retaining)
-- Doti emphasizes the importance of recognizing both monetary and non-monetary incentives (recognition); money matters, but money isn’t the only thing that matters
2.4 Importance of identifying sunk cost in decisions
-- Doti emphasizes importance of recognizing failure/priorities;
-- Often, people misperceive sunk costs as “all money we’ve invested”
-- Chapman consideration of $1million into new classroom facility already started v.
student union
2.4 Pricing tools and ideas
-- The tool of price discrimination: pricing according to consumer valuation by
individual or group; a widespread practice in higher ed
-- Doti notes limits of applying this pricing template in all situations; price
Discrimination and its limits, difficult to do in markets that are highly price competitive
3. Constrained optimization as framework for organizing thinking
3.1 BSZ present the shell of the framework of constrained optimization (maximizes or minimizes some objective while limited by some constraint or boundary) which is the most widely used way of organizing thinking in economics
3.2 This is how economists think about choices (individual, firms, ...)
3.3. Organizations need to be clear on objectives – what they are trying to do
-- connection to “mission” focus of the 1990s; if you don’t know what you are trying to do
from a marketplace output (quantity/quality) perspective, how can you expect employees,
managers to do their jobs well (BSZ reference to “Star Trek” mission)
-- Clarifying objectives more important as organizational output becomes broader in scope
and more quality oriented
-- Objectives can be too broad (emphasis in the 1990s)
-- Can also be too narrow (HBS’ Max Bazerman more recent study/emphasis on goal setting problems where goals don’t put enough weight on things like integrity or lack of recognition that some goals, such as ethics, cannot be about outcomes
3.4 Clarifying organizational/project constraints critical
-- World at War example; Winston Churchill a great visionary; able to envision very valuable strategies, but known as “adventurer”before the Prime Minister job fell to him in 1940; his problem was not clearly seeing the constraints and limits to seemingly useful strategies; -- Examples of Gallipoli in WWI and Norway WWII invasions;
-- Good managers (maybe utilizing subordinates) identify important constraints without “letting the auditors take over”;
4. Importance of People: Because of its emphasis on incentives and highly analytical consideration of using “resources” including human resources, economics and economists probably contribute to the view of people as interchangeable parts and undersell some of the critical aspects of managing people;
4.1 Epigrams from Chapter 4 in my Ballfield to Boardrooms:
The number one reason why one team outperforms another is people.
▪Red Auerbach, former NBA coach and general manager
The tragedy of our times is that we’ve got it backwards. We’ve learned to love techniques and use people.
▪Herb Kelleher, Southwest Airlines CEO
4.2 People are a unique and critical resource; machines and materials add value to companies but they don’t think or feel; they can’t indentify advantages, mistakes, ... They may help in doing these, but people are the core of any business. Chapman’s James Doti, an economist, speaks to this clearly
-- They are not all alike; there is a “probability distribution” of talents, skills, motivation, ...
-- Case of Vince Lombardi, Green Bay Packers coach of 1960s
-- Lombardi’s loud, highly-disciplined, drilling style attracted most of the attention and
a generation of disciples
-- vastly very underappreciated aspect of Lombardi and likely key to his success was his
understanding of people
-- Lombardi understood importance of identifying key personnel; he spent his first months
with the team intensively studying film to assess the players that he had; he determined
to place Paul Hornung (former Heisman winner) who had been on bench in a key
role
-- Lombardi recognized that individual goals and team not the same and that purely trying
to rely on preaching team goals wasn’t sufficient; beyond his “tough management” style
he integrated (meaningful) recognition of individual excellence as a motivational tool
with regular handout of weekly (small) monetary awards each Thursday
5. Managing v. Meddling: A big temptation in management is to overdo it; managing too far down or too actively; we will discuss decisions rights in organizations in more detail in a later class but seeing this in a big picture view can be helpful
5.1 Epigrams from Chapter 8 Ballfield to Boardrooms:
Rick, you’re too controlling. Sit down. Relax.
▪Boston Celtic fan to Celtic coach Rick Pitino
Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to get their work done.
▪Peter Drucker, management expert
5.2 Sports examples: 1983 Houston team and coach Guy Lewis’ decision to step in and slow down the championship game; Rick Pitino’s experience in Boston.
-- While managers can be complacent and do too little, the curse of many active, success-oriented managers is to do too much.
