This week’s Research Hero is Prof. Max Bazerman, Jesse Isidor Straus Professor of Business Administration at Harvard Business School. He is also affiliated with Harvard Kennedy School of Government, the Psychology Department, and the Program on Negotiation. Prof Bazerman’s research focuses on but is not limited to decision making, ethics, and negotiation. He has coedited more than 200 articles and 16 books, including Negotiation Genius, Predictable Surprises: The Disasters You Should Have Seen Coming, and How to Prevent Them, and the sixth edition of Judgment in Managerial Decision Making. He has international collaborations with over 25 countries and 50 companies in United States. Prof. Bazerman is also famous for being the one who introduced the science of negotiation in Business schools. He has received many awards, to name a few recent ones: honorary doctorate from the University of London (London Business School), being named as one of Ethisphere’s 100 Most Influential in Business Ethics, one of Daily Kos’ Heroes from the Bush Era for going public about how the Bush Administration corrupted the RICO Tobacco trial, and the 2008 Distinguished Educator Award from the Academy of Management.
I wish someone had told me at the beginning of my career…
a) All good papers find homes
b) If the reviewer is being “stupid”, it is probably your writing that allows them to be “stupid”. The solutions isn’t hoping for smart reviewers, but taking the perspective of the reviewer, and writing so that they see the brilliance in your work. (and, if you don’t have those writing skills, find an editor)
I most admire academically… because…
a) Kahneman and Tversky, for outlining the most influential research direction in the social sciences
b) Thaler and Sunstein, for nudging us to how to put this brilliance into practice to make the world a better place
The best research project I have worked on during my career...the project that I am most proud of/ that has inspired me most…. The next project, which I do not even know about as I write this, that one of my brilliant doctoral students lures me into joining.
The worst research project I have worked on during my career…the one project that I should never had done… My empirical work has co-authors, so I am going to refuse to answer this one.
The most amazing or memorable experience when I was doing research….The common occurrence of a brilliant doctoral student coming into my office to inform me about how wrong I am – again!
The one story I always wanted to tell but never had a chance… I have told all my stories worth telling
A research project I wish I had done… And why did I not do it…Kern, M. and Chugh, D. (2009). Bounded ethicality: The perils of loss framing. Psychological Science, 20(3), 378-384. The paper is brilliant, simple, and important. And, it is about things I know about. I can’t figure out why I didn’t do this before Kern and Chugh. I love this paper!
If I wasn’t doing this, I would be...less happy.
The biggest challenge for our field in the next 10 years…Changing our methods to cope with the insightful and important work of John, Leslie K., George Loewenstein, and Drazen Prelec. Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices with Incentives for Truth-telling. Psychological Science (2012). Simmons, Joseph P., Leif D. Nelson and Uri Simonsohn. False-Positive Psychology : Undisclosed Flexibility in Data Collection and Analysis Allows Presenting. Psychological Science (2011). My generation messed up, and led to the acceptance of bad practices with too many cute false positives. We need to clean up our act, and the faster the better.
My advice for young researchers at the start of their career is… Don’t p-hack (see Simmons et al., 2011). The world is changing, detecting p-hacking is easy, and the value on integrity in research is going up very quickly.
Thanks for the interview! The link to the Kern and Chugh articles seems to be for internal only. Here’s a publicly viewable one (http://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~dchugh/articles/2009_PsychScience.pdf).
“p-hack (see Simmons et al., 2011)” leads to little of relevance, maybe; now I understand why we taught Harvard referencing. Even so I can guess what’s from context maybe that was the students excuse for not caring about Harvard – they did not even ask “Where’s that ?”