ANSWER

1: Choosing Based on Expected Value

In a project where we were determining whether to invest in a new product line, I came across the concept of expected value. Three possibilities were available for the choice: options A, B, and C.

Option A had a 60% chance of making a $100,000 profit and a 40% chance of making nothing. There was a 50% probability that Option B would make a profit of $150,000 and a 50% chance that it would make a profit of $50,000. Option C had a 70% chance of making a $80,000 profit and a 30% chance of making nothing.

I multiplied the likelihood of each result by the corresponding payout for each choice to determine the expected value before adding the outcomes. Option A’s expected value was 0.60 * $100,000 + 0.40 * $0 = $60,000. The expected value for Option B was 0.50 * $150,000 + 0.50 * $50,000 = $100,000. The predicted value for Option C was 0.70 * 80,000 + 0.30 * 0 = $56,000.

The unpredictability of the results was the danger associated with these expectations. Option B offered the most significant potential reward, but because there were two conceivable results, it also had the highest unpredictability. Although the payments for Option A and Option C were lower, their outcomes were more predictable.

We needed to learn more about market trends, client preferences, and future competitors to reduce uncertainty. More information on the chances and potential rewards may be obtained by conducting in-depth market research, examining customer surveys, and examining the competitive environment.

The choice to pursue Option B with a $100,000 projected value should be determined in light of the estimates and risks. The potential payoff outweighs the risk despite the larger unpredictability, and further research is needed to improve the probability.

Adverse Selection and Moral Hazard in Part 2

In a recent management situation, we had to deal with the difficulty of hiring practices that included unfair selection. Some candidates hired for new positions lied about their credentials and experience, which could have caused a mismatch between their skills and the demands of the position. Reduced productivity and higher turnover rates were the results of this.

We put numerous strategies into practice to address the adverse selection issue:

1. We improved the screening procedure by conducting more in-depth reference checks, skill evaluations, and background checks. This enabled us to weed out applicants who overstated their qualifications.
2. Before making full-time commitments, we provided internships or trial runs to evaluate candidates’ performance.
3. In order to access a more trustworthy pool of candidates, we formed connections with respected educational institutions.

Part 3: The Principal-Agent Issue and Motivation

The principal-agent issue is illustrated by the challenge of leading a distant workforce. I want the people on my team to work hard and achieve deadlines, but they might not feel the same responsibility outside of the workplace. To solve this, I implemented performance-based incentives, such as bonuses for hitting goals.

The use of incentives is not without risk, however. It could cause unwanted behaviours, such as team members putting quantity before quality to hit deadlines rapidly. Additionally, it could foster unproductive rivalry and resentment among team members. I ensured the incentive system was well-balanced, concentrated on individual and team success, and matched the company’s overarching objectives to reduce these risks.

I can analyse decision-making under uncertainty, create incentive structures that encourage desired behaviours, and deal with information asymmetry issues better in my professional life if I use what I have learned from this course. Making informed decisions, maximising results, and promoting a more productive workplace will all be made more accessible.

QUESTION

Description