-- Organizational processes (all processes) have a certain amount of variation built into them;
trying to eliminate all of this variation or reduce it by tweaks and short-term, active
management only makes things worse
-- In the short term, active management only helps when there are clear-cut, identifiable,
correctable problems manifesting themselves; otherwise, reducing problems and
improving outcomes requires a longer term, process-wide consideration
Monday, February 1, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
test comment
ReplyDeleteThere were three things that stuck out in my mind from chapter 2. Two of these were not really new but very good reminders. The first of these was the concept that people are not selfish. I believe the text used the example of people will donate to charity if it gives them satisfaction. While this concept is elementary, it is a very good reminder for me personally to always looks for things of value in an analysis, negotiation, etc. It reminds me to keep in mind that value may not be something tangible. The second concept which again is nothing new is the concept of sunk cost. Even thought I can normally identify sunk costs, at least in the situations I am typically presented with, I still find it hard to let some of these go. In other words it is hard for me to forget about the resources I have spent up until a given time. Also, this reminded me when I was doing some work for an stop or proceed analysis at work to remove all the cost up until this point in time before deciding if we should proceed on the project. Finally, the third item, after finishing the last part of chapter 2 I was left with an overwhelming realization of just how bad my algebra and graphing skills have become!
ReplyDeleteIt has been quite some time since I had an Econ class, but the one concept I distinctly recall from my first Econ class was Utility. Up until I read this chapter, I had only thought of utility in terms of goods as they related to me as a human being alone. The case at Merrill Lynch made it evident that utility has a much larger meaning then that which I had attached to it in my mind. It can reflect more of an intellectual, employee-based unitization. On a different note, I found the happy-is-productive model completely ludicrous. The text alluded that under this model, if a person is offered a lifetime salary that would not change, they would be happy and hence productive. I definitely don't believe that an unhappy worker is more productive than a happy one. However, there is no reward for hard work under this 'happy' model as well as no repercussion for slacking. I tend to think that a challenged employee will be more productive. Much like Kevin, by the time I got through this chapter last week, I had a great fear that I would really need to brush up on my graphing skills to get through this class!
ReplyDeleteI really had enjoyed reading on the Merrill Lynch integrity issue and how sometimes their analysts were compensated the most when they used very little integrity. But in order to change the way people/customers saw their investment advice from "used car salesman" to actual honest advice they had to change the way the compensated their analysts and they had to pay them on the quality of their investment advice. My second year in pursuing my undergraduate degree, I had been selling cars. They would not allow you to make any suggestions to the consumer. (I believe a car is a big investment) I had to sell any and all cars. Even if I knew the car was not good. Needless to say I am not doing that any longer.
ReplyDeleteIf I am investing I certainly would hope someone would actually care about my money, the way that I would.
I also enjoyed the demand function section. If your money goes down, your chance of buying anything above and beyond your means goes down. It deals on strictly cash. I know for a good part of last year, I was unemployed. So I did not buy much. If you dont have the money to spend you can't buy it.
Incentives, S(k)unk cost, happy-go-lucky employees, comparative advantage & other…
ReplyDeleteI would agree that one of the most important topics for any manager is to understand what motivates his / her employees to achieve more; however, one shouldn’t loose sleep or waste precious time on trying to satisfy the every possible want or need. Several studies on the subject matter already exist and one particularly stuck with me: A life-time longitudinal study by Staw, Berry & Clausen. The study, as most Org. Behavior scholars would recall, covers over 40 years of research on motivation, job satisfaction and impact of employee performance. The main point is that little could be done externally to motivate or influence employees to perform better and improve their level job satisfaction. My impression is that managers will often employ negative, coercive and / or monetary measures, either because of own inability to understand nuances, low EQ, or just simply due to being in a time pinch.
This is not intended to minimize the importance of understanding the fine characteristics of our subordinates or superiors, rather than to provide a realistic set of expectations. I have a few examples in my immediate surrounding of happy, underachieving and unproductive employees. Their level of expertise, proximity to retirement and care-free attitude (acquired for whatever reason) creates a complex situation.
As far as sunk cost, there are only a few things that will get a manager “relieved of duties” faster than wasting company’s money. For that reason, many have tried to “recover” or minimize failed projects, and attempt to morph these failures into something successful. It is a powerful political tool; therefore the need to justify decisions still exists. Perhaps a middle-ground-view should be adopted: instead of basing or future decisions of s(k)unk cost, we should move forward, but dedicate time to investigate root cause of the problem. I know, I’m so insightful…
After reading the chapter I really understood something that happened in my company as in the Merrill Lynch integrity issue. We had a compensation system where the managers will receive a bonus based on performance measures as: Speed of service just to put an example. Some managers will use the slow time of the day to enter several zero dollar transactions to average lower speed of service. Other managers will sacrifice the customer service in order to avoid higher times. After careful review the company discontinued this compensation system. I personally learn that as a manager I need to be very careful when trying to affect behavior by affecting constraints as individuals are very clever to find ways to maximize their utility even when integrity may be at risk.
