Philosophy of Sciene (15)

The goal of our focus interview was to get a new perspective on the homo oeconomicus. Therefore we invited businesspeople from different industries in order to obtain a holistic picture from different view points. The heterogeneous group was formed by two female and five male participants. Moreover the interview was conducted by a female and male moderator. Our interview partners are working in financial services, media, advertisement companies, pharmaceutical industry, lobbying organizations, and university. We presented our understanding of homo oeconomicus with the following statement of Adam Smith “It is not the goodness and benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the backer that we our food, but their own selfish interest.”

In order to get into the topic we decided to follow the strategy to ask first some personal questions and then after a warm-up phase to come into more general questions. Thus, we confronted the interview partners with their current job situation. They were asked to describe some motivation factors why they like their respective jobs or not. One the one hand, it was mentioned that own responsibility (e.g. to take own decisions) is a driver for personal motivation in job, but on the other hand several interview partners came to the conclusion that their activities should shape future and contribute to the progress of society. Nobody indicated that money is an important motivation factor. There was a common sense that money is a foundation of stability (e.g. for paying invoices), but they did not think that money makes people happy. One interview partner used the picture of the diminishing marginal utility of money and happiness.

Concerning decision-making we faced the discussion group with the question whether they take decisions in business rationally or emotionally. While someone in a recruiting position trust his/her gut feeling, other ones (e.g. in media planning) trust more numbers. However, it was stressed that rationality can only be a basis for decision-making, but more or less everybody is always driven by emotions. It seems that emotions are always involved. We presented in that context one result of our online-questionnaire. Almost one half of the respondents partly agreed that a person act rationally in order to be successful. Some interview partners said that people are biased regarding the combination rationality and success. For being a successful manager the group agreed that both parts – rationality and emotions – are essential. It was argued that Bernard Madoff, who ran the biggest ponzi scheme ever known, acted also both rationally and emotionally. The irrationality of people could be seen as a cause of the financial crisis. People seem to follow their emotions and consumed financial products, because others did it as well. It can be attributed to a herd-instinct.

A central question was whether people think that the homo oeconomicus still exists, since according to some scholars capitalism is no longer the ideal economic model. Some discussion participants explained that economists need something to assume because simplification is an elementary part of every model. People gave answers like that homo oeconomicus is a framework but an adaption or extension would be necessary. In an alternative model it seems to be important to incorporate more social responsibility. A majority of the interview partners stressed the missing social aspect in the homo oeconomicus model. More or less a social concept would fit the current situation of globalization.

Summing up, the main points of the focus interview from my point of view are the following: It was mentioned that visions and long-term perspective thinking are crucial, since we asked what kind of message or what advice would you formulate to our government. In regard of homo oeconomicus it seems that the dimension of emotions and the social contribution to society are missing links. For me it was interesting that people took part in this interview and really used the opportunity here to exchange their opinions. I would not expect it that people are highly motivated more by intrinsic than extrinsic factors in their jobs. The discussion group argued for contribution to society, which seems to reinvent them.