Pixel

Marketing Gaps and Intersections, Between Education and Social Practice: the “Win-Win-Win Papakonstantinidis Model” and the High-Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP)

0

Citation Download PDF

International Journal of Innovation and Economic Development
Volume 4, Issue 2, June 2018, Pages 7-23


Marketing Gaps and Intersections, Between Education and Social Practice: the “Win-Win-Win Papakonstantinidis Model” and the High-Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP)

DOI: 10.18775/ijied.1849-7551-7020.2015.42.2001
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.18775/ijied.1849-7551-7020.2015.42.2001

Leonidas A. Papakonstantinidis

 Professor, The Indian Institute of Information Technology IIIT Bhagalpur, India

Abstract: Given gaps and intersections between education and social practice, this article goes to the next step. Efforts are focused on “what must be done,” what policy must be applied so that gaps and intersections must be eliminated, that means “all about the graduated from any education level could be absorbed by the labor market in a period. Conventional policies have failed, and alternative solutions are promoted by the scientific community among them, some scientists propose quite new forms, as the compassion-social entrepreneur. In this volume-section a quite radical reversal concept is proposed Instead of “good trade practices” in the frame of a high risk hard competitive market’s environment”, the “High Risk Ethical Priorities” is proposed taking into account market trends, and competition. From this point of view, the term “High Risk Ethical Priorities” (HREP) is introduced (for the first time), by this article. Finally, the two criteria, the Chi-square and the NE have been used, for the point of the unique equilibrium (deviation=0) be detected.

Keywords: “Win – win- win Papakonstantinidis model”, HREP priorities, Social welfare, Social entrepreneurship, The impossibility theorem (Arrow) the incompleteness theorem (Gödel) Pareto efficiency, Nash equilibrium, The Rawls theorem on justice, Sensitization, Team psychology, The “Principle-Agent Theory”, Egalitarianism, Utilitarianism

Marketing Gaps and Intersections, Between Education and Social Practice: the “Win-Win-Win Papakonstantinidis Model” and the High-Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP)

1. Introduction

Suppose that President Putin (Russia) and President Trump (USA) decide to launch joint oil drilling in the Arctic Ocean (where their common borders are) after long-term negotiations that result in benefits (win-win) and mutual positions for their countries (Russia and US) – see map

Is this agreement fine from the socioeconomic view? The answer to this “old” question, is NO.
Any reactive agreement, or disagreement (whatever small or big, on how to drive a car or bicycle, from “baby cry towards the UN decision, is based on the Nash “Bargaining Problem” according to which the decision of one is depended on the decision taken by the other part of a win-win negotiation. So from the concept of Neumann-Morgenstern (1940) “zero-sum two players game”, where the “winner takes it all” ten years later in 1950, John Forbs Nash focuses on “shares”, detached from the result.

Figure 1

The win-win agreement or even disagreement does not concern the two Global leaders, but it concerns 7 billion Global population by “di-chain reactions”.

1.1 Problem Statement

Given this simple paradigm, it is understood that any re-active behavior, any bargain between two parties does not concern only them but all the population of the planet. Lorenz’s paradigm explains this situation as a butterfly effect. In chaos theory, the butterfly effect . is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in significant differences in a later state. It is believed that human relations-especially after the New Technologies evolution-have been become very sensitive, as the weather/climate phenomena are.

The first statement:

Under this perception, the problem risen both in theoretical view and practice, is: “How to succeed or approach social solutions, by the same free marketplace’s rules?”
This approach could be applied in any socio-economic activity or even in the biological and biochemistry and psychology scientific field, due to its unique “reaction rule”.

Different scientific fields, economics, sociology, psychology, history, are included in the re-active behavior and decision making, due to re-active.

The second statement concerns in “educational and professional view:

Starting from the given thesis that gaps and intersections between education and profession marketing exist, then, new policy aspects may be detected, thus deriving incentives of looking for new forms of marketing organization: The shift to the philosophy of modern literature is now visible as the last decade writers propose to return to Moral Values close to Human Being and less close to numbers . A scientific dialogue is starting on what entrepreneurship is now defined and if “social compassion” organizations could have the same treatment. It is obvious that capitalism is impossible to go on with this form. In this frame, HREP (High Risk Ethical Priorities) is launched as a new form of a radical perception view of marketing, which resulted from the “win-win-win Papakonstantinidis model” application in socioeconomic forms.

1.2 Definitions

1.2.1 Education-Profession

  • Marketing education is a degree program option where students learn how to move products from concept to consumer. Learn more about what marketing education entails in this lesson. The discipline of marketing is built upon three areas of interdisciplinary content. These foundations of economics, human resource skills, and marketing concepts
  • Marketing profession: The action or business of promoting and selling products or services, including market research and advertising. On the distance between the two forms of marketing, the (1) win-win-win papakonstantinidis model and (2) HREP are building on.
  • The “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” is – more than a methodological tool for conflict resolution and “measuring” social welfare, based on deviations- a mechanism for a new bargaining ethic, taking into consideration the Community profit , (the “C’ factor) regarding grades of freedom, into the bargain and during the bargain, thus strengthening social cohesion, solidarity, and respect for others.