ReplyDeleteThe company I work for is engaged in a returns to scale scenarios with our competitor in an arrangement similar to the VW / Volvo relationship in Chapter 5. Both companies had explosive powder plants, neither running at capacity, both struggling with high unit costs. Our competitor "closed and dozed" their plant leaving ours to run at maximum efficiency. It is a net cost reduction for both parties. It also allowed us to then be cost competitive with offshore suppliers and grow our market share. For new people is seems counter-intuitive to supply the competitor. However unit costs are more important than emotional decisions
ReplyDeleteThe company I work for is engaged in a returns to scale scenarios with our competitor in an arrangement similar to the VW / Volvo relationship in Chapter 5. Both companies had explosive powder plants, neither running at capacity, both struggling with high unit costs. Our competitor "closed and dozed" their plant leaving ours to run at maximum efficiency. It is a net cost reduction for both parties. It also allowed us to them be cost competitive with offshore suppliers and grow our market share. For new people is seems counter-intuitive to supply the competitor. However unit costs are more important than emotional decisions
ReplyDeleteThe importance of people is one thing that stood out to me. As a manager it is so easy to get wrapped up with procedures, processes, work instructions, metrics, etc, and forget that your most effective weapon is the brain power of your people. In an effort to standardize and drive efficiency I think that we sometimes dull the minds of our best people and allow them to check out mentally. I really like Drucker's quote "Most of what we call management consists of making it difficult for people to get their work done." I realize I have been guilty of this. This drives the question of how do we find the line between effective prductive managmentand destructive management.
ReplyDeleteAnother thing I found interesting is the conflict between stretch goals and ethics. I have been a manager for over 3 years and until this year have never had specific goals for my team. This year, we were advised (forced) by corporate to create goals for our team for the "delivery" component of our department. We are measured on on-time proposal dwgs and on-time engineering. I have set fairly aggressive stretch goals of 95% and 85% respectively, thinking this would serve as motivation for my team. But after reading the research on the HBS site, I question the validity of this. Since we are only measuring "delivery" will "quality" suffer? Will ethics be compromised to push through work just to make the numbers look good (even though I preach not to do this)? Will my team become deflated and unmotivated if we fail to meet our goals? I still believe goals will be productive for my group, but this warns me not to manipulate my team with the goals, as it will backfire.
ReplyDeleteOne thing I did not follow was in the Merrill Lynch example (p29). The author suggests that reducing the emphasis on investment banking reduces the gains from disonest advice and results in more honest behavior. It seems the author is making a big assumption that a substantial portion of the investments Merrill Lynch covers are bad. If the number of poor investments at Merrill Lynch are indeed that high, I am not convinced this change would really make the employee feel better. I understand the point they are trying to make, but I question how real the impact would be.
ReplyDeleteI have been owner of a small business for last 10 years and a manager of a pharmacy dept. for last 4 years. I have gone through a lot of incentive programs. One thing for sure that as an employer or a manager; one has to be very careful in establishing incentives. Improper incentives can really create a mess. You try to achieve one thing and create another problem in the process. Money is not the only solution, even though it is very important factor. Along with money; work environment, relationship with employees, support system, vacation, true open door policy in place, and many more other factors one should consider and create a good balance for their employees. Everybody is different. To create a work satisfaction is very difficult. After all work is work. It is on going challenge for employer and a manager to keep employees motivated and engaged. In today's word, we are very much into setting a guidelines for everything; in doing so we are ignoring a commonsense approach to the daily problems and challenges.
ReplyDeletePerhaps I am a cynic, but the "economists do not assert that people are selfish" statement is a bit hard to swallow. The Merrill-Lynch example and the current banking fiasco plus WorldCom, Enron, and GM disasters demonstrate how greed can impact personal and global economic situations. Does this mean that the study of economics is a purely academic pursuit?
ReplyDeleteI contend that our current toil (remember, I don't have a formal business background) will ready us for the real world, given this background of marginal analysis, models of behavior, demand elasticity, and profit maximization curves. Will we be able to optimize the price discrimination in our latest venture for our customers? It is certainly not clear yet, but I welcome my discovery in our common quest.
I have often wondered why, as I read our initial 4 chapters how the Nobel Association could award their prize in Economics for a particular theory, then about a decade later award it for a totaly "new" and contrary theory. I guess that's why I'm not an economist.
