On Greed

Abstract

Greed is a central element in human existence. It is also frequently mentioned as a factor in many recent organizational and financial scandals. Thus, it was surprising to discover that empirical research on greed is rare. In contrast, however, a variety of different literatures present a rich conceptual foundation for understanding the dynamics of greed and greedy behavior. We focus on four of these literatures, broadly defined as historical/philosophical, economic, political, and social psychological/game theoretic, to investigate the concept of greed. We identify and explore three of its major characteristics: its moral, cognitive, and emotional elements. In addition, we present a decision process model to synthesize and analyze the dynamics of intuition, emotions, and reasoning that contribute to or inhibit greed. In essence, our discussion addresses the genesis, the catalysts, and the ramifications of greed.

Acknowledgements

The authors truly appreciate the insightful comments that Nir Halevy, Art Brief, and Jim Walsh provided on the previous versions of this paper.

Notes

Adelphia communications, AOL Time Warner, Arthur Andersen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, CMS Energy, Duke Energy, Dynegy, El Paso, Global Crossing, Halliburton, Homestore.com, Kmart, Merck, Mirant, Nicor Energy, Peregrine Systems, Qwest Communications, Reliant Energy, Tyco, WorldCom, and Xerox.

Popular economic thought has also been influenced by the approach espoused by Ayn Rand (1943). Although some readers view her philosophy as one that supports greed, we view her directives as a push toward pure, unadulterated self-interest—a distinction that can easily blur as excessive wealth is accumulated. We have tried to restrict our focus as much as we can to greed; this means that we have not incorporated her work more extensively.

Social psychologists (e.g. Steinel & De Dreu, 2004) also define greed as the desire to get high personal outcomes; this approach is consistent with the current analysis of prisoners' and social dilemmas.

Other notions of dual models interpret them as automatic vs. controlled processes (e.g. Fazio, 1986; Eagly & Chaiken, 1993; Greenwald, Banaji, Rudman, Farnham, & Nosek, 2002).

Moral judgments about greed can also be an interpersonal process (Haidt, 2001). For the sake of conceptual clarity, we focus on individual decision-makers in our model.

Barsade and colleagues (2009) noted that even when people are conscious of their emotions, they may still not be completely aware of their source or their consequences. This suggests that conscious processes may be a subset of the processes that influence people's behavior. Thus, our distinction between hot and warm emotions is actually relative.

Research suggests that guilt is particularly effective in curbing one's greed (Wang & Murnighan, 2010a) as it typically leads to helping behavior even toward people who are unrelated to the source of the guilt feelings (Freedman, Wallington, & Bless, 1967; Regan, 1971; Regan, Williams, & Sparling, 1972).

Moral reasoning can also be subject to the influence of different situational or conditional moods and affect, which tend to be relatively ephemeral compared with the hot and warm emotions that we have discussed here. For the sake of conceptual clarity, we do not include them in our model.