1.2.2 High Risk Ethical Priorities

What is HREP?

Until now, good trading practices was a presuppose (?) in a hard competitive world
What we intend now, is the reverse image:

Ethical Priorities, of High Risk, under the condition of a free market. High Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP) are “payoffs” expected by people who dedicate time money, or even their own lives in implementing of an ethical priority; for example, to save a human life-see at “doctors without borders” who every day risk their lives, to save another life. As “free will” is the greatest human conquest, these doctors want to be in war zones; it is not imposed.

Table 1

  Pre-supposes
Priorities (%)
The field of action liberalism conservatives communism HREP
in a competitive World 85 75 60 5
In a future World less competitive, more respect the other’s personality 15 25 40 95

Source: Papakonstantinidis 2018

Table 2

l

presupposes

 

The field of action

(%) accepted

 

 

 

competitive World

In a future World less competitive, more respect the other’s personality  

In a socialist world

 

HREP

Liberalism

Profit

 

100

 

 

 

 

Conservatism stability

 

40

 

 

10

 

 

50

 

 

 

Communism

Labor market/syndicates

Jobs creation

 

 

20

 

80

 

HREP  

 

100

 

 

Source: Papakonstantinidis 2018

See that old people-conservatives, mostly, invest in the future. In the opposite, young people claim direct profit in their bargain.

The definition is approached through the register of its characteristics:

Let’s start from a paradigm, “Doctors without borders ” activities, especially those in war zones, could be considered as of “High Risk Ethical Priorities” due to their not only saving lives but one more, endangering their own lives. These scientists could choose their “profession environment” in good hospitality, far from the war zones. But they prefer to serve there, putting their lives at risk – endangering their own lives. This is the compendium of self-sacrificing and solidarity.

Saving a life is extreme “Ethical Priority”, but doing it by endangering your own life is the holistic view of the High Risk Ethical Priority (HREP). Here, people from marketing Profession who promote this task, who are looking for new doctors in war zones also refer to HREP, if they have to lose their positions, due to this promotion.

From the above mentioned, we can summarize that:

  • HREP is the people’s actions by their own choice and decision, vs. the micro-economic rational behavior
  • except for some few cases, HREP overcome rationality and thus cannot be included in economic thought;
    HREP follows the “free will” philosophy, where the western democracies are based on;
  • HREP is included in the “romantic” view of life, meeting self-sacrifice, bravery, value humanity, respect, recognition;
  • Finally, HREP is “out of market rule” and thus, cannot be measured.

2. Main Questions

The continuous conflict between the three (3) main bargaining power poles at the local level, i.e. local people (and their interests lobbies), local authorities and the consumers of tourism services shape the landscape of its management and operation. This conflict landscape is directly correlated with the development of dynamical trends coming primarily from the rapid rate of world urbanization: Market forces are based on Instant Reflection Individual Mixed Strategies (IRIMS) between the three power poles, i.e., Local People, Local Authorities and tourism services’ Consumers (P. A. C.) shape the local space unity by a continuous dynamic evolution. This evolution positively influences the community development towards its spatial integration, during the process of community tourism at the local level. Given the above:

  • May the rural development be viewed as the result of a continuous conflict among local power poles’ (people, authorities, organizations, regions) for the domination over the rural tourism activity? How, local interests – which converging in a local goal- should be achieved by the same market rules?
  • Is the 3ple PAC involvement, able to create an equilibrium point in payoffs matrix coming from “best responses”, of the three (3) players? How is the 3ple PAC equilibrium different (if it is) from that of the 2-players game?Is there any possibility for the PAC system to produce conflict equilibria in a globalized and competitive world? What is the possibility of ensuring the maximum profit for each of them [“Pareto efficiency”], so that none of the PAC members have any interest to change his/her strategy, without losses for him/her and others?
  • Could, a 3-ple pole system influence the world economic and social system?
  • Could the behavior of bargainers (locally) being changed resulting rural development process’ spillover feedback? Should, a 3-ple pole system influence the world economic and social system?
  • Could the behavior of bargainers (locally) being changed resulting rural development process’ spillover feedback?