Thoughts on the Sunk cost----
ReplyDeleteSunk cost are hard to forget. One reason is because, we have spend lot of money and time after it and it is very hard to let it go. Your ego gets hurt. But one must let it go. One should not consider to make a future decisions. It can convince you to make a poor choice about how to spend your time and money. One should concentrate on making a best decisions for that moment and going forward. It can saddle you with more debt than value. It can lead you to poor investing decisions. Sunk cost are often very tricky. One should avoid sunk costs unless it is highly certain that you are going to actually do something. So what is the take home message about sunk cost? Always, make the best decision now. Do not let yourself be swayed by money you have already spent and can not get back.
--Vick Patel not Vicky
I have always considered the concept of opportunity costs to be one of the most important aspects of effective decision making. The concept that every alternative has both a loss and a gain helps to develop a realistic method for evaluating these alternatives. Page 18’s example of miscalculated opportunity costs reminds me that we often forget to calculate one of the most valuable opportunity costs, our time. An example to consider would be in the economic impact of spending Saturdays with our families vs. taking this time to further our educational goals. This same problem exists in determining the economic costs of alternatives in a variety of circumstances, thus explaining the difficulty of making predictions and trying to correctly determine the costs and benefits of each.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the “Happy-Is Productive Model” listed within the text, I don’t feel that the reason that the Merrill Lynch employees mislead customers into purchasing stocks of poorly rated companies was due to unhappiness but rather greed. I do however agree with the quote from the book that “Utility is maximized at the point of tangency between constraint and an indifference curve” (p.23). The study of economics is complicated for this very reason, this point at which risk aversion meets profit maximization is extremely subjective. Although the text discusses several factors that play into how individuals make financial decisions, economics is one of the most difficult sciences that I have ever studied because it tries to predict human behavior.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting concept from chapter two is the idea that an optimal choice exists within the median point of an indifference curve. The illustration of decision making in a two dimensional illustration is very good for discussion, particularly when considering simple alternatives. In the case of Page 25 and a comparison between food and clothing I wonder how the illustration would change when considering additional factors like shelter or water. Additionally, while the need to demonstrate economic principles requires us to simplify our illustration there are many basic needs that must be addressed when considering real world choices. An interesting addition to the optimal choice decision could be a consideration between basic needs and luxury items. In this case I would expect that we would first need to satisfy our basic needs and would then begin to consider addressing luxury needs. This would most certainly change the positioning of the optimum choice based on differing income and price levels.
ReplyDeleteI have not taken a Econ class since my undergraduate degree which has been several years back, but found several things now that I am a management position useful. One thing was the Creative Gaming of the System were the MIS manger purchased 20 new computers which took over a year because he purchased one at a time on his personal credit card because he wanted the airline frequent flyer miles that were associated with his card. Brings me to why several of my team members jump at the chance to purchased competitive samples at retail for quarterly analysis to compare against the product we produce at Fruit of the Loom which are also placed on their personal credit cards for the same reason.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Merrill Lynch, I believe that most people make up today are not loyal to the company the work for as the jump ship majority of the time because of money. Greed is becoming the norm. Product-of-the-Environment Model argues that that the behaviors of the individuals are largely due to their upbringings and I would say that is true in some cases but I also believe that the companies today are not rewarding people like they did when are parents worked their whole life’s at the same company. Loyalty, Integrity and proud to be part of an organization meant something.
Since I’m in sales, the Merrill Lynch situation really hit home. When looking at compensation based on performance it is really hard to see into the future and assess every situation that will be manipulated to maximize the earning opportunity. It seems that it is human nature to find the path of least resistance. My company has put a premium on productivity so it is in the benefit of the sales person to have the largest number of contracts. This sometimes can hurt the customer and the company because the sales rep will under sale the account a lot of the time just to get the productivity bonus. The intent of the bonus program was to increase productivity but it has created potential revenue loss. Also because the customer is receiving the cheapest product available they will typically not see the results of a product that should have been recommended and in turn discontinue the service the following year.
ReplyDeleteWhen Goal Setting Goes Bad – Management cannot walk away after setting a goal. In the late 80s, I was a coder (assigning diagnostic and procedure codes to determine reimbursement for the facility) for Humana. My boss answered to the VP of Finance who answered to a Humana Corporate Finance officer. A directive (goal) was given to each facility to get as many charts coded as possible in order to get the unbilled amount as low as possible and to “do anything necessary” to make this happen. Long story short – Humana had to pay back millions of dollars due to fraudulent billing. Many coders left during this process including myself. The directive went against our ethical code within the American Health Information Management Association as well as personal ethics. Management walked away from a directive (goal) and left the objectives up to each individual coder to carry out.
