A friend who has been teaching about "euvoluntary exchange" got this from a student.
When he first explained the concept of BATNA and the situations in which BATNA is too low, I was all for changing those situations. However, we need to remember that if we're going to take away somebody's best option (even if it is a crappy one) then we're also going to have to give them a better alternative.
I teach Management Ethics. We watched the film clip from "Other People's Money" where the kindly company owner, and "Larry the Liquidator" each give their speech to shareholders. Before introducing the clip, I asked "What is the purpose of business?" and we had much discussion, and wrote many answers on the board. After the owner's speech I stopped the clip and asked how many agreed with his position; about half did. Then I showed Larry's speech, and asked how many had changed their minds; about 2/3 of them had changed their opinion, or said they see it as much more complex.
ReplyDeleteThen we opened discussion. The students talked about the BATNA's of the workers and shareholders, and what decisions they could make that were voluntary or euvoluntary. They also incorporated Schumpeter, Bastiat, and Friedman.