The continuous conflict between the three main bargaining power poles at the local level (state services, elected local authorities, local people and its interests lobbies) shape the landscape of its management and operation. The 3-Pole roles – especially in Greece – are not so clear. As a result, each of them intervenes in the other responsibilities’ space. Each of them cancels the efforts undertaken by other and thus the output is very poor. This conflict landscape is directly correlated with the development trends, coming especially from the rapid rate of world urbanization:

Over the second half of the 20th century, we have seen the continuous transformation of the world’s population from rural to urban (Kenneth Wilkinson, 1991; Ramonet Ignacio, 2000), and this change is likely to continue in decades to come. It is obvious that cities and local communities are not alone nor operate independently from each other. In a globalized world, cities and local communities are interconnected and mutually affected each other – the trends of urbanization shape other Natural Environment and the form of cities / local communities, changes in employment, immigration trends, and also from the standard production and marketing (Oikonomou- Kafkalas, 1922a; Ankerl Guy, 1986). Urbanization in the People’s Republic of China – for example – increased in speed following the initiation of the reform and opening policy. By the end of 2010, the mainland of the People’s Republic of China had a total urban population of 665.57 million or 49.68 percent of the total population Rural-to-urban population fraction has continued to decline dramatically over the last two decades. In 2001, 64% of the population resided in rural areas, down from 74% in 1990. Meanwhile, the annual population growth rate was estimated at 0.59% (United Nations World Prospects Report 2006 estimate), and approximately 94% of the population occupies 46% of the land. Besides, community population (or a percentage % of population) may move from home to workplace and back, even aboard (beyond national borders) In the “world village” any place/community/municipality/big city may concern to be interconnected and interactive with the other communities thus affected each other, in a world decision making. In this frame, big cities and communities are displayed by their “technical” characteristics, rather than those of “cohesive societies”.

Today, the point is to prove and highlight the necessity of converting a technical-territory community view, in a more conceptual “behavioral” community, highlighting bargaining behavior within the community. The paper argues that this converting behavior could be realized only by using the same market rules (competitive-conflict instrumental rationality’s behavior), that should converge the three bargaining power poles’ interests competitive behavior in a NEW local sensitized cooperative behavior. So, the behavioral analysis should be broached in order, the suggested “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model and its usefulness be highlighted, in respect to local communities’ management and its resulted development. This is the scope of this paper: Starting from the common work (Spais G, Papakonstantinidis L, Papakonstantinidis S: 2009) analysis, paper focuses on two different points: (a) the win-win-win papakonstantinidis model short description and (b) the “path” from technical-territory community in behavioral Community through sensitization (the 3rd win) as the result of methodological “keys”-below- application in the local development process. In real terms, the “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” is launched as a new methodological tool for conflict resolution, mainly in the local development strategy and decision making.

3. Aim of the Study

The aim of this theoretical contribution (if it exists) is to highlight the “SENSITIZATION ability” that every one of us either relates to refugees, or in countries, whether in claiming or even in our daily transactions. It is time to stop looking only personal interest or “individual defense” in the form of the suggested “the win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” focusing on the development of small villages and the SMEs networking, inside the total quality management (TQM).

In particular, the proposal deals with collecting, classifying and comparing the theoretical material from various sources on the functioning of Social Welfare Function (SWF), towards building a strong case with logical and coherent arguments, towards the one Triple Pole (A-B-COMMUNITY) Equilibrium (TPE), different from N.E, that leads to the Social Bargaining Solution” (SBS) and coincide with the “optimal” Community Collective Choice (CCC) in order to create a highly versatile tool, “the win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” of well-formed formulas (wffs).

Coming from its applications, the ambition is to create a series of new policy tools to strengthen social welfare, despite the “impossibility theorem” (K. Arrow 1955). There are several arguments that through “a simultaneous, reflective, strong effective (Pareto), Flexible, fair (Rawls), collective (Amartya Sen) Social Welfare Function (SWF) in the frame of a General Equilibrium (Walras), incompatibilities that incorporate the values of equality, justice, harmony, symmetry, and the hypothesis, of self-organization (Papakonstantinidis) as well as the hypothesis of self-supporting bargaining solution in a community level, should exist and be the only one: the win-win-win equilibrium Win-win-win papakonstantinidis situation is proposed as an extension of both “non-cooperative game” and the principal-agent problem (also known as agency dilemma or theory of agency) under the constraints put by the five theorems. Especially, Pareto efficiency, as an economic state where resources are allocated in the most efficient manner Pareto efficiency is obtained when a distribution strategy exists where one party’s situation cannot be improved without making another party’s situation worse. Pareto efficiency does not imply equality or fairness. Also known as “Pareto optimality” (INVESTOPEDIA). Also, the theory of justice focuses on the “veil of ignorance”, along with the original position, is a method of determining the morality of a particular issue (e.g., slavery) based upon the following thought experiment: parties to the original position know nothing about their particular abilities, tastes, and position within the social order of society. When such parties are selecting the principles for the distribution of rights, positions, and resources in the society they will live in, the veil of ignorance prevents them from knowing about who they will be in that society.

Also known as “Pareto optimality” (INVESTOPEDIA). Also, the theory of justice focuses on the “veil of ignorance”, along with the original position, is a method of determining the morality of a certain issue (e.g., slavery) based upon the following thought experiment: parties to the original position know nothing about their particular abilities, tastes, and position within the social order of society. When such parties are selecting the principles for the distribution of rights, positions, and resources in the society they will live in, the veil of ignorance prevents them from knowing about who they will be in that society.

