Business Briefing

The Conversation

The Conversation editors, Jenni Henderson and Josh Nicholas, delve into a new topic every week, unearthing the latest business and economic analysis from our best academics.

  1. 30/10/2017

    Business Briefing: questioning the economics of prison

    The perimeter fence at Silverwater jail in Sydney's west AAPThere are more than 41,000 daily full-time prisoners in Australia, according to the latest ABS data. Many of them are in private prisons - almost 20% of the prison population according to a 2014 Productivity Commission report. But we don’t really know whether private prisons are more cost effective or produce better results. Private prison contracts are often “commercial in confidence”, and it’s hard to know what exactly we’ve paid for. All this means we have to rely on watchdogs to ensure taxpayers are getting value for money, and it’s tough for companies to really compete. Read more: Private prisons and the Productivity Commission: where is the value for money? Prison job programs are often touted as a way to reduce prisoner recidivism, but again there is little evidence showing a positive impact. Joanne Wodak was a research assistant on a study in the Northern Territory. Despite positive feedback from both prisoners and employers, Wodak says these programs don’t address other, important factors affecting recidivism such as alcoholism and homelessness. Technology could drastically change what a prison is and who is in them - through the use of algorithms that decide who gets bail, for instance. But as the University of Sydney’s Sandra Peter and Kai Riemer discuss, it’s unlikely to have an impact on the jobs prisoners themselves do. Low wages mean that prisoners provide an incredibly cheap source of labour, and the economics of this is unlikely to be drastically changed by technology.

  2. 13/07/2017

    Business Briefing: are our standards dropping in the workplace?

    How should you signal that you don't want to be disturbed? www.shutterstock.comOur workplaces are becoming less formal as the decor resembles what we have at home, companies relax dress codes, and technology makes it possible to work from anywhere. But the old formality had some advantages, says Libby Sander from Bond University. For example, closed doors used to signal that you didn’t want to be disturbed, and suits are an easy way to look professional. As Sander points out, new forms of office etiquette, such as not disturbing someone wearing headphones, are filling this void. To know how to behave in this new relaxed environment, context matters, says Nicole Gillespie, an associate professor of management at the University of Queensland. This means reading the relationships you have with your co-workers and the wider culture in the office, and being aware of the effect you own actions are having. Never is this more important than in cases of office profanity. It’s not uncommon to hear a bit of swearing in some workplaces, but it could get you fired in certain circumstances. As part of one Fair Work Commission ruling, the difference comes down to swearing in conversation, versus directly at someone. “There’s a big difference between that coarse kind of conversation and aggression in someone’s tone of voice, so you’ve got to ask what the intention is,” says Simon Burgess, from the University of New England. Burgess says it’s up to each of us to hone our communication skills and perhaps improve our office etiquette a bit.

  3. 22/05/2017

    The science of business decision making: giving out perks doesn’t necessarily lead to results

    Office perks like slides down stairs may not be the best way to motivate good behaviour Scott Beale/Flickr, CC BY-NC-NDResearch shows that when it comes to cognitive tasks, like decision making, paying people more can lead to worse outcomes. If we want to get the best out of our executives, the ideal amount to pay them is “enough to take money off the table”. Anything extra might excite them, but not in a way that makes them better executives. Put simply, giving a CEO one, two or three million dollars might motivate them. But it doesn’t necessarily follow that they will work any harder if offered four, five or six million. That’s because they don’t really need the sixth million. It does not provide upside motivation, and could have the reverse effect. Research shows when you have enough money then you value the next dollar less, and may not work as hard for it. There are other motivations that drive performance, such as the prestige of a particular company or job. Paying someone less may lead to better outcomes when they are motivated by these other factors. In practice, if we want the best decision making, this means we should pay executives enough so they feel rewarded for their efforts, but no more than others would take to do the same job, says associate professor Prabhu Sivabalan. Hear more on what professor Prabhu Sivabalan has to say on decision making, also what Game Theory has to say about the decisions that lie behind where businesses set up shop with academic Stephen Woodcock, in this edition of Business Briefing.

