As leaders rise and hierarchies shift, Stanford GSB organizational behavior professor Deborah Gruenfeld, guest in season one of If/Then, reminds us that power is not just about authority—it’s about presence. In this special feed drop from Pfeffer on Power, Gruenfeld, author of Acting With Power, revisits topics featured in her If/Then episode, exploring how body language and mindset can shape perceptions of influence. “We’re all playing roles,” she explains, whether as CEOs, professors, or professionals navigating high-stakes environments. The key, she says, lies in mastering both "inside-out" techniques—such as reframing internal narratives—and "outside-in" strategies, like commanding physical space to exude confidence.Host Jeffrey Pfeffer, professor of organizational behavior at the GSB, and Gruenfeld discuss how power dynamics transcend culture and context, offering universal lessons for anyone looking to lead with impact. “Don’t leave power to the bad guys,” Gruenfeld advises, urging listeners to embrace their own potential for influence. This episode provides actionable insights to help you show up powerfully in any room, especially when the stakes are high. As the conversation unfolds, Pfeffer and Gruenfeld challenge us to think differently about power—not as a privilege, but as a responsibility to shape better outcomes for ourselves and others.Jeffrey Pfeffer will be a guest on the second season of If/Then. Pfeffer on Power is Produced by University FM. For a full transcript of this episode, visit the Pfeffer on Power’s website.More Resources:Deborah Gruenfeld, faculty profileDeborah’s Book: Acting with Power Pfeffer on Power Chapters: (00:00:00) IntroductionHost Jeffrey Pfeffer introduces guest Professor Deborah Gruenfeld from Stanford GSB.(00:01:45) First Impressions and Body LanguageHow people make snap judgments based on appearance and nonverbal cues.(00:03:25) Change How You Show UpThe possibility of reframing behavior to project more confidence and authority.(00:06:33) Showing Up with PowerTwo approaches for appearing more authoritative and powerful.(00:08:53) Inside-Out PowerReframing internal narratives to project power, even in moments of insecurity.(00:11:32) Outside-In PowerTechniques for using body language to command authority.(00:14:00) Physical and Social DynamicsHow occupying space communicates dominance and influence.(00:17:06) Unconscious Reactions to Power Whether power dynamics are consistent across cultures and time.(00:20:32) Ambivalence Toward PowerWhy some individuals are reluctant to embrace power.(00:24:47) Ethical Leaders in PowerThe importance of ethical individuals embracing power to prevent its misuse by others.(00:28:14) ConclusionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

In this episode of If/Then, we're diving into insights from three GSB experts featured on Think Fast, Talk Smart. Join us as professor of organizational behavior Michele Gelfand explains her "tight and loose" cultural framework, revealing how societal structures impact everything from crime rates to creativity. We also hear from marketing professor Jonathan Levav, who explores decision fatigue in judicial settings, shedding light on how mental depletion influences choices. Finally, marketing professor Szu-chi Huang discusses the role of motivation and emotionality in decision-making, drawing from her experiences in advertising and academia. Together, these discussions provide a multifaceted view of the elements influencing our choices and interactions.Key Takeaways:Switch between “tight” and “loose” mindsets: Individuals can code switch between “tight” and “loose” mindsets depending on the setting. You can shape your environment to help promote certain mindsets.Take mental breaks: Decision fatigue causes individuals to make the easier decision, not necessarily better ones. Taking breaks can help replenish your mental energy to think through decisions properly.Target your audience’s emotional needs: Emotion drives decision making. Messaging that meets emotional needs is more impactful.More Resources:Michele Gelfand, faculty profileJonathan Levav, faculty profileSzu-chi Huang, faculty profileThink Fast Talk Smart If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. For a full transcript of this episode, visit our podcast’s website.Chapters: (00:00:00) IntroductionKevin Cool introduces the episode featuring GSB faculty discussing their research on the Think Fast, Talk Smart podcast.(00:00:35) Cultural Tightness vs. LoosenessThe benefits of "tight" versus "loose" culture.(00:03:47) Adjusting to Different Cultural NormsWhether individuals can adapt to cultural tightness or looseness.(00:05:24) Decision Fatigue in Court SettingsA study on how decision fatigue affects parole rulings over time.(00:07:29) Communication to Combat Decision FatigueInsights into overcoming decision fatigue and enhancing communication.(00:09:48) The Roots of MotivationThe transition from advertising to studying motivation in academia.(00:11:13) Needs and Emotions in Decision-MakingThe influence of needs and emotions in effective decision-making.