The scope of the paper is, additionally, to produce the scientific dialogue on the thematic SMEs networking alongside a small place. Seemingly, the integrated endogenous local development program, in this case, is quite different: Capacity building is a key-factor which forms “social transformations”, by doing networks, around an “open discussion theme” called “flag theme”, thus influencing local development procedure. The frame is defined by what we call “the bargaining problem” which provides us with the strategic material of “trends” alongside the network, by forming new equilibrium points, new balances, or destroying the existing, doing step-by-step new networks or transforming the existing ones. By its turn, bargaining problem is depended on both “instant reflections” and pure individual or SMES “winning strategies” based on “information given” in relation with “expectations”. By its turn, information given may be the “output” of knowledge creation, according to the “New Innovation Theory”, influencing social behavior and by this, individual strategies. For this, capacity building as Factor of Networking SMES towards local development is analyzed.

Capacity building is the key-point in producing the dialogue, on the local development process, based on networking SMES, for the reasons that:

  • capacity building is about “stimulating learning” (Moseley, 2003)
  • learning by doing-but, not in isolation – is often extremely effective
  • the challenge for the capacity builder is to create situations in which learning occurs as a by-product of someone responding to a challenge.

From this point of view, “development” – especially rural and local development – might be a sustained and sustainable process of economic, social, cultural and environmental change, designed to enhance the long-term well-being of the whole by networking (Wilkinson, 1991; Swarebrooke, 1999; Papakonstantinidis, 2002; Moseley, 2003).

Among different definitions on “capacities building”, the paper starts this dialogue from the definitions of the capacity building provided by professor Moseley (2003):

  • “Increasing the stock of skills, knowledge, and readiness to act.”
  • “Promoting the development of social capital (institutions and networks etc.) to produce positive social outcomes.”
  • Networking SMES around a FLAG THEME in the small place
  • As it concerns the first definition, “Readiness to act” relates to a host of other things to do with motivation confidence, resources, and the removal of constraints.

The second definition includes reference to the purpose of capacity building and it also states unambiguously that capacity building is about increasing one of the “four capitals” (the social capital) whereas it is arguable that it is also concerned with enhancing human capital, meaning that individual people and not just the “glue” that binds them.

The Third DEFINITION is “networking” may lead to “coalitions” around a flag theme, thus promoting the integrated and endogenous development, at the local level.

SMEs involvement: First steps towards networking

Based on these definitions the following questions would arise:

How can we involve SMEs to implement community objectives?

In this regard, the scientific community should take into consideration two approaches to answer this question:

How does SMEs take part of capacity building in local society?
How should SMEs be promoted to increase their capacity by networking?

The first direction leads us to the implementation of community objectives by a public-private partnership.
The second direction increases the competitiveness of local SMEs, and this may ensure the better off of the local community.

Both directions must be concerned by a “society involvement perception”, including FIVE (5) methodological steps [according to the “ladder”]:

  • Information
  • Sensitization
  • Participation
  • Direct involvement
  • Partnership

In particular:

  • A first step is information by which people and SMEs at a local level are told about what is possible to be done, regarding complementary activities, locally and what it might to do for their area;
  • The next step may be sensitization, by which SMEs are encouraged to reflect on the character of their area; the natural, cultural and human resources of the area;
  • This may then lead to active participation in the debate upon the development of SMEs area, around a “Flag Theme”, or “common interests, by a more social character, thus making their first steps towards coalitions, by creating a “common strategy” in some fields. Flag Theme should be an innovative idea, coming from the studying of nature, or from a historical fact – reproducing a custom, a myth, a historical name or event. It may be, even a fantastic event, which may be attractive for tourists Flag Theme may have resulted in the outcome of the common work during the sensitization and the animation process. Some examples from Greece/Europe are referred below: “Odyssea” – Aegean Sea “Arktouros” (Pindos Mountain), “Forest of Dadia” (Evros), “Zagorohoria” (Epiros), “Flag of Greek Revolution” (Kalavryta), “Twelve Gods in Olympos” (Pieria), “Faragi Samarias” (Crete), “Pindos Crossing” etc or using names from history i.e «Apidotia» (Nafpaktos); thematic routes as “Oil Roads”, or “Silk-town” (Soufli); or a fantastic place , as the “Pirot Sea” for people who asking for adventures, or the «love valley» to attract people in love. In those cases, local activities are round the Flag theme for each place, thus providing it with its identity; through diversification, as a most popular tourist destination;
  • This, in turn, may provoke the direct involvement of people and SMEs at a local level in pursuing and contributing to their common fields.

This direct involvement may then form the basis for the creation of formal or informal local partnerships which may undertake aspects of the development the SMEs common strategies around the flag theme. That could be led to SMEs networking around the “flag theme” Conflict resolution which could occur between SMEs should be arranged by the “new” methodological tool, suggested by the presenter: It is the well-known win-win-win model –Papakonstantinidis LA.

