Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 1: Dramatic resolution vs. Rational solution

Drama theory differs from game theory in that it does not regard actors' preferences and perceived opportunities as fixed, but as capable of being changed by the actors themselves under the pressure of pre-play negotiations. Thus characters in a drama undergo change and development. A manyperson, multiphase theory of dramatic transformation is presented, showing how thecore of a drama (in the sense of game theory) is transformed by the interaction between the characters into a strict, strong equilibrium to which they all aspire. The process of dramatic transformation is shown to be driven by actors' reactions to various paradoxes of rationality; it is proved that when all these paradoxes have been overcome, a full dramatic resolution has been reached, satisfying actors' emotional and moral demands, as well as the demands of rationality.     

Drama theory and its relation to game theory. Part 2: Formal model of the resolution process

In a drama, characters' preferences and options change under the pressure of pre-play negotiations. Thus they undergo change and development. A formal model of dramatic transformation is presented that shows how the core of a drama is transformed by the interaction among the characters into a strict, strong equilibrium to which they all aspire. The process is seen to be driven by actors' reactions to various paradoxes of rationality.     

What Our Students Should Know: Perspectives from Business and Academia

Perspectives from business and academia on the relative importance of various skills and attributes were compared. The perspective from academia came from the University of Guelph learning objectives and the AEB simple and complex skills required for undergraduate majors. A survey of Canadian agribusiness firms, including governmental agencies, provided the business perspective. Different types and sizes of businesses were consistent in ranking the relative importance of the various skills and attributes. The rankings by business were also consistent with the hierachial learning objectives from the University of Guelph and the disciplinary skills from the AEB. The hypothesis that business and academia are more convergent than divergent as to what our students should know is supported by these results.
Both business and academia rank communication skills highly. Business ranks personal qualities slightly higher than communication skills, but universities recognize that they can only screen for personal qualities, as opposed to the skills that they can enhance through education. Relatively low rankings of technical, computer and quantitative skills and experience should not be interpreted to mean they are unimportant, but rather that they are necessary but not sufficient for entry-level employees to succeed in agribusiness firms.     

Agriculture in the EEC taking stock

The focus of this assessment is the European Community's ‘Stocktaking of the Common Agricultural Policy’. While the CAP has attracted considerable scrutiny and controversy, the Stocktaking represents the most authoritative review of agricultural policy from within the EEC bureaucracy. The authors evaluate first the extent to which the Stocktaking's own analysis is a fair reflection of achievements under the objectives which the CAP has set for itself. Second, they ask whether the proposals for policy reform advocated in the Stocktaking are appropriate. They conclude that the Stocktaking's proposals — and their subsequent interpretation within the EEC — are not adequate to tackle the problems facing EEC agriculture.     

Teaching ideas for the commencement of the governmental accounting source

Many undergraduate accounting students enter their first course in governmental accounting with a negative attitude about the subject. This is due, in part, to the fact that after several courses in “accounting,” the governmental course presents methods and procedures which are quite different and are, therefore, suspect. This paper encourages an approach to the course which can overcome this bias by providing an appropriate context from which to commence the course.     

Analysing clusters of skills in R&D — core competencies, metaphors, visualization, and the role of IT

Though it is now universally accepted that companies should try to align their R&D activities with their business objectives, achieving this alignment is notoriously difficult in practice. The rise of the core competence framework has been very helpful in creating, and legitimizing, a language in which issues of technical competence and R&D strengths can be followed through to their consequences for competitive advantage. Companies are starting to express their R&D priorities explicitly in terms of core competencies.
Without effective IT support, core competence concepts are often applied arbitrarily. This has led to accusations that core competence theory can become yet another battlefield upon which companies play out their internal political battles. Computer-based techniques can help counteract this danger by enabling large volumes of relatively objective data to be collected, then making it possible to analyse and draw out patterns from this data, and finally enabling the data to be represented effectively.
It is in this last area of data representation that information technology is now of particular benefit. In order to make the core competence approach sufficiently robust as a basis for decision making, it is necessary to collect and process large volumes of data. However, this data is normally difficult to represent in such a way that managers can assimilate it. In our recent experience, we have come to realize the particular importance of effective representations and metaphors, and have started to shift our own emphasis towards these areas in addition to analysis per se .
The paper shows how core competence approaches can support R&D management decision making by exploring the roles of data collection, analysis and representation. Information technology is an integral part of these approaches, and we draw out some generalized lessons for the successful use of IT in decision support.     

Advances in Drama Theory for Managing Global Hazards and Disasters. Part II: Coping with Global Climate Change and Environmental Catastrophe

We explore issues of group decision making for reducing global environmental risk, with particular reference to the political dynamics surrounding international agreements on tackling climate change. Continuing political delays in deciding to reduce greenhouse gas emissions may make it necessary to resort to high risk and controversial geo-engineering solutions, such as injecting large amounts of sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, despite the unforeseen, potentially catastrophic consequences that these entail. Advances in drama theory (dt.2) are used to analyze the prospects for agreement on reducing or stabilizing greenhouse gas emissions, following the Bali agreement of December 2007. It is concluded that Western nations and emerging economies are behaving like players in a game of “chicken”, each expecting the other to take on the main burden of emissions reduction. We judge it unlikely that either will play a full part until it is too late for emissions reduction alone to avert environmental catastrophe. At that point, parties will resort to geo-engineering “fixes”, despite the risks. However, all such forecasts are conditional on decisions made and attitudes taken by political leaders and the public. Our analysis serves to pinpoint the relevant decisions and attitudes.