Читать книгу Selfishness, Greed and Capitalism - Christopher Snowdon - Страница 10

In applied cost–benefit analyses economists typically assume a large element of narrow self-interest. There is no compelling evidence to suggest that they are mistaken. The matter-of-fact observation that butchers and bakers work for money does not preclude them from enjoying their work, nor does it preclude them from working for nothing if they can afford to. It merely reminds us that without financial incentives very little work would get done.

Why, then, does Chang think that his fellow economists are wrong in believing that people’s financial decisions are largely driven by self-interest? A clue to his thinking comes when he quotes the manager of the Japanese company, Kobe Steel, whom he once heard speak at a conference. This gentleman stood up in front of a panel of economists and, as Chang recalls, delivered the following speech (Chang 2010: 43):

I am sorry to say this, but you economists don’t understand how the real world works. I have a PhD in metallurgy and have been working in Kobe Steel for nearly three decades, so I know a thing or two about steel-making. However, my company is now so large and complex that even I do not understand more than half the things that are going on within it. As for the other managers – with backgrounds in accounting and marketing – they really don’t have much of a clue. Despite this, our board of directors routinely approves the majority of projects submitted by our employees, because we believe that our employees work for the good of the company. If we assumed that everyone is out to promote their own interests and questioned the motivations of our employees all the time, the company would grind to a halt, as we would spend all our time going through proposals that we really don’t understand. You simply cannot run a large bureaucratic organisation, be it Kobe Steel or your government, if you assume that everyone is out for himself.

Chang describes this little monologue as ‘a powerful testimony to the limitations of standard economic theory, which assumes that self-interest is the only human motivation that counts.’ But let us look at what this manager is actually saying. He is describing a business that has become too large for any single individual to be able to supervise every aspect of its operation. Naturally, therefore, a certain amount of trust has to be placed in the staff. It is possible that this trust could be misplaced and that middle managers are putting forward foolish proposals that will lose the company money. It is also possible that the staff could abuse this trust by stealing from the company.

Since neither of these undesirable outcomes appears to have resulted, the manager believes that his staff are not as self-serving as an economist would assume. But he is wrong. In truth, the employees are being guided by the same incentives and disincentives as Adam Smith’s victuallers. Unless Kobe Steel is a very peculiar firm, its workers will not be volunteers but salaried employees who have been recruited on the basis of qualifications, references and interview. If it is like most companies, it will award bonuses to employees who advance its corporate interests. It almost certainly incentivises staff with promotions and pay rises. Less productive staff may be denied promotion or even face the sack. It is precisely because the workers are incentivised to promote the interests of the company that its senior managers do not have to question their motives and can trust their proposals. By aligning the interests of shareholders, directors, management and staff, Kobe Steel harnesses self-interest to create prosperity and harmony. As Taleb (2007: 17) says, ‘the great strength of the free-market system is the fact that company executives don’t need to know what’s going on.’ There is no conflict between working for the good of the company and promoting one’s own interest. This is not a testimony to the limits of standard economics. It is the invisible hand in action.3

The manager quoted above takes the view – which Chang appears to share – that an employee’s self-interest can best be advanced by embezzling, stealing and cheating. Remember that Chang thinks that classical economists view people as ‘selfish, amoral agents’ and should therefore be happy to engage in criminal behaviour. Since the employees of Kobe Steel are apparently honest, Chang feels vindicated in his view that the economists are wrong.

But surely the company has disincentives as well as incentives? Even if the character of the staff at Kobe Steel is beyond reproach, it would be surprising if the company does not have regulations and a disciplinary process which will occasionally result in dismissals. It may also have some form of video surveillance system on its premises. Businesses have regulations, surveillance and disciplinary procedures not because they assume that everybody is a greedy crook but because a few people are.4 We have laws against murder and theft for the same reason – to deal with a minority of criminals, not because we assume that everybody is a ‘selfish, amoral agent’.

Safeguards against misconduct in the workplace are perfectly consistent with the free-market view that economic life be regulated to prevent corruption, extortion and theft. For most employees, the benefits they receive from working hard, combined with the threat of dismissal or prosecution if they shirk or steal, means that their self-interest is best advanced by furthering the interests of the company. The carrot may be a greater incentive than the stick, but neither relies on the employee’s benevolence. The manager of Kobe Steel assumes that employees who are ‘out to promote their own interests’ cannot also ‘work for the good of the company’. In fact, the framework of incentives provided by the employer means that the two objectives are perfectly compatible.

3 It is worth noting that, even if the employees are only motivated by making good steel and not by the desire for maintaining or advancing their position in the company, this is still part of what determines their self-interest. Intellectual curiosity, the desire to do a good job and the satisfaction of making something can all motivate people.

4 As it happens, not every person who has worked at Kobe Steel is impeccably well behaved. In 2006, an investigation revealed that ‘data on soot and smoke released by one of its plants were falsified frequently over a period of 30 years’ (Japan Times, 2006). In 2009, the chairman resigned over ‘inappropriate donations’ given to politicians. In 2002, six former Kobe Steel executives and a corporate racketeer agreed to pay 310 million yen to the company after a payoff scandal. In the latter case, the judge remarked: ‘Top executives of a company cannot avoid responsibility by simply making the excuse that they did not know (about the wrongdoings of their subordinates)’ (Japan Times, 2002).