(00:13:43) ConclusionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Artificial intelligence could fundamentally transform democracy for better or worse. In this bonus episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, Professor Andrew B. Hall of Stanford Graduate School of Business explores AI's potential to disrupt our electoral system. With the 2024 presidential election approaching, Hall warns that AI-generated misinformation could sway voters and erode trust in democratic processes. Yet he also sees AI's potential to solve political challenges. If we want to maintain a healthy democracy, then it’s crucial to understand AI's impact on our political landscape in the upcoming election and beyond.Key Takeaways:AI's potential for misinformation: Professor Hall warns that AI-generated content misinform voters, potentially influencing election outcomes.Threat to democratic integrity: The possibility of AI-driven misinformation could erode trust in the fairness and integrity of democratic processes, leading to decreased acceptance of election outcomes.AI's dual nature in politics: While AI poses significant risks, Hall also thinks it could provide solutions to existing political problems, suggesting it will have a complex, double-edged impact on democracy.More Resources:Andrew Hall, faculty profileWhite Paper: Preparing for Generative AI in the 2024 Election: Recommendations and Best Practices Based on Academic Research, By Ethan Bueno de Mesquita, Brandice Canes-Wrone, Andrew B. Hall, Kristian Lum, Gregory J. Martin, Yamil Ricardo Velez, Stanford Graduate School of Business and the University of Chicago Harris School of Public Policy, November 2023If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. For a full transcript of this episode, visit our podcast’s website.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

One underappreciated fact about the explosion in genetic databases, like consumer sites that provide information about ancestry and health, is that they unlock valuable insights not only into an individual’s past and future, but also for that individual’s entire family.This raises serious concerns about privacy for people who have never submitted their genetic information for analysis, yet share much the same code as one who did.This week on If/Then, we’re sharing an interview from The Future of Everything with Stanford GSB Professor Kuang Xu. Xu is an expert in how genetic information can and should be used. He says that the DNA problem weighs heavily on privacy experts in fields ranging from law and engineering to public health and criminal justice. The fundamental question is: Can we create methods for accessing genetic data while maximizing the privacy of all involved?The Future of Everything is Produced by Stanford Engineering. For a full transcript of this episode, visit The Future of Everything’s website.Chapters:(00:00:00) IntroductionHost Kevin Cool introduces an episode featuring The Future of Everything podcast with host Russ Altman and guest Kuang Xu, a professor at the GSB. (00:03:24) Genetic Technology and Privacy RisksThe key ideas and methodology behind making genetic searches more private.(00:06:23) Social Network and Genealogy in Genetic SearchesHow a genealogy network functions as a social network in genetic searches.(00:09:23) Technical Aspects of Securing Genetic DataThe difference between sequential and static methods for genetic searches.(00:11:19) Practical Application of Sequential MethodsWays the sequential search method could be applied without compromising privacy.(00:12:43) First Steps in Sequential SearchWhat the first steps would look like when using the sequential search method.(00:14:41) Balancing Accuracy and PrivacyWhether the new privacy methods compromise accuracy in identifying individuals.(00:15:22) Applications in Genetic ResearchHow privacy methods can apply to genetic research for disease prediction and beyond.(00:18:22) Insights During ResearchSurprise findings from Kuang’s research on genetic privacy.(00:21:28) Privacy Beyond GeneticsThe possibility of applying these privacy techniques to other sensitive datasets.(00:22:58) Commercial Interest in Privacy SolutionsThe interest from companies in adopting these privacy innovations.(00:24:09) Genetics and Business School ConnectionKuang’s work at Stanford’s School of Business and how it connects to genetics and privacy.(00:25:30) Emergency Room Waiting TimesResearch related to reducing waiting times in emergency rooms.(00:26:57) In-Person Voting and COVID-19 SpreadOverview of data collected during in-person voting during COVID-19.(00:27:54) ConclusionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Power dynamics in the office can have an outsized impact on your career. When we talked to Deborah Gruenfeld in Season One of If/Then, she shared expert insights on navigating workplace power and influence. And some exciting news - that episode has been nominated for a Signal Award. Help us win a Listener Choice Award by casting your vote at stanford.io/ifthenpower. A log-in is required to vote. Thank you for helping us make this possible!See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

