DISQUS

Sarah · 3 years ago

Poker tournaments are a fantastic way to assess how individuals naturally/instinctively make decisions. It may even help you predict how employees might react under pressure.
– Are the risk-loving or risk-averse?
– Do the evaluate all the information they have, or just do what their "gut" says.
– Do they tend to be influenced by the way others around them are playing?
– Do they change their behaviors when the stakes get higher?
– How do they react under pressure? Does the quality of their decisions change?
– Do their ethics line up with those of the company? How far will they go to win?
– How good are they at bluffing and maintaining their cool when they do? Does the company or their role require them to be?

With the meteoric rise in popularity of Poker it is a great way to get employee attention and participation in an evalutation that they aren't even aware of. And, organizations today are investing a lot of time, energy and money in disaster planning. Identifying key employees who could help in a situation that called for quick thinking and leadership (regardless of their actual role in the organization) is more important than ever.

In spite of all this, some employees may disagree with, and therefore be distracted by, the gambling aspect of Poker. They may even be unwilling or unable to participate for religious or cultural reasons. If your company is largely open-minded, there may be very practical ways to have tournaments without even letting on to employees that you might be gathering information. But it will require you consider how to gather similar information from those who cannot participate. For example, you may support other sorts of tournaments (maybe there are some that would be culturally acceptable to most groups) in the event that poker is not appealing to some. Much of the same information can be gathered through games in general.

Other ways game theory might apply to evaluating individuals...
In business, tournament theory (a type of game theory) applies to the idea that an individual's direct reports all wait for that job to become open and they vie for that one spot. This scenario forces employees to behave in the manner that they think makes it most likely that they will get that job. they may work extra hard, they may attempt to become socially close to influential people, they may sabotage the work of others, or any number of other political strategies. It often shows their true colors.

Other elements of employee ethics and values can also be studied through examining behaviors in the context of game theory. The prisoners dilemma, for example. In the prisoner's dilemma two prisoners are in separate rooms. If one tells the truth, he goes free and the other is punished. If neither one tells the truth, then they both go free. The second scenario (which might be viewed as teamwork) is obviously better for both prisoners. However, to ensure that one is better off, he may decide to tell the truth, thereby diminishing the total well-being of the group.

The idea of using game theory as a way to assess prospects, possible high potential employees, and high-level employees is very creative and in practice could be done relatively easily. Winning the poker tournament would be irrelevant in the end (though it may motivate employees and create commitment if they believe they company will give them a prize for winning or would even allow them to play on company time). I believe the knowledge that could be gained about individual's decision-making drivers would be well worth the lost work lost work time (if any time was in fact lost).

It is a creative idea. It would require a company to take a chance. Do something different. And fend off potential criticism from those who disagree with gambling. However, if you are with a company that is looking to be one of the 100 Best, this might be one of those creative ideas that differentiates you from the pack. But better than M&Ms; or other perks, this could also substantially strengthen hiring, retention and succession planning.