By J. Scott Armstrong
The Wharton School, University of
Pennsylvania
Summary:
Armstrong describes role-playing to be
when an administrator asks people to play roles and use their “decisions” as
forecasts. These exercises produce a
realistic simulation of the interactions among conflicting groups. Armstrong
then gave a few situations were role play has been used.
1.
A special interest group considers a
sit-in to convince the government to provide subsidies to its members. The
government believes the subsidy to be unwise and is willing to make only minor
concessions. How likely is it that a sit-in would succeed?
2.
A firm selling industrial products to a
small number of customers plans major changes in its product design. The
changes are risky but potentially profitable. It wants to make the changes
without its competitors finding out.
3.
A law firm is considering strategies
for a defendant. Which defense would be most persuasive to the jury?
All of the situations above are
dependent on the interactions of two parties. Role-play can be used to help
accurately forecast one’s own decisions and the reactions of other parties.
Armstrong argues that role-playing is most effective for predictions when two
conflicting parties respond to large changes. To use role-play a forecaster
asks subjects to put themselves in specified roles. Then they can either
imagine how they would act, act out their responses alone, or interact with
others in the situation. The decisions that are made in a situation can vary
based on the designated role. An
experiment by Cyert, March and Starbuck in 1961 proved that. The subjects were
presented with the same data, however they made substantially different forecast
depending if they were “cost analyst” or “market analyst.”
In the next section Armstrong listed
conditions where the use of role-playing is favored. There is a balance in the
amount of parties that interact in effective role-playing. It is easiest to
copy situations in which only two parties interact. When many parties involved
different viewpoints, matching the role-play to the situation becomes more
difficult forecast. Role-playing is useful in situations where the interacting
parties are in conflict. It is also useful in situations involving large
change.
Role-playing is the preferred when
predicting decisions in situations in which parties interact. It is especially
important that when trying to forecast the outcome of a decision-making
situation, the analyst ensures that the role-playing matches the actual
situation. The key is well thought out casting, role instructions, descriptions
of the situation, administrative procedures, and interaction among groups for
effective role-playing. It can provide the most realistic representation of
interactions among different parties. It’s a low-cost and confidential alternative
to experimentation. Evidence showed that out of the situations listed above that
role-playing was more accurate than expert opinions for predicting decision-making
when there were conflicts between groups and when large changes were involved.
Role-playing is transferable across
many disciplines.
Critique:
The author spends a lot of time going
through the steps of setting up role-play in this article and only does a shallow
dive in to results of role-play. Also, the article is written on qualitative
case studies. The argument for the value of role-playing would have been much
stronger with statistics to support it. This is something that is hard to
measure the value. Role-playing as a methodology is valuable because it can be
used across most disciplines. In the situations the author laid out he was able
to show that it cold be applied to businesses, polices and law makers,
educations, and in healthcare. The author on touches quickly on role-play
without interaction of multiple parties.
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1175&context=marketing_papers
https://repository.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1175&context=marketing_papers
No comments:
Post a Comment