Second part on an analysis based on the Nash Equilibrium: the coatings industry and a parallel with science.
By: M.Sc. Ph.D. Julián A. Restrepo R.*
In the first part of this article presented in the previous edition, we explained the issue of Nash Equilibrium through concrete examples in which renowned scientists from all kinds of sectors had to fight for their proposals to be well received, after being criticized and considered as not successful. Then, some went on to win prizes. It sought to leave an example of perseverance when you are convinced of having a good idea, regardless of the segment where you work.
In this second part, we will talk about how do we relate the Nash Equilibrium, the world of science and the coatings industry?
We will start from an analysis of the cases of those ideas of scientists that were initially ignored but that ended up imposing themselves: From a conceptual point of view, we assume that science prides itself, in its investigations, of leaving out subjectivity and generating results that, in theory, no one should question lightly. But when we talk about human beings, egos, disbelief and insecurity often defeat even the most rigorous scientific process,[6] which we see reflected in the different examples discussed of men of science. But if this is the case for scientists, academically and intellectually trained men to receive new ideas, what could we expect from industry professionals?
At this point it is important to clarify that I am not talking about the issue that many now consider serious as it is that science is at the mercy of the market and capitalist interests (for example, in the case of some pharmaceutical industries that apparently prefer profits over health), because if scientists who tell the truth do not find their space, it means that we are lost! I'm talking about scientists who told the truth have been silenced, not because of capitalist interests, but simply because they come up with new ideas or try to change the status quo. But, we must be aware that today both elements surround anyone who is dedicated to science, but my voice of protest is based on the fact that, at least in our industry, there are still elements for decision-making in companies that can be classified as villagers and in many cases short-plazistas.
Let's remember that although companies have their policies, values and organizational culture, in reality, this is nothing more than the result of the sum of each individual in the organization. In other words, we will end up saying the obvious, but companies are made by people, so, although a company conceptually has a line of values, rules and an entire organizational culture, in the end they end up not but the decisions and acts of human beings, susceptible to errors and if you like, at the mercy of their passions and feelings. In fact, we know that many times the mistakes of large companies have responded to the passion of personnel within the organization, perhaps, making decisions in the heat.
But I try to get to the point and I hope not to be pessimistic, but I must still recognize in our industry a high dose of negative passion, revanchism, envy, lack of cooperation, which goes against the precepts of the Nash Equilibrium: "It is better to cooperate." In an industrial culture that appeals to include more the element of innovation, I believe that we still have to work hard to overcome our own fears and be more open to the generation of new ideas, products and services, which will allow us to have an industry more adaptive to an increasingly globalized market and less dependent on individual interests.
I already discussed in a previous article [8] that individualism can deprive our companies of valuable benefits: if you have corporate profits as the only premise, this only leads to society paying the price of lack of coordination and anarchy, which can affect the quality of the products offered, since they would seek to have a product with a competitive price in the market, but that, due to the informality of other companies, it must be as low as the market dictates, which can lead to the reduction of the entire potential of the product, forcing companies to look for increasingly economical inputs, and in some cases, to reduce the number of members of the research teams.
According to the Nash equilibrium, the best solution cannot be found from an individual strategy: to decrease the sale price of a product, since other companies will do the same. The best strategy to increase the profits of all companies is to achieve a consensus in the general strategy of these, perhaps, for example, look for opportunities for brand strengthening, or instead of struggling with prices, seek to better guide the customer about what it really requires, offer more services, etc.
Likewise, individualism, interpreted in the context of the Nash equilibrium, gives companies a false sense of advantage in a "competitive game" by a paint consumer market, and we have already argued that an individual advantage leads to nothing but a Nash equilibrium for everyone, including competitors.
Finally, and as a very personal quota, I can add that many of us who work with ideas that do not fit too well in the productive system can understand and feel the rejection that many of the scientists historically encountered and we must always tend to ignore personal attacks and stand firm in the face of opposition, but responding with gentleness and dedication. The scientific attitude adopted by the different examples of men of science, presented as an example, serves as a lesson to all of us. [9]
References
[6] (a) http://www.eldefinido.cl/actualidad/mundo/559/Cientificos_humillados..._que_tenian_razon/; (b) https://noticiasdeabajo.wordpress.com/2011/03/12/estudios-cientificos-que-han-sido-silenciados-por-la-industria-biotecnologica/; (c) http://www.agenciasinc.es/Noticias/Descubrimientos-que-merecieron-el-Nobel-fueron-antes-rechazados
[7] (a) https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Shechtman; (b) https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuasicristal
[8] a) Restrepo, J.A., "The Nash Equilibrium, Part I". Revista Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 5, Sep/Oct 2012, pp. 23-25; b) Restrepo, J.A., "The Nash Equilibrium, Part II". Revista Inpralatina, Vol. 17, No. 6, Nov/Dec 2012, pp. 20-23.
[9] https://logos77.wordpress.com/2013/02/12/rebelde-con-premio-nobel-la-leccion-de-daniel-shechtman/
* M.Sc. Ph.D. JULIÁN A. RESTREPO R. Advisor and Technical Consultant in Coatings: [email protected] – Medellín, Colombia.