4. Literature Review: Ethical Priorities: Aspects of “Moral Philosophy”

4.1 The “Good” Coming from God

Ancient Greek Philosophy focused on the “Society” and the “human being” as a part of the society: They tabled “man” in the Society, not in a separate logic On the opposite, Thomas Hobbes focused on “individual”. That was a huge change from the one syllogism to another : Citizens in Greek Athens and Sparta were peer in their class: They have only 3 responsibilities: (i) to vote their Laws in “Ecclesia of Dimos” (ii) to go to war for fighting and (iii) to follow their Philosophical Academy (where they were). One more, in Sparta the healthy young men were separated from their families and involved in society, were educated in the art of war. Over than two and a half -at least, in Europe- thousand (2500) years (starting from the written history’s period) people have involved in timeless philosophical, focusing in “human happiness” and the social welfare; first of all, there is not a commonly accepted definition concerned either “social welfare” or “happiness” or even “good Here “Community as total GOOD”.

The Greek Ancient Philosopher Socrates (469-399 b.C) believed that self-knowledge was sufficient to live a good life. He concerned that “knowledge is equivalent to virtue. People can reach absolute knowledge say, follow the correct method. One has to seek knowledge and wisdom before the other private interests. The knowledge sought as a means of moral action. The logic is a prerequisite to living a good life. Our true happiness depends on whether you do what is right. You cannot be happy if you act in contrary to what you believe ”.

Aristotle (384-322) Aristotle’s emphasis was on good reasoning combined with his belief in the scientific method forms the backdrop for most of his work. For example, in his work in ethics and politics, Aristotle identifies the highest good with intellectual virtue; that is, a moral person is one who cultivates certain virtues based on reasoning.

Aristotle: The Nicomachean Ethics
The Nicomachean Ethics is widely considered one of the most important historical, philosophical works and had an important impact upon the European Middle Ages Aristotle argues that the correct approach for studying such controversial subjects as Ethics or Politics, which involve discussing what is beautiful or is to start with what would be roughly agreed to be true by people of good upbringing and experience in life and to work from there to a higher understanding. A contemplation about good living, because it also aims to create a good living. It is therefore connected to Aristotle’s other practical work, the Politics, which similarly aims at people becoming good. Ethics is about how individuals should live better, while the study of politics is from the perspective of a law-giver, looking at the good of a whole community. Taking this approach, Aristotle begins by saying that the highest good for humans, the highest aim of all human practical thinking, is eudaimonia, a Greek word often translated as well-being or happiness. Aristotle, in turn, argues that happiness is properly understood as an ongoing and stable dynamic a way of being in action (energeia) specifically appropriate to the human “soul” (psyxi) at its most “excellent” or virtuous (virtue translates arête in Greek). If there are several virtues, then the best and most complete or perfect of them will be the happiest one. An excellent human will be a person good at living life, who does it well and beautifully (kalos). Aristotle says that such a person would also be a serious (spoudaios) human being, in the same sense of “serious” that one contrasts serious harpists with other harpists. He also asserts as part of this starting point that virtue for a human must involve reason in thought and speech (logos) as this is an aspect (an ergon, literally meaning a task or work) of human living. The character here translates ēthos in Greek, related to modern words such as ethics, ethical and ethos. Aristotle does not, however, equate character with habit (ethos in Greek, with a short “e”) because real character involves conscious choice, unlike habit. Instead of being a habit, the character is a hexis like health or knowledge, meaning it is a stable disposition which must be pursued and maintained with some effort. However, good habits are described as a precondition for good character.

A starting point for the west Europe philology is divided into two (2) main philosophical currents (although were guided by those bases provided by the classical ancient Greek thought):

Classical Utilitarianism, which started with the slogan “The greatest happiness for the greatest number” and

Welfare Economics, which is supposed to increase national welfare Example:

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679). The pure state of nature or “the natural condition of mankind” was deduced by the 17th-century English philosopher in “Leviathan” in his earlier work on the Citizen”. Hobbes argued that all humans are by nature equal in faculties of body and mind (i.e., no natural inequalities are so great as to give anyone a “claim” to an exclusive “benefit).

David Hume (1711-1776) Beginning with his “A Treatise of Human Nature” (1739), Hume strove to create a total naturalistic “science of man” that examined the psychological basis of human nature In opposition to the rationalists who preceded him, most notably Rene Descartes he concluded that desire rather than reason governed human behavior.

Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) Kant argued that the necessary features of our minds structure our experiences. In his view, the mind shapes and structures experience so that, on an abstract level, all human experience shares specific essential structural features.

J. J. Rousseau (1712-1778) Rousseau claimed that the state of nature was a primitive condition without law or morality, which human beings left for the benefits and necessity of cooperation. As society developed, a division of labor and private property required the human race to adopt institutions of law. In the degenerate phase of society, man is prone to be in frequent competition with his fellow men while also becoming increasingly dependent on them. This double-pressure threatens both his survival and his freedom. According to Rousseau, by joining together into civil society through the Social Contract and abandoning their claims of natural right individuals can both preserve themselves and remain free. This is because submission to the authority of the general will of the people as a whole guarantees individuals against being subordinated to the wills of others and also ensures that they obey themselves because they are, collectively, the authors of the law.

