Search results

"One of the hardest parts of being a leader is handling disagreements about values. The skills required to do this are increasingly important in polarized societies where there is pressure for businesses and organizations to have a sense of purpose and "do the right thing." Our book helps readers address these challenges. To do this, we don''t give a simplistic cookie-cutter recipe for what is right and wrong. Rather, we guide readers on a journey to rigorously explore their values and better understand the values of others. We discuss the human psychology that drives conflicts over values as well as the philosophical frameworks that have guided people for millennia. We provide strategies, based in research from psychology and the behavioral sciences, whichthat readers can use to implement their values in their lives and their organizations. Topics covered include moral intuitions, self-serving biases, situational pressures, social norms, the role of business in society, consequentialism/utilitarianism, motives, perspective-taking, justice, fairness, and liberty"--

As societies become more polarized, there is increasing pressure for business leaders to have a sense of purpose and to make moral decisions. Being a good leader requires both a keen understanding of the realities of human decision making as well as an analysis of what is right and wrong. This book integrates lessons from three intellectual traditions - psychology, philosophy, and political economy - to guide readers on a journey to rigorously explore their values and decision making. The authors begin by examining people's intuitions about right and wrong. They then clarify principles that embody these intuitions and help readers engage with others whose intuitions or principles differ from their own. Ultimately, this book teaches readers how to be strategic as they lead with their values: as individuals, as designers of organizations, and as businesspeople interacting with societal institutions.

In Bounded Rationality and Politics, Jonathan Bendor considers two schools of behavioral economics—the first guided by Tversky and Kahneman's work on heuristics and biases, which focuses on the mistakes people make in judgment and choice; the second as described by Gerd Gigerenzer's program on fast and frugal heuristics, which emphasizes the effectiveness of simple rules of thumb. Finding each of these radically incomplete, Bendor's illuminating analysis proposes Herbert Simon's pathbreaking work on bounded rationality as a way to reconcile the inconsistencies between the two camps. Bendor shows that Simon's theory turns on the interplay between the cognitive constraints of decision makers and the complexity of their tasks