This special episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society explores the personal stories behind Stanford GSB faculty's groundbreaking research. Discover how individual experiences shape scholarly inquiry.Baba Shiv, professor of marketing, examines decision-making and the brain's liking and wanting systems. His self-proclaimed "irrational" nature led him to question whether good decisions are based on reason or emotion.Mohammad Akbarpour, professor of economics, found his passion in market design, seeing economics as "the right mix of thinking about humans and mathematics." His research on welfare economics stems from observing economic disparities in his native Iran.Deborah Gruenfeld, professor of organizational behavior, studies power dynamics inspired by her early career and family history. Her work reveals how even arbitrary positions of authority can dramatically alter behavior.These faculty remind us that behind every groundbreaking theory are real people driven by curiosity to make sense of the world around them. Join us to hear how personal journeys fuel impactful business research.Key Takeaways:Personal experiences shape research: Leading scholars draw inspiration from their own lives and observations, leading to innovative research questions and approaches.Challenging assumptions drives discovery: Researchers like Baba Shiv, Mohammad Akbarpour, and Deborah Gruenfeld push boundaries by questioning fundamental assumptions in their fields and themselves, leading to new insights.Human stories behind data: This episode reveals that even in data-driven fields like economics and organizational behavior, personal narratives and curiosity play a crucial role in shaping impactful research.More Resources:Baba Shiv, faculty profileMohammad Akbarpour, faculty profileDeborah Gruenfeld, faculty profileIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. For a full transcript of this episode, visit our podcast’s website: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/why-i-research-findings-fueled-head-heartSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Behavioral economist and Professor of Marketing Baba Shiv works with entrepreneurs on how to build a risk-tolerant mindset. A mindset, Shiv believes, that is crucial in times of crisis.While we take a break and prepare for season two of If/Then, we're sharing an episode of Grit & Growth, a podcast from our partners at Stanford Seed. Here, Baba explains two types of mindsets: a fear of failure or a risk-averse mindset (type one) and a fear of missing out on opportunities mindset (type two).“What the rational brain is good at is simply being rational ... it lists what the emotional brain has already decided to do. If you’re stuck in a risk-averse mindset, the rational brain will come in and say, 'These are the reasons why you should not innovate’ Whereas if you’re in a type two mindset, the rational brain will come in and say, 'Here are the reasons why you should take some chances.'”And Shiv believes that taking chances, especially when your competitors are being more timid, is how leaders and companies can succeed. Shiv has seen firsthand that entrepreneurs from emerging economies are particularly innovative: “They’re facing constraints all the time and as a result are more resourceful, not in spite of their situations, but because of them.”Shiv is the Sanwa Bank, Limited, Professor of Marketing at Stanford Graduate School of BusinessTop TakeawaysSleep. Without it, you’re more likely to wake up feeling risk-averse ... the antithesis to innovation.Calm your mind and the rest will follow — develop a meditation, yoga, or tai chi practice to make your breath and brain more resilient to stress.Pay attention to your heart—actually your heart rate variability — so you know if it’s a good time to make an important decision.Innovation = creativity, multiplied by execution, divided by constraints. Don’t forget to think about your constraints in the design process.Focus on building your collaborative advantage (not just competitive advantage) by developing meaningful connections with suppliers, customers, partners, even competitors. You’ll make more progress with relationships based on trust than just transactions.Instill an innovative mindset throughout your company — survival is going to come from teamwork.On Grit & Growth, meet intrepid entrepreneurs from Africa and South Asia, hear their stories of trial and triumph, and gain insights and guidance from Stanford University faculty and global business experts on how to transform today’s challenges into tomorrow’s opportunities.Baba Shiv on If/Then Season One, "More Than a Feeling: The Keys to Making the Right Choice"See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

It can be tempting to think one thing causes another because they happen in succession, but there’s a lot to unwrap in the idea of causality. This week, If/Then is featuring an episode from the podcast All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions. Listen as hosts and finance professors Jonathan Berk and Jules van Binsbergen explain the difference between correlation and causality, and examine cases where it is tempting to assume one thing caused another. Their guest for this episode, Guido Imbens, is a professor of Economics at Stanford Graduate School of Business, and was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2021.All Else Equal: Making Better Decisions Podcast is a production of Stanford GSB and is produced by University FM. It is hosted by Jonathan Berk, The A.P. Giannini Professor of Finance at Stanford GSB, and Jules van Binsbergen, The Nippon Life Professor in Finance, Professor of Finance, at The Wharton School. Each episode provides insight into how to make better decisions.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