Classical utilitarianism: The origins of utilitarianism are often traced as far back as the Greek philosopher Epicurus but, as a specific school of thought, it is generally credited to Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) (Utilitarianism) Utilitarianism retains the Epicurean view that humans naturally seek pleasure and avoid pain,)

J.Bentham (1748-1832) : Utilitarianism theory-cardinal utility function) became a leading theorist in Anglo-American philosophy of law Bentham’s utilitarianism is based on some assumptions like, Each knows best what is good for him/her, Each should decide him/herself in private matters, The welfare of an individual doesn’t depend on other individual’s welfare.

On the other hand, John Stuart Mill was better known as the author of Principles of Political Economy (1848), a work that tried to show that economics was not the “dismal science” that its radical and literary critics had supposed. Its philosophical interest lay in Mill’s reflections on the difference between what economics measured and what human beings valued.

John Rawls (A Theory of Justice 1971). Rawls belongs to the social contracts tradition. However, Rawls’ social contract takes a different view from that of previous thinkers. Specifically, Rawls develops what he claims are principles of justice through the use of an artificial device he calls the Original position in which everyone decides principles of justice from behind a veil of ignorance. This “veil” is one that essentially blinds people to all facts about themselves so they cannot tailor principles to their advantage:

Capitalism: The historical context of classical economics was the age of enlightenment the French Revolution (1789-1799) and the Industrial Revolution Classical economics is widely regarded as the first modern school of economic thought It is the idea that free markets can regulate themselves. Its major developers include Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations in 1776 is usually considered to mark the beginning of classical economics. The school was active into the mid 19th century and was followed by neoclassical economics in Britain beginning around 1870. Classical economists attempted and partially succeeded to explain economic growth and development. The Wealth of Nations (1776)

Karl Marx (1818-1883) Marx’s theories about society, economics and politics—the collective understanding of which is known as “Marxism” hold that human societies progress through class struggle a conflict between an ownership class that controls production and a dispossessed laboring class that provides the labor for production.

Mahatma Gandhi (1869–1948) quotes:
“Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.

”Quotes”:

“When it (violence) appears to do good, the good is only temporary; the evil it does is permanent.”
Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.”
“Hate the sin, love the sinner.”
“I believe in equality for everyone, except reporters and photographers.”
“You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops of the ocean are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty.”
“Victory attained by violence is tantamount to a defeat, for it is momentary.”
“An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.”

Neoclassical Economics
Neoclassical economics is a term variously used for approaches to economics focusing on the determination of prices, outputs, and income distributions in markets through supply and demand often mediated through a hypothesized maximization of utility by income-constrained individuals and of profits by cost-constrained firms employing Neoclassical economics is conventionally dated from William Stanley Jevons’s “Theory of Political Economy” (1871), Carl Menger’ s Principles of Economics (1871) , and Leon Walras’ s “Elements of Pure Economics” (1874 – 1877) . These three economists have been said to have promulgated the marginal utility revolution or Neoclassical Revolution.

Marginal utility
Instead of the price of a good or service reflecting the labor that has produced it, it (the price) reflects the marginal usefulness (utility) of the last purchase. This meant that in equilibrium, people’s preferences determined prices, including, indirectly the price of labor.
Consumers act rationally by seeking to maximize the satisfaction of all their preferences. People allocate their spending so that the last unit of a commodity bought creates no more satisfaction than the last unit bought of something else

Assumptions (for welfare)
• Social Welfare may be the end of the “social welfare process (the ideal case) The utilities of consumers are independent
• A social welfare function exists.

Acceptance of Valerio Capraro thesis. (Capraro Valerio 2013) “Humans have attitude to cooperation by nature, and the same person may act more or less cooperatively depending on the particular payoffs” “Utility” may be used mainly in its “marginal” situation: very small “utils” by which decision taken: Marginal utility is the additional satisfaction a consumer gains from consuming one more unit of a good or service.

Figure 2

The new-classical “Non-Cooperative Games” &its famous “win-win Nash Equilibrium”(NE).The welfare function is a function that ranks social states (complete alternative descriptions of the society) as less desirable, more desirable, or indifferent for every possible pair of social states. Inputs of the function include any variables considered to affect the economic welfare of society. In using welfare measures of persons in the society as inputs, the social welfare function is individualistic in form. One use of a social welfare function is to represent prospective patterns of collective choice as to alternative social states (Amartya K. Sen, 1970 [retrieve 1984]).

5. Research Methodology

5.1 Introduction

The Article deals with the timely Marketing Education and Marketing Profession gaps’ and intersections’ elimination by smart policies, taking into account human needs, -more than a typical entrepreneurship behavior- under the prism of neo-introducing “High Risk Ethical Priorities” (HREP) terminology, and the “win-win-win papakonstantinidis model” It is looking out for coincidences and “distances” between the 2, taking into account the competitiveness in the market. An approach, education/profession be given as “cost” on the other has been done
Research outcomes are given by the application of “Chi-Square” and the Nash Equilibrium (NE)
An ideal condition –the “angels case” is looked to facilitate the “measured deviation” be done
In the case of Chi-square and the NE coincidence, in the higher level, then the absolute equilibrium may result [sample from the population and the absolute cooperation – expected agreement-disagreement payoffs are equal – see the HREP EQUATION, below.

