Economic rationality and ethical behavior

This paper argues that economic rationality and ethical behavior cannot be reduced one to the other, casting doubts on the validity of formulas like 'profit is ethical' or 'ethics pays'. In order to express ethical dilemmas as opposing economic interest with ethical concerns, we propose a model of rational behavior that combines these two irreducible dimensions in an open but not arbitrary manner. Behaviors that are neither ethical nor profitable are considered irrational (non-arbitrariness). However, behaviors that are profitable but unethical, and behaviors that are ethical but not profitable, are all treated as rational (openness). Combining ethical concerns with economic interest, ethical business is in turn an optimal form of rationality between venality and sacrifice. Because every one prefers to communicate that he acts ethically, ethical business remains ambiguous until some economic interest is actually sacrificed. We argue however that ethical business has an interest in demonstrating its consistency between communication and behavior by a transparent attitude. On the other hand, venal behaviors must remain confidential to hide the corresponding lack of consistency. This discursive approach based on transparency and confidentiality helps to further distinguish between ethical and unethical business behaviors.Rationality, business ethics, economic rationality, transparency, confidentiality

A process approach to the utility for gambling

This paper argues that any specific utility or disutility for gambling must be excluded from expected utility because such a theory is consequential while a pleasure or displeasure for gambling is a matter of process, not of consequences. A (dis)utility for gambling is modeled as a process utility which monotonically combines with expected utility restricted to consequences. This allows for a process (dis)utility for gambling to be revealed. As an illustration, the model shows how empirical observations in the Allais paradox can reveal a process disutility of gambling. A more general model of rational behavior combining processes and consequences is then proposed and discussed.Gambling, expected utility, process utility, rationality, irrationality, consequentialism

The biased balance: Observation, formalism and interpretation of a dissymmetric measuring device

This paper studies a balance whose unobservable fulcrum is not necessarily located at the middle of its two pans. It presents three different models, showing how this lack of symmetry modifies the observation, the formalism and the interpretation of such a biased measuring device. It argues that the biased balance can be an interesting source of inspiration for broadening the representational theory of measurement.Representational theory of measurement, biased measurement, bias, rationality, irrationality, observer, dependence, indeterminacy, invariance

The role of power for distributive fairness

We employ an experimental labour setting to study fairness in the division of gains from productive activity. The focus is on the impact of power structures on allocation decisions and on fairness perceptions. Two types of actors are involved in generating a gain, but only one contributes actively by completing a real-effort task. In three treatments, decision power to divide the gain is assigned (1) to the inactive, (2) jointly to the inactive and the active, and (3) to the active. Results show that the impact of power goes beyond changing final allocations: it also significantly alters fairness perceptions. Decision power - in particular absolute power – mediates and significantly enhances self-serving biases. Results complement studies on the psychology of fairness perceptions. Moreover, the paper discusses implications for organizational design.

Homothetic interval orders

N*-set, semigroup, weak order, semiorder, interval order, intransitive indifference, independence, homothetic structure, representation

Biased representation of homothetic preferences on homogeneous sets

In the homogeneous case of one-dimensional objects, we show that any preference relation that is positive and homothetic can be represented by a quantitative utility function and unique bias. This bias may favor or disfavor the preference for an object. In the first case, preferences are complete but not transitive and an object may be preferred even when its utility is lower. In the second case, preferences are asymmetric and transitive but not negatively transitive and it may not be sufficient for an object to have a greater utility for be preferred. In this manner, the bias reflects the extent to which preferences depart from the maximization of a utility function.Intransitive preferences, incomplete preferences, irrational behavior, bias, procedural concerns, process of choice

Biased quantitative measurement of interval ordered homothetic preferences

We represent interval ordered homothetic preferences with a quantitative homothetic utility function and a multiplicative bias. When preferences are weakly ordered (i.e. when indifference is transitive), such a bias equals 1. When indifference is intransitive, the biasing factor is a positive function smaller than 1 and measures a threshold of indifference. We show that the bias is constant if and only if preferences are semiordered, and we identify conditions ensuring a linear utility function. We illustrate our approach with indifference sets on a two dimensional commodity space.Weak order, semiorder, interval order, intransitive indifference, independence, homothetic, representation, linear utility

Ethical differentiation and market behavior: An experimental approach

Does ethical differentiation of products affect market behavior? We examined this issue in triopolistic experimental markets where producers set prices. One producer’s costs were higher than the others. In two treatments, the additional costs were attributed to compliance with ethical guidelines. In the third, no justification was provided. Many participants playing the role of consumers reduced their experimental gains by purchasing the ethically differentiated product at a higher price – whether or not they knew the amount of extra cost. Individual differences were important (students of business/economics paid smaller premia than others). Finally, we speculate about the observed “demand function” for ethics and emphasize the use of experimental methodology to complement empirical studies designed to assess the potential market for ethically differentiated products.Fair trade, ethical premia, price competition, contextual effects, Leex

The domain and interpretation of utility functions: An exploration

This paper proposes an exploration of the methodology of utility functions that distinguishes interpretation from representation. While representation univocally assigns numbers to the entities of the domain of utility functions, interpretation relates these entities with empirically observable objects of choice. This allows us to make explicit the standard interpretation of utility functions which assumes that two objects have the same utility if and only if the individual is indifferent among them. We explore the underlying assumptions of such an hypothesis and propose a non-standard interpretation according to which objects of choice have a well-defined utility although individuals may vary in the way they treat these objects in a specific context. We provide examples of such a methodological approach that may explain some reversal of preferences and suggest possible mathematical formulations for further research.Utility, representaion, interpretation, preference reversal

Ethics outside, within or beyond OR models

Since ethical concerns are calling for more attention within Operational Research, we present three approaches to combine Operational Research models with ethics. Our intention is to clarify the trade-offs faced by the OR community, in particular the tension between the scientific legitimacy of OR models (ethics outside OR models) and the integration of ethics within models (ethics within OR models). Presenting and discussing an approach that combines OR models with the process of OR (ethics beyond OR models), we suggest rigorous ways to express the relation between ethics and OR models. As our work is exploratory, we are trying to avoid a dogmatic attitude and call for further research. We argue that there are interesting avenues for research at the theoretical, methodological and applied levels and that the OR community can contribute to an innovative, constructive and responsible social dialogue about its ethics.Ethics, models, processes, OR