Search results
1 – 5 of 5Barry M. Mitnick and Martin Lewison
Despite the existence of a variety of approaches to the understanding of behavioral and managerial ethics in organizations and business relationships generally, knowledge of…
Abstract
Despite the existence of a variety of approaches to the understanding of behavioral and managerial ethics in organizations and business relationships generally, knowledge of organizing systems for fidelity remains in its infancy. We use halakha, or Jewish law, as a model, together with the literature in sociology, economic anthropology, and economics on what it termed “middleman minorities,” and on what we have termed the Landa Problem, the problem of identifying a trustworthy economic exchange partner, to explore this issue.
The article contrasts the differing explanations for trustworthy behavior in these literatures, focusing on the widely referenced work of Avner Greif on the Jewish Maghribi merchants of the eleventh century. We challenge Greif’s argument that cheating among the Magribi was managed chiefly via a rational, self-interested reputational sanctioning system in the closed group of traders. Greif largely ignores a more compelling if potentially complementary argument, which we believe also finds support among the documentary evidence of the Cairo Geniza as reported by Goitein: that the behavior of the Maghribi reflected their deep beliefs and commitment to Jewish law, halakha.
Applying insights from this analysis, we present an explicit theory of heroic marginality, the production of extreme precautionary behaviors to ensure service to the principal.
Generalizing from the case of halakha, the article proposes the construct of a deep code, identifying five defining characteristics of such a code, and suggests that deep codes may act as facilitators of compliance. We also offer speculation on design features employing deep codes that may increase the likelihood of production of behaviors consistent with terminal values of the community.
Details
Keywords
This article explores the trade-offs between market concentration and multi-market participation in evaluating proposed mergers. For complementary demands, the price-decreasing…
Abstract
This article explores the trade-offs between market concentration and multi-market participation in evaluating proposed mergers. For complementary demands, the price-decreasing effect of multi-market participation provides a countervailing influence on the price-increasing effect of higher concentration. The larger the footprint of the multi-market provider, the greater the likelihood the price-decreasing effect dominates. Higher concentration may be consistent with non-increasing prices despite the absence of merger economies. In the case of substitutes, multi-market participation compounds the price-increasing effect of higher concentration. Merger guidelines that place undue emphasis on market concentration can lead policymakers to block mergers that enhance consumer welfare and vice versa.