5.2 High Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP)

As education and profession marketing’s gaps and intersections are concerned given, the article is focused on the new-introductory terms, i.e

  • The win-win-win papakonstantinidis model, and
  • The “High Risk Ethical Priorities

Figure 4

5.3 Chi-Square- Research ID

Chi-squared distribution, showing xon the x-axis and p-value on the y-axis.

A chi-squared test, also written as x2 test, is any statistical hypothesis test where the sampling distribution of the test statistic is a chi-squared distribution when the null hypothesis is true. Without other qualification, ‘chi-squared test’ often is used as short for Pearson’s chi-squared test. The chi-squared test is used to determine whether there is a significant difference between the expected frequencies and the observed frequencies in one or more categories.

In the standard applications of the test, the observations are classified into mutually exclusive classes, and there is some theory, or say null hypothesis, which gives the probability that any observation falls into the corresponding class. The purpose of the test is to evaluate how likely the observations that are made would be, assuming the null hypothesis is true.

Chi-squared tests are often constructed from a sum of squared errors, or through the sample variance. Test statistics that follow a chi-squared distribution arise from an assumption of independent normally distributed data, which is valid in many cases due to the central limit theorem. A chi-squared test can be used to attempt rejection of the null hypothesis that the data are independent.

It “measures” how to conduct a chi-square test for independence”. The test is applied when you have two categorical variables from a single population. It is used to determine whether there is a significant association between the two variables.

For example, in an election survey, voters could be classified by gender (male or female) and voting preference (Democrat, Republican, or Independent). We could use a chi-square test to determine whether gender is related to voting preference.

6. Research Id “HREP”

Field: Environmental Protection
Sample: 213 high-level educated staff with high-level hierarchy positions
RURAL AREAS in PELOPONNESUS
[as categorized by R. 1262/82]–analysis ,
PERIOD : [ 2017 -01-01 till 2017-12-31 ]

Table 3

AREA STATISTIC CATEGORIZATION TIME PERIOD SAMPLE m-education post graduated m-profession agro-business leaders
PELOPONNESUS

RURAL AREA

STRATIFICATION 1-1-2017 TILL

31-12-2017

213 107 106

Acknowledgments

First of all and foremost I thank THE ALMIGHTY ALLAH for giving me the ability to complete the present article. Special thanks to my dear supervisor Pr. XIE Ke Fan, for his support and guidance, and to my dear friend Allan. Last but not least, all my appreciation to the Journal Editors on their valuable feedbacks that have helped to the improvement of the present paper.

Footnotes

[1] Papakonstantinidis LA (2018). The term “High Risk Ethical Priorities (HREP)” is launched into the socio-economic perspective data, by this IGI-GLOBAL volume; it expresses the hopeful expectation of the author on reconstructing a new word, in which “Ethical Priorities” will have the role of the market, with some important market constraints-for its operation. That is quite different from the competitive capitalistic perception (competitive market, under the constraints of minimum ethical market conditions). In the first case, people act with the “Ethic Rule’s  expected payoffs In the second  case, payoffs (or incentives for someone to participate in a deal or bargain) are the expected individual profit The “Ethical” side is introduced by the form of “bargaining constraints” (i. e law rules against the violence in bargain and during the bargain).

[2] Nash Equilibrium

  • Nash, Jr., John F. 1950a. “The bargaining problem.” Econometrica 18:155-162.
  • Nash, Jr., John F. 1950b. “Equilibrium points in n-person games.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences U.S.A. 36:48-49.
  • Nash, Jr., John F. 1951. “Non-cooperative games.” Annals of Mathematics 54:289-295.
  • Nash, Jr., John F. 1953. “Two-person cooperative games.” Econometrica 21:128-140.
  • John F. Nash, Jr.(1950) The Bargaining Problem Econometrica Vol. 18, No. 2 (Apr. 1950), pp. 155-162 Published by: The Econometric Society DOI: 10.2307/1907266 (Nash Solution)

[3] (Lorenz Eduard, 1963) “Can a Butterfly in Brazil Really Cause a Tornado in Texas?” This concept was initially used in theories about weather prediction, but later the term became a popular metaphor in science. In chaos theory, the butterfly effect is the sensitive dependence on initial conditions in which a small change in one state of a deterministic nonlinear system can result in large differences in a later. The name, coined by Edward Lorenz for the effect which had been known long before, is derived from the metaphorical example of the details of a hurricane (exact time of formation, the exact path taken) being influenced by minor perturbations such as the flapping of the wings of a distant butterfly several weeks earlier. Lorenz discovered the effect when he observed that runs of his weather model with initial condition data that was rounded in a seemingly inconsequential manner would fail to reproduce the results of runs with the unrounded initial condition data. A minimal change in initial conditions had created a significantly different outcome

