Kostroma, Kostroma, Russian Federation
Kostroma, Russian Federation
Carrying out our study within the framework of mathematical modeling, incentives were analyzed which determine the real efforts of team members who are tasked with creating output (product) which has common value for the overall group and then divides and distributes the total income (dividend) received among members in equal shares. The supposition of the study was the forming of small groups of members (coalitions) within larger team structures which are united by a sense of mutual trust in one another and whose component members are not prone to displays of self-serving opportunistic behavior. Unlike non-coalition agents with the goal of maximizing their own individual dividends, the volumes attained by coalition member’s efforts correspond to a maximum dividend for the overall coalition. In our study it has been shown that the overall efforts of members of a coalition are much higher than the analogous efforts of non-coalition agents. Accordingly, under existing conditions where there is a distribution of the total income in equal shares, the overall dividend of a coalition member is in fact lower than the dividend of a non-coalition agent. Such conditions may be viewed by coalition members as unfair and in fact pose a real threat to the stability of the coalition. The necessary adjustment to the division of incentives and final dividends needed to eliminate such a threat are considered in this article and consist of a preliminary revision of the dividend distribution rules with adjustments in favor of coalition members. The boundaries and parameters of the values within the share of coalition members which correspond to the necessary conditions and adjustments needed to facilitate the stability of the coalition have been determined.
collective action; coalition, sustainability; Nash equilibrium; Pareto-preferable outcome; cooperative game.
1. Belyanin A.V., Zinchenko V.P. Doverie v ekonomike i obschestvennoy zhizni. M.: Fond «Liberal'naya missiya», 2010. – 164.
2. Belokrylova O.S., Ermishina A.V. Faktory kollektivnyh deystviy (na primere zhilischnoy samoorganizacii) // Terra Economicus. 2012. № 1. S. 174-179.
3. Garfinkel' G. Koncepciya i eksperimental'nye issledovaniya «doveriya» kak usloviya stabil'nyh soglasovannyh deystviy // Sociologicheskoe obozrenie. 2009. № 8 (1). S. 10-51.
4. Germanov I.A., Markova Yu.S., Gordeeva S.S. Organizacionnaya spravedlivost' kak faktor formirovaniya vertikal'nogo doveriya v organizacii (opyt issledovaniya na predpriyatii neftyanoy otrasli) // Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Social'no-ekonomicheskie i pravovye issledovaniya. 2021. № 4 (28). S. 8-28.
5. Germeyer Yu.B. Igry s neprotivopolozhnymi interesami. M.: «Nauka», 1976. – 326 s.
6. Zak F.L. O nekotoryh modelyah al'truisticheskogo povedeniya // Zhurnal Novoy ekonomicheskoy associacii. 2021. № 1(49). S. 12-52.
7. Kozhemyak K.Yu. Doverie k okruzhayuschemu miru i kak povyshaetsya doverie // Aktual'nye problemy innovacionnogo pedagogicheskogo obrazovaniya. 2018. № 5. S. 33-35.
8. Koulmen Dzh. Ekonomicheskaya sociologiya s tochki zreniya racional'nogo vybora // Ekonomicheskaya sociologiya. 2004. № 3. S. 35-44.
9. Olson M. The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, 1965. – 176.
10. Ostrom E. Upravlyaya obschim: evolyuciya institutov kollektivnoy deyatel'nosti. M.: IRISEN, Mysl', 2011. – 447 s.
11. Ouen G. Teoriya igr. Per. s angl. M.: Mir, 1971. – 230 s.
12. Parilina E.M., Sedakov A.A. Ustoychivye kooperativnye struktury v igrah s glavnym igrokom. V sb. Sociofizika i socioinzheneriya. M.: IPU RAN, 2018. S. 181-182.
13. Petrosyan L.A., Zenkevich N.A. Principy ustoychivoy kooperacii // Matematicheskaya teoriya igr i ee prilozheniya. 2009. № 1. S. 106-123.
14. Polterovich V.M. Pozitivnoe sotrudnichestvo: faktory i mehanizmy evolyucii // Voprosy ekonomiki. 2016. № 11. S. 5-23.
15. Skarzhinskaya E.M., Curikov V.I. Modelirovanie kollektivnyh deystviy: znachimost' kooperativnyh soglasheniy // Rossiyskiy zhurnal menedzhmenta. 2019. № 3. S. 337-366.
16. Fukuyama F. Doverie: social'nye dobrodeteli i put' k procvetaniyu. Per. s angl. – M.: OOO «Izdatel'stvo ACT»: ZAO NPP «Ermak», 2004. – 730 s.
17. Chernikov M.V. Spravedlivost': funkcional'nyy analiz // Svobodnaya mysl'. 2020. № 2 (1680). S. 157-170.
18. Eggertsson T. Ekonomicheskoe povedenie i instituty. M.: Delo, 2001. – 408 s.
