Behavioral Economics Perspective In Exploring The Decision Making Of .
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.Behavioral Economics Perspective in Exploringthe Decision Making of Industrialized BuildingSystems in MalaysiaS. A. S. Zakaria, G. Brewer, and T. Gajendran Abstract—The adoption of modern building technology isplaying an increasing vital role in the development ofconstruction industry. Therefore, the proliferation ofIndustrialized Building System (IBS) technology adoption byconstruction industry has made the study of existing technologyadoption theories and decision making models in IBS settingincreasingly important. The intention of this paper is todetermine the influence of behavioral factors on IBS decisionmaking as perceived by IBS supply chain members in Malaysia.This paper proposes conceptual and theoretical frameworks byinvestigating the influences of behavioral factors on the decisionmaking of IBS technology adoption. This paper starts with adescription of decision making nature as a developmenttowards a grasp of decision making as a process in which adecision maker interacts in the formation of a final choice basedon behavioral economics perspectives, particularly withreference to IBS decision making in the Malaysian constructionindustry. The paper ends with the implications of thisconception for behavioral factors influences in IBS decisionmaking.Index Terms— decision, industrialized building system,behavioral economicsI. INTRODUCTIONIN building technology adoption, barriers to theacceptance of off-site production (OSP) are based aroundhuman perceptions grounded in the historical failure ofoff-site practices to deliver improved performance, technicaldifficulties (e.g. site specifics, delivery problems, interfacingproblems, cost), lack of opportunities for benefiting fromeconomies of scale, and the fragmented structure of theconstruction supply chain [1]. Although numerous workshave demonstrated the possible benefits of adopting OSP toconstruction projects, yet uptake has been slow [2].S. A. S. Zakaria , PhD Student, School of Architecture and BuiltEnvironment, Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, mail:sharifahakmam.syedzakaria@uon.edu.au).G. Brewer, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Faculty ofEngineering and Built Environment, University of Newcastle, CallaghanNSW 2308, Australia (email: Graham.Brewer@newcastle.edu.au).T. Gajendran, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Faculty ofEngineering and Built Environment, University of Newcastle, CallaghanNSW 2308, Australia (email: nt: S. A. S. Zakaria. Author thanks Universiti SainsMalaysia for the scholarship of this study and University of Newcastle,Australia for the support.ISBN: 978-988-19252-2-0ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)Industrialized Building System (IBS) or off-site productionis the focus of many government and private initiatives toincrease the productivity of the building projects andconstruction industry. IBS technology is the mass factoryproduced building components off-site, then they areproperly assembled and joined on-site to form the final units[3]. It is argued that IBS improves the productivity ofconstruction and also reduces the amount of site laborinvolved in building operations [4]. A review of past IBSadoption literatures indicated that past studies have focusedmainly on technical and managerial problems [5]-[7].Accordingly, IBS technology policy over these years hasfocused on better understanding the practice behind thescientific and technical aspects of IBS technology itself [8].The changes in IBS technology adoption that have takenplace in Malaysia will bring significant economic, social andsustainable impacts, from the case of foreign labordependency [9] to the green technology problems [10]. Dueto the nature and extend of these scenarios, decision makersin construction industry have begun to pay more attention toIBS technology adoption and gradually recognizing that IBSdecision must be seen as equally important in addressingIBS problems. In order to achieve IBS goals [11], both thescale of IBS adoption decisions, priorities, and values foreach decision maker need to be clearly understood.Therefore, based on this argument, this paper is materializedto assess the perception of IBS supply chain members basedon their experience and knowledge in relation to thebehavioral factors of decision making pertaining the IBStechnology adoption of building projects in Malaysia. Thispaper is also based on an effort to develop a conceptualframework for IBS decision making in construction industryand to determine the influences of behavioral factors on IBSdecision making. This paper provides a review of recentwork in behavioral economics and technology adoption withthe development of IBS decision making models. First, thestudy will be exploring a series of key behavioral concepts.Next, the study is intended to determine whether IBSdecision makers are concerned and influenced by thebehavioral factors of IBS decision making.II. DECISION MAKING PROCESS AND BEHAVIORALECONOMICSA better understanding and utilization of behavioraleconomics underlying IBS technology adoption can givedecision makers a competitive edge in the challenging worldof construction industry. The term behavior refers toanything a person does, typically in response to internal andWCE 2012
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.external events which can be overt actions that are open toview or convert activities that are not openly shown [12].Economics and social psychology are heuristics tools foridentifying for factors that influence specific behaviors suchas values, attitudes, habits, social norms, personal norms,and perceived behavioral control, meanwhile economicsfocuses on the influences of internal and external factorsexplaining intentions to act [13]. In general, decisionmakers’ evaluation on an item’s value on some dimension isderived from binary comparisons between a small number ofchoice alternatives available in the working memory [14].Human preferences in the choice and judgments of financialdecision making are relative [15]. In addition, emotionalstates have powerful effects on how individuals processchance events or evaluate outcome [16]. Feeling states areimportant modulators of decision making behavior [17].Therefore, the effect of an internal state change of anindividual who subjectively transform probabilities intodecision weight and outcomes into values, which depends onthe individual aspiration, expectation, and situation [18].Behavioral economics has now generated a large number ofstudies showing how descriptive and procedural variablesthat are psychologically important and actually influencebehavior in many settings [19].Based on the above literatures, developing better decisionmaking skills, even on technical and technology basedproblems may involve other factors, including morediversified and practical perspectives with attentions to thesurrounding of changing and uncertain environment. isciplinary areas that draw heavily on research andperspectives from behavioral science, industrial engineering,and economics itself as shown in Table I.TABLE IINTERDISCIPLINARY AREAS IN DECISION MAKINGArea ofContextualIBS DecisionDecision NatureStudyStressorsPerspectivesBehavioralhuman ess.interactionstakeholdersIndustrialmanagement andchangingand supplyEngineeringorganizationcompetenciechains level, themembers’pace oftechnological opinion andperspectives.change.Economicsdecision theoryfinancialand ions,changingpolicies.Although behavioral decision making research isconcerned with how people make choices, behavioraldecision making is predicted by individual differences insensitivity for rewards but not based on impulsivepersonality traits [20]. In economic psychology, thecombination of behavioral economics and decision makingpromotes good interdisciplinary studies in order to explorewhether decision makers have made the right economicchoices based on the reasons of having made a decision,their personal beliefs and risk preferences [21]. Identical toISBN: 978-988-19252-2-0ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)individual decision making, firms’ behavior can beobserved, managed, and measured [22]. From constructionmanagement perspectives, understanding scientific facts andmanagerial theories are not enough [23]. Rather, decisionmakers in construction industry should also know whyfactors other than technical advancement on technology andmanagerial perspectives have merit in IBS decision making.III. DECISION MAKING OF IBS SUPPLY CHAINIn construction industry, IBS supply chain is themanagement of the current IBS delivery process with thetransformation from on-site to off-site activities, so that eachprocess of project execution and implementation must bestrategized to reduce risks and bring maximum value [24].Construction supply chain coordinates inter-organizationsdecision making and supply chain members such as supplier,designer, general contractor, sub-contractor, and clients orowner typically create a decision as a set of possiblesolutions with the consideration of decision makingvariables such as environment, cost, time, quality, and safety[25]. Supply chain is an emerging concept in constructionindustry as individuals and groups work together within amultidisciplinary environment in designing, developing andproducing products with common goals aligned with projectorganization, even if the most important decisions are madeduring design process [26].Supply chain management involves the planning andcontrol of the flow of supply chain to speed time to market,reduce inventory levels, lower overall costs, and enhancecustomer service and satisfaction to meet customer’sdemand efficiently [27]. In ensuring profitability andcompetitiveness, supply chain management should be linkedto business process to capture synergy of inter and intracompany management with the integration of managerialcomponents and behavioral components such asmanagement methods, power, and leadership structure, riskand reward structure, and culture and attitude that are lesstangible and difficult to access [28]. Each IBS supply chainmembers simultaneously plays several roles and thismultiplicity of roles affect the ways in which conceptualdecision making framework is constructed. Therefore, thereis a need for IBS supply chain members to look beyond IBSdecision per se [29] and to consider the conceptual decisionframe and the behavioral context of IBS technologyadoption.In exploring and understanding IBS decision making froma behavioral approach, a decision making perspective isestablished which illustrates the ways in which decisionmakers are like some others and also how they are differentfrom others too or to which people are compared in terms ofas an individual in a firm or as a team member in a buildingproject as presented in Table II.TABLE IIDECISION MAKING PERSPECTIVESIBS Decision sIndividual in afirmconstructionstakeholdersindividual normsperson centeredTeam members in aprojectsupply chain membersgroup normsgroup variables centeredWCE 2012
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.Analysispersonal traitsAimsto develop anunderstanding ofmind or mentalactivities in IBSdecisionsbased on firmsground rulesPredictionsViewjudgment withinindividualIndividual differences in aprojectto establish generaldecision criteria on the IBStechnology adoptionbased on assessment aboutcause-and-effectrelationshipjudgment across orbetween individualsBased on Table II, by seeking to gain greater insights intothe IBS decision making process of both individuals, firms,and construction projects, the study of behavioral economicshas important implications for a number of subject andpolicy areas including the study of constructability,sustainability, labor economics, and ergonomics directedtoward undertaking globalization challenges.IV. FRAMEWORK OF BEHAVIORAL FACTORS IN IBSDECISIONAppropriate decision processes need not always beanalytically complex, but instead depend on thecharacteristics of the external socio economy context, thedecision makers and the decision problem itself. In order todecide on building technology adoptions, the decisionmakers of construction industry generally depend onexternal and internal information such as competition,technical development, price movements, policy changes,and other changes within the industry. One way tounderstand this complex set up interactions between decisionmaking, IBS technology adoption, and the influence ofbehavioral factors is to describe them in terms of aconceptual decision framework as illustrated by Fig. 1.Fig. 1. Conceptual Framework of IBS Decision Making Based onBehavioral InfluencesISBN: 978-988-19252-2-0ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)The conceptual decision framework based on decisionperspective composes of factors which a decision makerconveys to understand on a particular IBS technologyadoption. In Fig. 1, the first part in the centre is IBS decisionbox. IBS decision is an action response to a discrepancybetween IBS current position and the expected or requiredgoal state. However, IBS technology adoption is an option.Decision makers can lead to take action to reduce thediscrepancy of IBS technology performance, or to remainwith the conventional building method, which implies failureto reach the required or expected IBS state or adoption. Thisis an important part of IBS decision making process.Idealistic factor is an idealistic notion of decision makingwhich implies the ultimate decision based on significantfactors that the individual values most such as goalsachievement, heuristics, and risk considerations; whereasextrinsic factor shapes decision making based on externalelements through decision makers’ perception, theconformity of firm’s needs, and values, leadership style,learning context and previous experience; and intrinsicfactor reflects self-thought which recognize decision makingas it really is, which is due to the inspiration of personalbias, personal needs and wants, personal values, attitudes,and feelings or emotions [30].IBS decision making is considerably broader than this inscope as this study is designed to explore the contribution ofbehavioral factors to IBS decision making process and itsimpact on building technology choice. A researchframework is developed to illustrate decision or choice asthe outcome of interactions between behavioral variables,decision maker variables and project variables in IBSdecision making process as illustrated by Fig. 2.Fig. 2. Technology-firm-behavior framework in IBS Decision MakingWCE 2012
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.Fig. 2 describes decision making process to providecontext for IBS decision and the results of this choicefeeding forward to influence future IBS decisions. Fig. 2also encompasses IBS technology adoption variability inbuilding projects, individual, and group decision makersunit, the impacts of behavioral factors and the choice ofbuilding technology. It also incorporates some underlyingdecision making processes related to the behavioralelements, as well as the defined characteristics, roles, andvalues of the IBS decision makers. This framework, which isalso known as technology-firm-behavior framework whichrepresents the focus of this study enables the attempt toidentify what aspects of behavior, what types of IBSdecision makers and what types of decisions pertaining IBStechnology adoptions. As it is true in other branches ofeconomics, problems with construction industry ischaracterized by optimal choice and describing actual choice[31]. The solution to this problem is to retain the normativestatus of choice optimization in decision making and at thesame time to develop explicitly descriptive models ofdecision making based on the behavioral perspective of IBStechnology adoption in building construction.V. RESEARCH METHODOLOGYThe focus of this study is to analyze the perception of IBSsupply chain members on decisions made about IBStechnology adoption in building projects. The differences inthoughts and conceptualization that emerge among IBSsupply chain members affects their perceptions of behavioralfactors in their decision making on IBS technology adoption.This study aims to answer this research question: howstrongly we believe that behavioral factors impacted IBSdecision making?. Thus, this study has two objectives: 1) todetermine behavioral factors that have influences on IBSdecision making as perceived by IBS supply chain membersand 2) to identify the most significant behavioral factors thathave influences on IBS decision making as perceived by IBSsupply chain members. The target questionnaire respondentswere focused on IBS supply chain members within theMalaysian construction industry based on a purposivesampling. A purposive sampling or judgment samplinginvolves selecting elements in the sample for a specificpurpose as they represent the target population, but they arenot necessarily representative [32]. In order to obtainperception towards the behavioral influences on IBSdecision making, 27 respondents were identified in thisstudy constituting IBS the supply chain members of threeIBS building projects. For each project, these respondentsinclude a/an architect, quantity surveyor, contractor, civilengineer, consultant, developer, project manager, and IBSmanufacturer. The structuring of the questionnaire wasdeveloped and supported by a review of related literatureson the elements of the research framework.Thequestionnaires are based on Likert’s scale of five ordinalmeasures of agreement. Ordinal scale 1 to 5 was used inascending order to show the degree of agreement for thecollected data from the questionnaires. The assessment andthe opinion of IBS technology adoption are based on the IBSsupply chain members’ judgments and the decision makingprocess of IBS technology adoption is encapsulated withinthe perception, subjectivity, and behavioral influences ofISBN: 978-988-19252-2-0ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)those who conduct evaluation, prospect, and finally make adecision, based on what they believe is the most important orsignificant of a given IBS building project.VI. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSThe collected data from the questionnaires were analyzedvia the frequency analysis and the index average analysis.The index average was established to figure out theimportance level of each behavioral element as representedby the relative importance index (RII) using this formula:Index Average (Σ ai X xi)/ Σ xi, where ai constant,weighing factor and xi variables representing respondents’frequency of response. The gathered data on the results ofrespondents were expressed in the figure according thestandings of the score of average index. In the discussion ofthe results, Table 3 presents the results of behavioral factorsinfluence as perceived by IBS supply chain members.TABLE 3RANKING OF PERCEIVED BEHAVIORAL FACTORS IN IBS DECISION MAKINGPerceivedbehavioral factorsin IBS decisionmakingIdealistic factor:goals achievementExtrinsic factor:previousexperienceIntrinsic factor:attitudesExtrinsic factor:learning contextIntrinsic factor:personal needs andwantsIdealistic factor:heuristicsIdealistic factor :goals achievementsIntrinsic factor:personal valuesExtrinsic factor:conformity offirm’s needs andvaluesIntrinsic factor:feeling andemotions.Frequency of 73.7410Table 3 shows the results of the questionnaire which seeksto determine the influence of perceived behavioral factors inIBS decision making among IBS supply chain members inthe Malaysian construction industry. The relative importanceindex (RII) is used to rank the different behavioral factors inorder to determine their major influences on IBS decisionmaking. The respondents were asked to provide theiropinions based on the statements of selected extrinsic,intrinsic, and idealistic factors as perceived by them indeciding on IBS technology. Goals achievement as one ofthe studied intrinsic factors was ranked by respondents as themajor factor that would influence IBS decision making.Intrinsic factor on goals achievement in this case is on thedecision to adopt IBS technology based on the possibleimprovements in quality of life at construction sites. Thesecond rank is the extrinsic factor of the experience of otherteam members when deciding on IBS technology adoption inWCE 2012
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.building projects. The third rank is the intrinsic factor onattitude that is related to the motivation to discover moreabout IBS technology to enhance its adoption. The fourth,fifth, sixth, and seventh ranks have the same average indexof 4.15. They refer to the influence of learning context,personal needs, information processing, and goalsachievements as perceived by the respondents in deciding onIBS technology. These influences are also related to thesatisfaction, believe, and experience that are achieved fromthe benefits and positive consequences of IBS adoption inbuilding projects. Besides this, a statement on the personalvalues of decision makers in terms of their passion forinnovation is also an important influence in IBS technologyadoption as it was ranked by IBS supply chain members atthe eighth position of RII rank. Although it is at the secondlast of the RII rank, the conformity of firm’s needs andvalues in terms of the future perception of others regardingthe career performance of decision makers also hasinfluences on the decision of IBS technology adoption.When comes to the intrinsic factor of feeling and emotions,this factor was ranked by IBS supply chain members at thelast place of RII rank which reflects that the element offeelings and emotions are the least influencer in IBSdecision making. The survey results signify that most of theIBS supply chain members were responsive to thebehavioral factors of IBS decision making. They alsoperceived some of these factors such as IBS goalsachievement, previous experience with IBS projects, anddecision makers’ attitudes should be considered in decidingon IBS adoption. Given the importance of wide spreadadoption for the success of IBS and the much–slower-thanexpected growth in IBS adoption, there is certainly a need tounderstand more about what factors are important in the IBSadoption decisions of the Malaysian construction industry[33].IBS decision making should be understood as a dynamicprocess that takes place by considering technology adoption,technology in-depth knowledge and processes that theconstruction business requires. Decision making of IBStechnology adoption at the supply chain level may be themost commercial significance in the short term but it isimportant to recognize the variability of psychology decisionmaking that exist among IBS supply chain members.Another key feature of behavioral economics is “framing”and the view that decisions or preferences are heavilyinfluenced by the ways in which a choice is presented.Research of IBS decision making with the considerationof