ReplyDeleteManaging versus Meddling – If you try to change multiple items, how do you know what worked? In a PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, and Act) or Six Sigma environment, it is important to make strategic changes to a process in order to determine the exact item or control that needed changing. Unless, you have low hanging fruit to immediately change and move on through the process. Another aspect of the PDCA would be the aspect of normal variation as opposed to abnormal variation and how much of either is acceptable. Management must consider that there will always be an amount of normal variation to contend with. It would seem that more time and attention should be spent on finding the cause of abnormal variation. The size of a facility or company could alter/dictate how “hands on” a manager could/should be in order to decrease abnormal variation
ReplyDeleteVery interesting comments from many of you. There are studies that support the correlation between happiness and productvity. Perhaps job satisfaction is a better label than happiness and to points made earlier, managers have to put a lot of work into setting up job satisfaction that also leads to desired business outcomes.
ReplyDeleteThis leads us to the Merrill Lynch fiasco. While to outsiders it looks like a simple case of greed, I suspect that mixed into the equation was a matter of survival as well. I'm sure we all know a person or two who is trapped in their jobs and not happy with the demands of their leaders.
There appeared to be a strong correlation between the Good Citizen model and what is commonly known as the American work ethic. Unfortunately I think we confuse being model employees with being "dupes" for the "man". whoever that is. Although BSZ states that in this model there's no need to pay incentives, I think a good leader would recognize and appreciate his employees strong personal desire to do a good job and reward it accordingly.
I've often vacillated between monetary contributions to charities versus performing "face-time" with that particular charity, and this conundrum brings us to the discussion of opportunity costs. Should I volunteer my time or should I stay at work a little longer in order to gain additional monies to donate.
ReplyDeleteIf we set up an optimal choice graph with personal utility as the x-axis and charitable utility on the y-axis, one can imagine a straight line that, instead of a budget line, we would have a time line (I've been told there is only 24 hours in a day). I can thence build an indifference curve to demonstrate whether to donate my time & services or to donate a monetary contribution. But then, it might take all the fun out of it, too.
What I found interesting in this chapter was the application of the indifference curves and constraint analysis to inputs like income and integrity. While it may be a stretch to quantify a qualitative input like integrity, the underlying premise remains true – given constraints, choices boil down to trade-offs. Reading through the Merrill case, it's clear that this was another case of conflict of interest. I have had many clients over the years that are similarly incentivized to "do the wrong thing." The ultimate solution, paying bonuses based on the quality of the investment advice, seems intuitive on the surface. However, the key point for me was that this incentive system is outwardly focused on the customer, not a self-serving corporate metric like investment banking activity. What if we were able to replicate this concept in other areas? For example, perhaps physicians could be compensated based on a metric associated with healing, not just the office visits they book or the surgeries they perform.
ReplyDeleteEconomic Choice confirms to me what I have always thought, is that people should live within a budget. When you first start out in college or as a married couple, if you dont live within the budget you will find yourself spending way beyond your means. And finding you cannot pay off your debt.
ReplyDeleteIf you look at footnote 2 "bounded rationality" which says that people will generally know best for their needs and typically will act in a rational manner.
Whenever I go out to a store, I dont go and spend the money to buy the TV, because I have a nice one at home. This Economic Choice, is kind of the way I operate, my budgeting and my overall spending habits.
The Merrill Lynch fiasco reconfirms for me how vital it is for a manager to have a good relationship/understanding of his or her employees. Simply because managers' responses to problems are likely going to depend on their understanding their people’s motives and believed reactions. Knowing your employees and how/why they operate the way they do and this knowledge will help you effectively know how to react and lead your people.
ReplyDeleteI subscribe to the only-money-matters model of reasoning why Merrill Lynch experienced this. I would venture to say that Merrill Lynch had some type of financial bonus structure that encouraged these sales reps to act the way they did - they saw an opportunity to make more money for themselves and they took it - they didn't care who they hurt to get the money either.
A random thought, but the idea of a sunk cost is hard for me to get over as well. Working in the pharmaceutical industry I continuously get internal company voicemails letting the workers know about drug "pn450" that failed phase 3 trials. I know that my company puts millions upon millions of dollars into research for all of these failed drugs and the idea that that money is just gone and forgotten about seems crazy. I understand that hey the drug failed...what can you do about it but go on to the next one. But, sometimes I think, "man if they could just tweak the molecule a little bit...just spend a little more money on r&d, what would happen to the drug...could it be more effective or safer."
Costs:
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to cost, economists and accountants use the term "COST" to mean different although related things. Economists define cost in terms of opportunities that are sacrificed when a choice is made; may be they mean simply benefits lost. Accountants define cost in terms of resources consumed. Their measures can be used to evaluate managerial performance. This is very interesting to me. Word "cost" is same, but two different way of looking at it.