[4]

  • “What is a Disregarded Entity – Disregarded Entity Definition”. Biztaxlaw.about.com. 13 July 2013.
  • Freer Spreckley (1981). “Social Audit – A Management Tool for Co-operative Working” Beechwood College.
  • “Social Enterprise – Harvard Business School”. Hbs.edu. Retrieved 24 May 2013.
  • Nicholls, A. (2006) Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

A social enterprise is an organization that applies commercial strategies to maximize improvements in financial, social and environmental well-being—this may include maximizing social impact alongside profits for external shareholders. Social enterprises can be structured as a for-profit or non-profit, and may take the form (depending on which country the entity exists, and the legal forms are available) of a co-operative, mutual organization, a disregarded entity, a social business, a benefit corporation, a community interest company, a company limited by guarantee or a charity organization.

[5] High School Marketing for Teachers: Help & Review/Business Courses Next Lesson What Is Marketing Education?

[6] Oxford dictionary

[7] Papakonstantinidis LA (2002) “the win-win-win model” Euracademy Summer School Visby University SW (Aug 14): The term “Community” is used for different means as village, city, state union of states, common Values, traditions, common History, ..anything that concerns “Social Cohesion”.

[8] J.F. Nash (1951) “the non-cooperative game theory-Econometrica, 1951

[9] INVESTOPEDIA –DEFINITION conflict of interest inherent in any relationship where one party is expected to act in another’s best interests The problem is that the agent who is supposed to make the decisions that would best serve the principal is naturally motivated by self-interest, and the agent’s own best interests may differ from the principal’s best interests. The agency problem is also known as the “principal–agent problem.”-also, see at  Joseph E. Stiglitz and Andrew Weiss (1981)  Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information The American Economic Review Vol. 71, No. 3 (Jun., 1981), pp. 393-410

[10]  Dorion Louis-André(2013), L’Autre Socrate. Études sur les écrits socratiques de Xénophon, Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 2013

[11]. May, H. (2000) “On Socrates Wadsworth”/Thomson Learning, p. 20.

[12] “Aristotle” (1998) entry in  Collins English Dictionary Harper Collins Publishers, 1998

[13] Τσάτσος Κωνσταντίνος (1980) Η κοινωνική φιλοσοφία των αρχαίων Ελλήνων, σσ. 176-258, Εστία, 1980

[14] Ross, David (1925). Aristotle The Nicomachean Ethics: Translated with an Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Re-issued 1980, revised by J. L. Ackrill and J. O. Urmson.

References

  • Abhishek, V., Jerath, K. and Zhang, Z. J. (2015). Agency selling or reselling? Channel structures in electronic retailing. SSRN Electronic Journal
  • Chen, C. F. (2006). Applying the analytical hierarchy process (AHP) approach to convention site selection. Journal of Travel Research, 45(2), 167–174 Crossref
  • Gefen, D. and Pavlou, P.A. (2012). The boundaries of trust and risk: the quadratic moderating role of institutional structure. Information Systems Research, 23, 940-959 Crossref
  • Jiang, B., Jerath, K. and Srinivasan, K. (2011). Firm strategies in the ‘mid-tail’ of platform-based retailing, Marketing Science, 30(5), 757-775 Crossref
  • Kumar, A., and Crossref
  • Mantin, B., Krishnan, H. and Dhar, T. (2014). The strategic role of third-party marketplaces in retailing. Production and Operations Management, 23(11), 1937-1949 Crossref
  • Muthers, J. and Wismer, S. (2013).Why do platforms charge proportional fees? Commitment and seller participation. SSRN’s Electronic Journals
  • Qu, C.X., Pavlou, P.A., and Davison, R. (2014). Swift guanxi in online marketplaces: the role of computer-mediated communication technologies. MIS Quarterly, 38(1), 209-230 Crossref
  • Rochet, J.-C., and Tirole, J. (2006). Two-sided markets: a progress report. Rand Journal of Economics, 37(3), 645-667 Crossref
  • Saaty T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, New York
  • Saaty, T. L. (2000). Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the analytic hierarchy process (Vol. 6 of the AHP Series). Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications
  • Saaty, T. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98 Crossref
  • Sen, D. (2005). Fee versus royalty reconsidered. Games and Economic Behavior, 53(1), 141–147 Crossref
  • Timmers, P., and Gasos, J. (2002). Business to Business Electronic Commerce: Challenges and Solutions, 189-206
  • Tsalgatidou, A., and Pitoura, E. (2001). Business models and transactions in mobile electronic commerce: requirements and properties. Computer Networks, 37(2), 221-236 Crossref
  • Wang, X. H. (1998). Fee versus royalty licensing in a Cournot, duopoly model. Economics Letters, 60(1), 55-62 Crossref

 

Share.

Comments are closed.