Error Estimate and Fairness in Resource Allocation with Inaccurate Information Sharing

International audienceIn resource allocation systems, inaccurate information sharing situations are such that users can be aware, up to a small error, about the other users' demands and the available global resource (which can be insufficient to meet the overall demand). Consequently, given an allocation rule, users can predict an allocation that will not necessarily coincide with the actual one. In this work, we provide an estimation of the error for a number of allocation rules and compare their robustness in inaccurate information sharing settings

Giving or Taking: The Role of Dispositional Power Motivation and Positive Affect in Profit Maximization?

Socio-economic decisions are commonly explained by rational cost vs. benefit considerations, whereas person variables have not usually been considered. The present study aims at investigating the degree to which dispositional power motivation and affective states predict socio-economic decisions. The power motive was assessed both indirectly and directly using a TAT-like picture test and a power motive self-report, respectively. After nine months, 62 students completed an affect rating and performed on a money allocation task (Social Values Questionnaire). We hypothesized and confirmed that dispositional power should be associated with a tendency to maximize one’s profit but to care less about another party’s profit. Additionally, positive affect showed effects in the same direction. The results are discussed with respect to a motivational approach explaining socio-economic behaviour.economic decision-making, rational choice theory, personality, implicit power motive, positive affect, operant motive test

Leader-Follower Effects in Resource Dilemmas: The Roles of Leadership Selection and Social Responsibility

Previous research on the allocation of scarce resources shows that when people are assigned labels of leader or follower in their group, leaders allocate more of the scarce resources to themselves than followers do. In three laboratory studies, we examine the idea that how people are selected for the leader role (i.e. election or appointment) determines whether leaders take more or equal shares (relative to followers) from a common resource. In a first experiment, we show that participants were more accepting of norm violating behavior by an appointed versus elected leader. In a second experiment, we show that when participants were assigned to a leader or follower role, allocations of appointed leaders differed significantly from those of elected leaders and followers, whereas there was no difference between the two latter conditions. Moreover, elected leaders were shown to feel more social responsibility than both appointed leaders and followers. In a final experiment, we show that when participants were primed with the concept of social responsibility (relative to a neutral condition) no difference in allocations between appointed and elected leaders emerged

Affect and Fairness

We investigate the role of affect and deliberation on social preferences. In our laboratory experiment subjects decide on a series of mini Dictator games while they are under varying degrees of cognitive load. The cognitive load is intended to decrease deliberation and therefore enhance the influence of affect on behavior. In each game subjects have two options: they can decide between a fair or an unfair allocation. We find that subjects in a high-load condition are more generous - they more often choose the fair allocation than subjects in a low-load condition. The series of mini Dictator games also allows us to investigate how subjects react to the gamesÕ varying levels of advantageous inequality. Low-load subjects react considerably more to the degree of advantageous inequality. Our results therefore underscore the importance of affect for basic altruistic behavior and deliberation in adjusting decisions to a given situation.social preferences, cognitive load, affect and emotion, lab experiment

CHANGES NEEDED IN THE ORGANIZATION OF THE NATION'S FOOD INDUSTRY TO MEET CHALLENGES AHEAD

Industrial Organization,

Social value orientation as a moral intuition: Decision-making in the dictator game

We studied the decision making process in the Dictator Game and showed that decisions are the result of a two-step process. In a first step, decision makers generate an automatic, intuitive proposal. Given sufficient motivation and cognitive resources, they adjust this in a second, more deliberated phase. In line with the social intuitionist model, we show that one’s Social Value Orientation determines intuitive choice tendencies in the first step, and that this effect is mediated by the dictator’s perceived interpersonal closeness with the receiver. Self-interested concerns subsequently lead to a reduction of donation size in step 2. Finally, we show that increasing interpersonal closeness can promote pro-social decision-making.Dictator game; social dilemma; decision-making; two stage model; social value orientation, interpersonal closeness

Psychological Contracts, OCB and Customer Service: An Exploratory Examination

This paper examines the relationships among the psychological contract, fairness, OCB, and customer service. We report on two exploratory studies that provide insight into psychological contract violations and subsequent perceptions of fairness, as well as OCB activity. A linkage is made between psychological contracts and behavior directed internally and those directed externally (i.e., customer service). We extend the current theory to suggest implications for effectively managing customer service employee OCB. Finally, suggestions are made for both practice and future research to be conducted in a multidisciplinary design

Predicting in-role and extra-role performance by gender

Men and women are said to perceive justice differently, with women proposed to be more concerned with relational issues and men focused more on material issues. In this study, the potential for differential effects of justice on performance by gender was analyzed across the four contemporary types of justice. Respondents were 265 male and 113 female occupationally diverse employees in a single organization. The results show significant differences in how men and women respond to the four justice types with only one - informational justice - acting similarly by gender. Women were more interested in maintaining social harmony than men. The results appear to strongly support the use of the justice judgment model over the group-value model as a means of explaining the gender differences. Implications for management include the importance of informational justice both generally and within the performance appraisal process<br /