Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Business
Economics
Exercise 2.2. A three-man board, composed of A, B, and C, has held hearings on a personnel case involving an officer of the company. This officer was scheduled for promotion but, prior to final action on his promotion, he took a decision that cost the company a good deal of money. The question is whether he should be (1) promoted anyway, (2) denied the promotion, or (3) fired. The board has discussed the matter at length and is unable to reach unanimous agreement. In the course of the discussion it has become clear to all three of them that their separate opinions are as follows: • A considers the officer to have been a victim of bad luck, not bad judgment, and wants to go ahead and promote him but, failing that, would keep him rather than fire him. • • B considers the mistake serious enough to bar promotion altogether; he'd prefer to keep the officer, denying promotion, but would rather fire than promote him. C thinks the man ought to be fired but, in terms of personal policy and morale, believes the man ought not to be kept unless he is promoted, i.e., that keeping an officer who has been declared unfit for promotion is even worse than promoting him. To recapitulate, their preferences among the three outcomes are A: PROMOTE best KEEP FIRE middle worst B: C: worst middle best middle worst best Assume that everyone's preferences among the three outcomes are fully evident as a result of discussion. The three must proceed to a vote. Consider the following voting procedure. First A proposes an action (either promote or keep or fire). Then it is B's turn. If B accepts A's proposal, then this becomes the final decision. If B disagrees with A'a proposal, then C makes the final decision (which may be any of the three. promote, keep of fire). Represent this situation as an extensive game with perfect information.

Exercise 2.2. A three-man board, composed of A, B, and C, has held hearings on a personnel case involving an officer of the company. This officer was scheduled for promotion but, prior to final action on his promotion, he took a decision that cost the company a good deal of money. The question is whether he should be (1) promoted anyway, (2) denied the promotion, or (3) fired. The board has discussed the matter at length and is unable to reach unanimous agreement. In the course of the discussion it has become clear to all three of them that their separate opinions are as follows: • A considers the officer to have been a victim of bad luck, not bad judgment, and wants to go ahead and promote him but, failing that, would keep him rather than fire him. • • B considers the mistake serious enough to bar promotion altogether; he'd prefer to keep the officer, denying promotion, but would rather fire than promote him. C thinks the man ought to be fired but, in terms of personal policy and morale, believes the man ought not to be kept unless he is promoted, i.e., that keeping an officer who has been declared unfit for promotion is even worse than promoting him. To recapitulate, their preferences among the three outcomes are A: PROMOTE best KEEP FIRE middle worst B: C: worst middle best middle worst best Assume that everyone's preferences among the three outcomes are fully evident as a result of discussion. The three must proceed to a vote. Consider the following voting procedure. First A proposes an action (either promote or keep or fire). Then it is B's turn. If B accepts A's proposal, then this becomes the final decision. If B disagrees with A'a proposal, then C makes the final decision (which may be any of the three. promote, keep of fire). Represent this situation as an extensive game with perfect information.

Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
5th Edition
ISBN:9781337106665
Author:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Chapter17: Making Decisions With Uncertainty
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 17.6IP
See similar textbooks
icon
Related questions
Question
Exercise 2.2. A three-man board, composed of A, B, and C, has held hearings on a personnel case involving an officer of the company. This officer was scheduled for promotion but, prior to final action on his promotion, he took a decision that cost the company a good deal of money. The question is whether he should be (1) promoted anyway, (2) denied the promotion, or (3) fired. The board has discussed the matter at length and is unable to reach unanimous agreement. In the course of the discussion it has become clear to all three of them that their separate opinions are as follows: • A considers the officer to have been a victim of bad luck, not bad judgment, and wants to go ahead and promote him but, failing that, would keep him rather than fire him. • • B considers the mistake serious enough to bar promotion altogether; he'd prefer to keep the officer, denying promotion, but would rather fire than promote him. C thinks the man ought to be fired but, in terms of personal policy and morale, believes the man ought not to be kept unless he is promoted, i.e., that keeping an officer who has been declared unfit for promotion is even worse than promoting him. To recapitulate, their preferences among the three outcomes are A: PROMOTE best KEEP FIRE middle worst B: C: worst middle best middle worst best Assume that everyone's preferences among the three outcomes are fully evident as a result of discussion. The three must proceed to a vote. Consider the following voting procedure. First A proposes an action (either promote or keep or fire). Then it is B's turn. If B accepts A's proposal, then this becomes the final decision. If B disagrees with A'a proposal, then C makes the final decision (which may be any of the three. promote, keep of fire). Represent this situation as an extensive game with perfect information.
Transcribed Image Text:Exercise 2.2. A three-man board, composed of A, B, and C, has held hearings on a personnel case involving an officer of the company. This officer was scheduled for promotion but, prior to final action on his promotion, he took a decision that cost the company a good deal of money. The question is whether he should be (1) promoted anyway, (2) denied the promotion, or (3) fired. The board has discussed the matter at length and is unable to reach unanimous agreement. In the course of the discussion it has become clear to all three of them that their separate opinions are as follows: • A considers the officer to have been a victim of bad luck, not bad judgment, and wants to go ahead and promote him but, failing that, would keep him rather than fire him. • • B considers the mistake serious enough to bar promotion altogether; he'd prefer to keep the officer, denying promotion, but would rather fire than promote him. C thinks the man ought to be fired but, in terms of personal policy and morale, believes the man ought not to be kept unless he is promoted, i.e., that keeping an officer who has been declared unfit for promotion is even worse than promoting him. To recapitulate, their preferences among the three outcomes are A: PROMOTE best KEEP FIRE middle worst B: C: worst middle best middle worst best Assume that everyone's preferences among the three outcomes are fully evident as a result of discussion. The three must proceed to a vote. Consider the following voting procedure. First A proposes an action (either promote or keep or fire). Then it is B's turn. If B accepts A's proposal, then this becomes the final decision. If B disagrees with A'a proposal, then C makes the final decision (which may be any of the three. promote, keep of fire). Represent this situation as an extensive game with perfect information.
Expert Solution
steps

Step by step

Solved in 2 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer
Similar questions
  • SEE MORE QUESTIONS
Recommended textbooks for you
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Managerial Economics: A Problem Solving Approach
Economics
ISBN:
9781337106665
Author:
Luke M. Froeb, Brian T. McCann, Michael R. Ward, Mike Shor
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Microeconomic Theory
Microeconomic Theory
Economics
ISBN:
9781337517942
Author:
NICHOLSON
Publisher:
Cengage
ECON MICRO
ECON MICRO
Economics
ISBN:
9781337000536
Author:
William A. McEachern
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS