Wednesday, January 05, 2011

game theory redux posting

Game theory is interesting area, applicable to many areas in life, work etc. This post presents some small intros in area, without going deeper - this helps keeping post pragmatical without too much academic influence. Caveat lector : Described acts might or might not have happened and are here only for illustrative purposes. Notes on game theory with intro. The example below is from the book i read recently. Book name is not here to keep focus on posting, so if wanting pointers, just contact me. Parents are worried that their teenager gets pregnant underaged (too young). To prevent this they tell that if she will - then they throw her out from home. In game theory this might have thought impact if daughter beliefs this. Now, if we think that parents love their daughter it is then their best interest to take care of her - and if she becomes mother underaged then she needs parents more than even. So it is parent's best interest to not throw her out. (what if girl plays according to that?) The above lays presentation on thinking systematically with game theory context. This reflects a so-called macho-chicken (Hawk-Dowe) game. This old thing where two cars are riding from opposite directions towards each other, and chicken is the one who turns car off from crashing line. Game can also end that neither party turn off, which means accident. So for both players it is beneficial/interest to make sure other one thinks him being macho before the move (ride) and that he won't turn off. And thus affect the other one plays chicken. Sam Palmisano (IBM ceo) has three management groups, where on two of them he is only a normal member, and on one a chairman. Others know the rules and act accordingly - this is important in order for game to work. Also importsnt thing is that when amount of people in meeting starts to be 5-7 then most dominant persons start affect group thinking - and prevent potentially challenging sides to come in to light, this sets challenges for meeting organizer to make sure all points are listened to - without universal truth/wizdoms. Macho & Chicken example from corporate world, albeit not from conflict. There is verbal ( maybe missing to tell what is wanted) and non-verbal communication (observed - interpreted - thoughts/trends). Whilst acting a secretary (which in itself is good), person A change the text while writing and changed what person E brought up. And brought own opinions up - which brings up that person A plays "macho" role. This leads then that there's no rising up new machos because what is done is changed so it is interest to play "chicken" due seeing it extra burden to do anything as not seeing own things going through. Which then kills self-starters, initiative. Another example with more players below. Person D, person L and me were on webinar, we were supposed to have webinar/training about certain product. During that, i asked questions, points etc. both colleagues were quiet. So i sent sms to friend to call me, and when call came - i went out from room, so that both of them needed to be "alone" with external over webinar and conference call. This both enabled and forced person L to present questions, and be vocal when, also when ext asked something, and he did. I did this couple times, and colleagues were quite ok with it, and myself know/knew how product worked so it did not bring anything for me. And i afterwards confirmed content with persons by discussing about the training, which also whilst self-evident, shows interest what other person thinks. So, i played chicken (or macho depending how you look), and how Sam Palmisano does on those 2 groups where he is just regular attendee. More macho/chicken stories are from different leaders who do not want so called yes-men on their mgmt team, but everyone should question them - this allows ideas to be challenged before they are implemented. This was just one area of game theory usage (intentionally or not), and whilst maybe "layman" thinking, is not often thought of, due many reasons, like corporate politics, not thinking wolempicture, not having goals etc - Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

No comments: