Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/57337
IF SOMEONE ASKS OUR STUDENTS TO PINPOINT BUSINESS'S TRUE MISSION, WE WANT THEM TO HAVE A COMPELLING ANSWER. first conducted by Ernst Fehr and Simon Gächter, ten players are each given ten $1 bills. The players are told that they must choose how much of their $10 to place in a common fund. Whatever they place in the fund will be multiplied by five and divided among all players. In this case, every player has an incen- tive to contribute as little as pos- sible, but hope that others contrib- ute as much as possible. Fehr and Gächter discovered that most play- ers begin by contributing about half of their money; by the tenth round, they contribute almost nothing. When one or two players inevitably place little or no money in the fund, more trusting players get angry. In the next round, the only way they can retaliate against the cheapskates is to put in no money at all. In a variation, players are informed how much every other player contributes to the common fund and have the opportunity to punish selfish players directly, at cost to themselves. If all players were driven by selfish motives, they would have no incentive to punish because it would cost them money. However, cooperative participants punish the selfish. They want everyone to work in the best inter- ests of the group, and they're will- ing to lose money to bring about that result. In yet another version, players are allowed to discuss their intentions beforehand and make promises about how much they will contrib- ute. Studies show that when players are allowed to make promises, they all make more money than they do in experiments where no promises are made. The majority of people don't like to lie—if they say, "I promise to contribute X amount," they generally do. The more com- mitments players are allowed to express, the higher the level of cooperation in the game as a whole. In many ways, these experiments offer business schools a foundation on which to build a central vision for the business profession. Fehr and Gächter show that, when left to their own devices, most people will set up a system of reciprocity and moralistic punishment. Business schools that understand this side of human nature can publicly elicit students' commitment to a central purpose for enterprise. They can actively encourage them to work together toward a common goal, for the benefit of the common good. In 1925, Wallace B. Donham, Harvard Business School's second dean, spoke at Stanford University's School of Business on the topic "The Social Significance of Busi- ness." Donham noted that the world's problems would not be solved through governmental or police intervention, but "from within on a higher ethical plane." The primary objective of business schools, said Donham, "should be the multiplication of men who will handle their current business prob- lems in socially constructive ways." Over the last 25 years, business schools have lost this fundamental emphasis on the socially motivated manager. Rather than acting primar- ily as "schools of management," they have become schools for bro- kers, bankers, consultants, inventors, and entrepreneurs. The MBA itself, once a degree with a clear role and distinct boundaries, has become an umbrella term for advanced business education. There is no universally understood role, no explicit focus on, or discussion about, what an MBA means to the profession or to society as a whole. Fortunately, a few business schools have returned to the "social- ly constructive" objectives set out by Joseph Wharton, Wallace Don- ham, and other founders of business education. They have adopted a more values-centered model in their curricula, offering students a clearer direction in their education and sense of purpose after they graduate. Still, too many other schools have yet to define for their students a common central mission. If someone asks our students to pinpoint business's true mission, we want them to have a compelling answer. Business faculty must begin a dialogue to come to an agreement about what the moral responsibility of the corporation truly is. As edu- cators, we can return the profession to the principles on which manage- ment education was founded. After all, human beings have the capacity to surmount incredible challenges and accomplish extraordinary goals, given the right institutional condi- tions. Business schools are uniquely positioned to put those conditions in place—and to graduate students who have an overarching sense of purpose in their careers. ■ z Rakesh Khurana is an associate professor of organizational behavior at Harvard Business School in Boston, Massachusetts. Herb Gintis is a professor of economics at the Central European University in Budapest, Hungary, and a member of external faculty at the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico. Both are part of "Free Enterprise: Values in Action," a multidisciplinary effort organized by the Gruter Institute for Law and Behavioral Research in California to explore the role of values in free enterprise. BizEd JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2008 55