This article has no academic standing, it has been written without empirical research on the basis of hypothetical reasoning. It is hoped that it may stir up some debate or be of use to students and business minded individuals.
What is evolutionary game theory?
It is necessary to understand the nature of evolutionary game theory before we look at it from the business context. The empirical approach would cite researchers such as price, Maynard and Nash drawing conclusions from a number of models, theories and equations. Since this article will not be empirical in nature I will not be discussing research.
My own interpretation of evolutionary game theory is about the survival of the species, but not as human beings but rather as code, specifically our gene code. If we look at the world today, Bosun whistle codes are everywhere they are the very fabric of our existence. Time, currency and even discoveries that have proven breakthroughs in science or technology are all a result of a code.
Can our Gene code actually manipulate us as individuals? and can it affect our personality?, can it change us as a species?, and can it alter our needs and desires?. We are all going to die; our gene code however always survives, unless of course human beings were to be wiped from the face of the earth. However even if that did happen, could the Gene code still live on?
In a hive of bees where the female is obviously vastly outnumbered by the males, how many males will mate? After all in order for a species to survive it must procreate. The instinct of survival is part of the bee's gene code. When someone or something disturbs the nest, they are perceived as a threat and often attacked. The bees stinging the intruder know they will die and yet they still do so. The question I ask is if there were more females, perhaps a 50 - 50 ratio of the sexes, would the bees still be so ready to die?
Let us now look at human beings. In an ideal world there would be no aggression, no fighting, we would all live in harmony. I suggest this could cause our extinction. Let us consider two main personality traits in humans of which we may fall into only one, either aggressor or passive. When an aggressor competes for a resource with a passive, the passive will almost always back away. If the reverse is true then the passive will either give the resource to the aggressor or offer to share. Whichever way you look at it the aggressor has a 50% better chance of winning the resource. If an aggressor is in competition with another aggressor it is unlikely they will share and one will get injured or loose. If a passive is in competition with another passive the result will likely be a shared resource. Let us look at this in simple mathematical terms:
� Aggressor V Passive, Aggressor Wins - 1
� Aggressor V Aggressor, No Win - 0
� Aggressor V Passive, passive wins - 1
� Passive V Passive - both win - 2
We cannot live in a society which is perfect because there would be no challenge and we need both aggressor and passive to provide a balance. Both of these behaviors in fact protect our existence and ensure our gene code lives far beyond our individual being and indeed protect us from mutations. We can see from the simple math's above that in a society where there are only aggressors we could not live, we can also see that the component (passive versus passive) equals the sum of all the other values when added together, resulting in a balance. What happens when a mutation is introduced?
History tells us that there have been many dictators often using aggressive tactics in order to force their own beliefs on others and in extreme cases resorting to genocide or other devastating actions. These individuals were one could say aggressors; however they could also be considered mutations as they did not care about the survival of the species. Countries came together whether passive or aggressor and brought an end to his tactics, he was a threat to survival. Throughout history no dictator has ever achieved his ultimate goal. They may have caused a great deal of suffering, but in time they were beaten. If we had only one trait i.e. passive or aggressor this could never have been achieved, we need both to survive.
What happens in a society where there are 70% males and only 30% females? Well from one perspective we could say that 40% of males are really a burden on resources and not required in other words excess baggage. As there are so few females, competition becomes fierce as the desire for pro creation burns inside most males. Fighting becomes more abundant, showing off and taking risks increases, violence and even murder rates rise.
Does the Genome recognize these problems and subsequently adapt? Can the Genome actually be responsible for creating human disasters, serial killers and indeed dictators? If our lives are all about a code which is ever evolving is there a final solution?, does the equation balance out in the end? If it does what happens? Do we evolve into different beings, different dimensions or realities or do we become extinct, is it endgame?
Now what does this mean from a business perspective?
In a business environment where there are many people it could be looked at as a small community in its own right. If the balance of personalities, aggressor and passive is not present then problems will occur similarly if there is a large difference in numbers between the sexes. Increased performance can be achieved by creating the right balance. It is possible to determine the number of aggressor and passives within an organization as it is with sexual orientation and work out what the balance is. Would it be ethical to do this and introduce it into the recruitment phase within organizations?
Let us look at a team with 18 members where only one is female. When the female is on shift she is constantly watching her performance and remarking on it. The other male team members begin to do the same; they are influenced purely by her presence and remarks. They begin to improve their performance as a result. Is it prudent therefore to begin to staff the same team with more females? Could the females be encouraged to openly remark on performance and improvement and would this result in an overall increase in performance for the whole team?
In General we would say that the fitter sex is the male, as they are stronger in strength, however the basic instincts of the good old human gene code within the male kicks in and the evolutionary game of survival begins. This effect is not necessarily sexual in nature and indeed I would doubt many of the males would even be aware of their behavior, it is simply implicit instinct within their genetic makeup.
In conclusion this article suggests that everything we are and everything we do are controlled by a code burned into our very existence. A code we have no control over and one that is exacting and demanding. A code that controls the future of the human race, of evolution and what we are, have been and will become. We are dispensable and irrelevant as long as the code continues to evolve. When the code is completed we will no longer be of use, though it is feasible that the evolved code will begin a new journey searching for a solution to a different equation within a new and more evolved species.
James Brown http://www.britishworkers.com
No comments:
Post a Comment