Worse but equal
Subtitle: the influence of social categories on resource allocations
By: Stephen Garcia, Max H. Bazerman, Shirli Kopelman, Dale T. Miller
Contributors: Bazerman, Max H.; Kopelman, Shirli; Miller, Dale T.; Harvard Business School
Edition: 2nd rev.
Series: Working paper / Harvard Business School -- 06-033; Working paper (Harvard Business School) -- 06-033.
Publisher: Harvard Business School
Published: 2009
Place of publication: [Boston]
Language: eng
Number of pages: 24
Description: This paper explores the influence of social categories on the perceived trade-off between relatively bad but equal distribution of resources between two parties and profit maximizing, yet asymmetric payoffs. Study 1 and 2 showed that people prefer to maximize profits when interacting within their social category, but chose suboptimal individual and joint profits when interacting across social categories. Study 3 demonstrated that outside observers, who were not members of the focal social categories, also were less likely to maximize profits when resources were distributed across social category lines. Study 4 showed that the transaction utility of maximizing profits required greater compensation when resources were distributed across, in contrast to within social categories. We discuss the ethical implications of these decision making biases in the context of organizations.
Notes: Previously published as: Social categories and minimizing joint gains : an ethical dilemma? / Stephen Garcia, Max H. Bazerman, Dale T. Miller. c2008.

Originally published as: Maximizing joint gains : transaction utility within and between groups. c2006.

"Revised June 2009"--Publisher's website.

Includes bibliographical references.