To wrap up the first season of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, we invited Senior Associate Dean Jesper B. Sørensen into the studio to talk about the importance of research at Stanford Graduate School of Business. He shares insights on what motivates faculty to study what they do and how it impacts practitioners across industries.    “One of the challenges of being a great researcher is that you need to move away again from this kind of day-to-day reality.… I think a gift that a lot of our faculty have is to be able to both live in that very abstract kind of world and then make it relatable to somebody who’s not living in that world,” Sørensen says. “Sometimes putting fundamental insights into practice is really hard. One of the hallmarks of research is trying to isolate particular mechanisms through various kinds of control. Scientists live in the world where it’s a vacuum, and so we just watch the leaf fall and we can then time it and then tell you what the answer is,” Sørensen says. “And managers live in a world where the wind is blowing and there’s all these kinds of forces getting in the way.” In his conversation with podcast host Kevin Cool, Sørensen also shares his thoughts on three episodes from If/Then’s first season. If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

While our team starts working on our second season, we'll still be sharing insights, bonus content, behind-the-scenes audio, and "class takeaways" from Stanford Graduate School of Business faculty throughout the summer. Stay Tuned! See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Getting to elect our leaders is certainly a privilege. Yet, even in a representative democracy, the choice that citizens have is often only as good as the candidates they have to choose from. That’s why Professor Andrew B. Hall, The Davies Family Professor of Political Economy, wonders: How do we get society’s best and brightest to participate in politics?As a political economist at Stanford Graduate School of Business and the Stanford School of Humanities and Sciences, Hall has spent years studying what motivates people to engage in the democratic process. On this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, he shares his insights on how we can create a system that attracts a more diverse and qualified pool of candidates to run for public office and encourages greater voter participation at the local, state, and national levels.Key Takeaways: Engagement starts with incentives: Whether encouraging better candidates to run for public office or driving higher voter turnout, Hall says our democratic system must incentivize citizens to actively take part in the process.What's at stake?: People are more likely to participate in democratic processes when they understand how the outcome directly affects them. Hall cites how homeowners are more likely to vote on local zoning issues that impact their property values.Adapting new technologies thoughtfully: As new technologies emerge, Hall says it's crucial to consider how they can be harnessed to improve democratic participation and address the challenges facing our political system.More ResourcesAndrew B. Hall, The Davies Family Professor of Political EconomyWhat Kinds of Incentives Encourage Participation in Democracy? Evidence from a Massive Online Governance Experiment Stanford GSB Insights:Inside a Government Where People Are Paid to VoteIf You Lived Here, You Might Be a Voter By Now If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we want to get fair outcomes, then we need to build fairness into algorithms.Whether you’re looking for a job, a house, or a romantic partner, there’s an app for that. But as people increasingly turn to digital platforms in search of opportunity, Daniela Saban says it’s time we took a critical look at the role of algorithms, the invisible matchmakers operating behind our screens.Saban is an Associate Professor of Operations, Information & Technology at Stanford Graduate School of Business whose research interests lie at the intersection of operations, economics, and computer science. With algorithms significantly influencing who gets matched with opportunities, she advocates for building “equity into the algorithm.”In this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, Saban explores how properly designed algorithms can improve the fairness and effectiveness of matching processes. If we want algorithms to work for good, then we need to make conscious choices about how we design them.Key Takeaways: Algorithms shape online experiences and real-world outcomes: On dating apps, volunteer matching services, and job websites, algorithms play a crucial role in matching people with opportunities. While these matchups are facilitated in the digital