behavioral factors offers important assistance inunderstanding technology adoption based on these ways:1) First, this study offers insights that cannot easily berequired with a purely theoretical decision research.2) Second, IBS decision making in this study wasparticularly conducted among IBS supply chainmembers.3) Third, from the applied viewpoint, this study is afoundation for understanding technology adoptiondecisions.4) Fourth, from a basic viewpoint, this study providesexpectation for results that generalize beyond thequantitative viewpoints.ISBN: 978-988-19252-2-0ISSN: 2078-0958 (Print); ISSN: 2078-0966 (Online)VII. CONCLUSIONBehavioral economics in this study seeks to providedecision analysis with a more practical and rationalpsychological foundation by examining the ways in whichvarious aspects of individual and behavioral factorsinfluence IBS decision making. Besides the evidences andresults from the perception study of IBS decision making,this paper has provided a review of evidence with IBSdecision making models that behavioral factors should beconsidered in IBS technology adoption. This study alsorepresents an attempt to examine a perception based IBSadoption model that was theoretically grounded in atechnology-firm-behavior framework. This study will beused to further confirm the usefulness of technology-firmbehavior framework for studying IBS adoption inconstruction industry. Thus, behavioral economics can beapplied in technical research on human and social cognitiveto better understand technology adoption decisions,particularly IBS 0][11][12][13][14][15]W. Pan, A. G. F. Gibb, and A. R. J. Dainty, “Perspectives of UKhouse builders on the use of offsite modern methods of construction,”Construction Management and Economics, 25, 2, pp 183-194, 2007.N. G. Blismas, M. Pendlebury, , A. Gibb. and C. Pasquire,“Constraints to the use of off-site production on constructionprojects,” Architectural Engineering and Design Management, vol.1, no. 3, pp 153-162, 2005.Y.F. Badir, M.R.A. Kadir, and A.H. Hashim, “Industrialised buildingsystems construction in Malaysia,” Journal of ArchitecturalEngineering, vol.8, no.1, pp 19-23, 2002.M. R. A. Kadir, W. P. Lee, M. S. Jaafar, S. M. Sapuan, and A. A.A.Ali, “Construction performance comparison between conventionaland industrialised building systems,” Malaysia Structural Survey,vol. 24, no. 5, 2006.M. N. M. Nawi, A. Lee and K. M. Nor, Barriers to implementation ofthe Industrialized Building System (IBS) in Malaysia,” The Built andHuman Environment Review, vol. 4, p. 22, 2011.K. A. M. Kamar, and Z. A. Hamid, “Supply chain strategy forcontractor in adopting Industrialized Building System (IBS),”Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, vol. 5, no. 12,pp. 2552-2557, 2011.S. Hassim, M. S. Jaafar, , S. A. A. H. Sazalli, “The contractorperception towers Industrialized Building System risk in constructionprojects in Malaysia,” American Journal of Applied Science, vol. 6,no. 5, pp. 937-942, 2009.CIDB, Industrialized Building System (IBS) Roadmap 2011-2015,Kuala Lumpur : Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB),2010.A. B. A. Rahman, and W. Omar, “Issues and challenges in theimplementation of Industrialised Building Systems in Malaysia,” inProc. of the 6th Asia-Pacific Structural Engineering andConstruction Conference, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, 2006.R. A. Begum, C. Siwar, J. J. Pereira, and A. H. Jaafar, “A benefit-costanalysis on the economic feasibility of construction wasteminimization: the case of Malaysia,” Resources, Conservation andRecycling, vol. 48, iss. 1, pp. 86-98, 2006.CIDB, Construction Industry Master Plan 2006-2015, KualaLumpur: Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB), 2003.Sarafino, E. P. Principles of Behaviour Change, Johnson Wiley andSons, Inc., 1996.S. Kallbekken, J. Rise, and H. Westskog, “Combining Insights fromEconomics and Social Psychology to Explain EnvironmentallySignificant Consumption,” Report of Centre for InternationalClimate and Environmental Research, Oslo, Norway, pp. 1-15, 2008.N. Steward, N. Charter, and G.D.A. Baron, “Decision by Sampling,”Cognitive Psychology, 53, pp 1-26, 2006.I. Vlaev, N. Charter, and N. Steward, “Financial prospect elatively:context effects in financial decision making under risks, “Journal ofBehavioural Decision Making,” vol. 20, pp. 237-304, 2007.WCE 2012
Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2012 Vol IIIWCE 2012, July 4 - 6, 2012, London, U.K.[16] G. F. Loewenstein, M. H. Bazerman, and L. Thompson, “Socialutility and decision making in interpersonal contexts, “Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology,” vol. 57, no. 3, pp 426-441, 1989.[17] P. R. Montague, B. King-Kasas, and J. D. Cohen, “Imaging valuationmodels in human choice,” Annual Review of Neuroscience, vol. 29,pp. 417-448, 2006.[18] D. Kahneman, and A. Tversky, “Choices, values and frames,”American Psychology, vol. 39, pp. 341-350, 1984.[19] S. DellaVigna, “Psychology and economics: evidence from the field,Journal of Economic Literature, 47, pp. 315-372, 2009.[20] I. H. A. Franken, and P. Muris, “Individual differences in decisionmaking,” Personality and Individual Differences, vol. 39, pp. 991998, 2005.[21] D. Leiser, and O. H. Azar, “Behavioural economics and decisionmaking: applying insights from psychology to understand how peoplemake economic decisions,” Journal of Economic Psychology, vol.29, pp. 613-618, 2008.[22] D. W. Lyon, G. T. Lumpkin and G. D. Dess, “Enhancingentrepreneurial orientation research: operationalizing and measuring akey strategic decision making process, Journal of Management, vol.26, no. 5, pp. 1055-1085, 2000.[23] G. Ofori, “Research on construction industry development atcrossroads,” Construction Management and Economics, vol. 11, no.3, pp. 175-185, 1993.[24] N. A Faizul, “Supply chain management in IBS industry,” in Proc. ofthe Malaysian International IBS Exhibition, Kuala Lumpur, 2006.[25] X. Xue, X. Li, Q. Shen, and Y. Wang, “An agent-based frameworkfor supply chain coordination in construction,” Automation inConstruction, vol. 14, pp. 413-430, 2005.[26] P. E. D. Love, Z. Irani, and D. J. Edwards, “A seamless supply chainmanagement model for construction,” Supply Ch
Although behavioral decision making research is concerned with how people make choices, behavioral decision making is predicted by individual differences in sensitivity for rewards but not based on impulsive personality traits [20]. In economic psychology, the combination of behavioral economics and decision making
International Finance 14. Development Policy 15. Institutional Economics 16. Financial Markets 17. Managerial Economics. 13 18. Political Economy 19. Industrial Economics 20. Transport Economics 21. Health Economics 22. Experimental and Behavioral Economics 23. Urban Economics 24. Regional Economics 25. Poverty and Income Distribution
1. Teaching with a Multiple-Perspective Approach 8 . 2. Description of Perspectives and Classroom Applications 9 . 2.1 Scientific Perspective 9 . 2.2 Historical Perspective 10 . 2.3 Geographic Perspective 11 . 2.4 Human Rights Perspective 12 . 2.5 Gender Equality Perspective 13 . 2.6 Values Perspective 15 . 2.7 Cultural Diversity Perspective 16
Behavioral Economics Experimental Economics Macroeconomics and Public Sector Economics Monetary Policy Fiscal Policy Cost-Benefit Analysis Economics of Regulations and Competitive Economy Labour and Population Labour Economics Population Economics Human Resource Development Islamic Economics Islamic Banking: Theory and Practice
Std. 12th Economics Smart Notes, Commerce and Arts (MH Board) Author: Target Publications Subject: Economics Keywords: economics notes class 12, 12th commerce, 12th economics book , 12th commerce books, class 12 economics book, maharashtra state board books for 12th, smart notes, 12th std economics book , 12th economics book maharashtra board, 12th economics guide , maharashtra hsc board .
havioral economics is a form of economics, and our goal is to strengthen the predictive and analytic power of law and economics, not to undermine it. Behavioral economics does not suggest that behavior is random or impossi-ble to predict; rather it suggests, with economics, that behavior is systematic and can be modeled.
Introduction to Behavioral Finance CHAPTER1 What Is Behavioral Finance? Behavioral Finance: The Big Picture Standard Finance versus Behavioral Finance The Role of Behavioral Finance with Private Clients How Practical Application of Behavioral Finance Can Create a Successful Advisory Rel
ECONOMICS 40 Chapter 1: The Principles and Practica of Economics 40 1.1 The Scope of Economics 41 Economic Agents and Economic Resources 41 Definition of Economics 42 Positive Economics and Normative Economics 43 Microeconomics and Macroeconomics 44 1.2 Three Principles of Economics
2nd Language - Hindi (Based on Curriculum issued by the council for the Indian School Certificate Examination, New Delhi First – Edition Nov 2016, Published by RDCD) 1st Term Syllabus GunjanHindi Pathmala – 4 1.Bharat ke bacche 2.Idgaah 3.Swami vivekanand 4.Prakrati ki sushma 5.Hamara tiranga jhanda 6.Everest e saath meri bhet 7.Chiti aur kabootar 8. Kabaddi Bhasha Adhigam evam Vyakaran .