  4. 14/03/2017

    Business Briefing: how the attitudes of the next generation are changing the property market

    Generation X and Y are equally, if not more aggressive than baby boomers when investing in property. Chris Devers/Flickr, CC BY-NC-NDGenerations X and Y are becoming just as, or even more aggressive, than the baby boomers as investors. An example of this are the “rentvestors”, who still don’t live in their own home, but have an investment property. There’s been a change in culture over the generations when it comes to the property market, says researcher Ilan Wiesel from the University of Melbourne. “It’s the shift from housing as a home, as a right, to housing as a commodity,” he says. This is reflected in that 60% of household wealth is in people’s homes. But for younger people, like Generation Y, there are some who choose to move around for work so tying themselves to one location doesn’t have the same appeal. Looking at the baby boomers, there are two types of security that drive people’s feelings about property. One is a sense of financial security but another is tied to a sense of continuity, in knowing you have a home and how that affects your identity. If you look at the advertisements for properties through the generations, certain aspects of these changing ambitions are highlighted, says researcher Robert Crawford from the University of Technology Sydney. After the war and the great depression, people felt hard done by and that it was time for a reward, that reward was owning a home. “The advertisements really play on this, but it’s a dream,” says Crawford. In the advertisements of the 1980s this changed again as size and location of properties became more of a feature than just owning a home. “As more and more people begin to realise their dreams of home ownership, the next [point] is - owning a home isn’t as much of an achievement, so I'II have to own a particular size of home,” Crawford adds. The rental market is also changing with generations, as more renters have a high income and rent for longer, says Professor Kath Hulse from the Swinburne University of Technology. In comparing this to other countries, Hulse says there is a culture of treating tenants differently too. “Germany has a very stable rental system… there’s a lot more security of tenure and it’s very common if someone sells the house, to sell it with the tenant, they don’t have to get out.” “Whereas in our case it’s almost automatically assumed that if you buy a house with a tenant or if you want put your house on the market, the first thing you do is to ask the tenant to leave,” she says. Over time some policies, like the First Home Buyers Grant, have had some impact on changing the behaviour of people in relation to the property market but with the danger of a flow on rise in house prices. “Part of it is to make the rental sector a better place to live, with better more modern regulation and better quality of service… and then people might have a real choice as to what they want, rather than feeling like they have to move into home ownership,” Hulse says.

  5. 14/12/2016

    Business Briefing: when robots and customers meet

    Customer-facing roles may soon be taken over by cheaper, friendlier and more knowledgeable robotic retail assistants. Thomas Peter/ReutersWhen you call up a business, you might get an automated customer service giving you options and helping you to do whatever it is you need to. This is a digital robot. It’s common to see digital robots in these types of roles because the technology is getting cheaper and better, says Mary-Anne Williams, founder and director at UTS’ Innovation and Enterprise Research Lab. Williams researches how humans interact with different types of robots, in customer service roles. She says because digital robots can access vast amounts of data about certain customers, these bots can provide a more specialised and customised service, similar to that of the good old days. People have fewer problems dealing with digital robots than humans because machines don’t make emotional or ethical judgements about customers that make them uncomfortable. However, when it comes to physical robots in customer service roles, our reactions can be very different. In research on these robots, there is a concept called “the uncanny valley”. This is where the closer the robot is to human form or face, the more uncomfortable or eerie we feel. So there’s that to overcome. Experiments students at Williams’ lab have conducted in a shopping mall show that these physical robots have to work hard to attract our attention and we’re easily underwhelmed by them, compared to the ones we see on TV or movie screens. The next big frontier for physical robots in business is to get them to empathise with customers, to understand the context around questions and interactions. And with the speed of innovation, this may be closer than we think, Williams says. The business briefing podcast will return with a new format in 2017. If you’ve got any feedback you’d like to pass on, please email it to: ask@theconversation.edu.au

Ratings & Reviews

5
out of 5
2 Ratings

About

The Conversation editors, Jenni Henderson and Josh Nicholas, delve into a new topic every week, unearthing the latest business and economic analysis from our best academics.