82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
But for our purposes, it hints at what might be wrong with [[Compensation|discretionary compensation]], and why investment banks are likely to stick with it anyway. | But for our purposes, it hints at what might be wrong with [[Compensation|discretionary compensation]], and why investment banks are likely to stick with it anyway. | ||
===The candle problems === | ===The candle problems === | ||
The | The [[Duncker candle problem|''Duncker'' candle problem]] challenges participants to figure out how to attach a lighted candle to a wall so that no wax gets on the floor, using only matches and a tray of tacks. Duncker correctly predicted participants’ “[[functional fixedness]]” regarding the tray — seeing it as only a container for the thumbtacks and not otherwise relevant to the problem — would hinder their arrival at the simplest solution to the puzzle: tack the box to the wall, and put the candle in the box. | ||
Thus, solving the | Thus, solving the problem requires a small amount of lateral thinking, to overcome the “[[functional fixedness]]”. | ||
Enter | Enter Elton Glucksberg, who ran the [[candle problem]] with two groups, each incentivised differently. One group was not offered any incentive but told the experiment was a to test out various problems to decide which to use in a later experiment”. | ||
The other group were offered ''two'' incentives. The winner — the fellow who solved the problem first — would win twenty-five bucks. The top quartile of problem solvers would win a consolation prize of $5. The remainder would get a [[donut]]. Zippo the hippo. | The other group were offered ''two'' incentives. The winner — the fellow who solved the problem first — would win twenty-five bucks. The top quartile of problem solvers would win a consolation prize of $5. The remainder would get a [[donut]]. Zippo the hippo. |