domain, they impact real people in the real world.Algorithms are not neutral: Algorithms reflect the values and priorities of their designers and have the power to either perpetuate or mitigate inequities.Thoughtful algorithm design can improve outcomes for all: Saban's research demonstrates that algorithms can be optimized to create more balanced and successful matching experiences. By consciously choosing to prioritize fairness and equity in algorithm design, we can create systems that work for the good of all users.More Resources:Daniela Saban, Stanford GSB faculty profile Stanford GSB Insights, "Cupid’s Code: Tweaking an Algorithm Can Alter the Course of Finding Love Online""Improving Match Rates in Dating Markets Through Assortment Optimization" as published in Manufacturing & Service Operations ManagementIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Unless you’re a CPA or own a large business, it might be hard to see the relevance of accounting. While it’s true that the average person doesn’t necessarily need to be able to read a corporate balance sheet, Professor Ed deHaan says a deeper understanding of accounting — a greater fluency in the “language of business” — can help everyone get a grip on their finances and make more empowered decisions for their lives.deHaan is a professor of accounting at Stanford Graduate School of Business. In this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, he explores why accounting principles are crucial given money's centrality across personal and professional domains, and how by proactively fostering financial literacy, we can empower a generation of informed consumers and leaders equipped to harness money as a force for good.Key Takeaways: Financial education should start early: deHaan advocates for teaching middle and high school students fundamental money management skills like understanding credit, interest, and risk. By equipping youth with financial knowledge before they face major decisions, we can set them up for long-term success and empowerment.Approach financial choices rationally: deHaan encourages individuals to cultivate an "economic lens" when making money decisions. This means objectively weighing not just immediate costs, but opportunity costs and long-term trade-offs too. In evaluating what to do with your money, he suggests asking: Would you advise a family member to do the same thing with theirs?Financial institutions have a systematic advantage: deHaan warns that financial service providers, like casinos, inherently have the upper hand over consumers. Lack of transparency and human biases like overconfidence often lead to predictable wealth transfers from individuals to financial institutions. Combatting this requires proactive financial education, regulatory protections, and individuals staying vigilant and informed.More Resources:Ed deHaan, faculty profile"On a Mission to Teach the World the Basics of Personal Finance""The Hidden Costs of Clicking the “Buy Now, Pay Later” Button""Retail Investors Are Making Simple — Yet Costly — Mistakes When Trading Corporate Bonds"If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we create good institutions, then we can live up to our good intentions.Knowing and articulating our values is essential. But when the metaphorical Siren’s song fills the air, is knowing our values enough to ensure that we live by them?According to Ken Shotts, a professor of political economy at Stanford Graduate School of Business, having stated values is just expressing aims not necessarily actualizing them through concrete policies and practices. “We need those binding institutions to help us live up to those intentions,” Shotts says. From incentive structures within organizations to regulatory bodies, laws, and civic organizations in society at large, Shotts explains how carefully designed institutions can ensure that we don’t just espouse good intentions, but that we actually live up to them.Key Takeaways: Good intentions aren’t enough: While defining our values is essential, we need binding institutions to ensure those values are upheld at the personal level, organizational level, and in society at large.Keeping businesses on track: At an organizational level, key "institutions" include tangible incentive structures like compensation, promotion criteria, monitoring processes, and cultural norms around praiseworthy and unacceptable behavior.Keeping society on track: On a broader scale, societal institutions like regulations, laws, and civic groups provide crucial checks and balances to channel business activities toward positive societal impact beyond just profits.More Resources:Ken Shotts is The David S. and Ann M. Barlow Professor of Political Economy.Ken Shotts, Stanford GSB Voices profileLeading With Values, by Ken Shotts and Neil MalhotraKen Shotts on Think Fast, Talk Smart – Leadership and Ethics: How to Communicate Your Core ValuesIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member.Find out more about If/Then.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Whether or not robots can feel is a question that, at least for now, might be better left to the philosophers. But what’s becoming increasingly clear, says Associate Professor Szu-chi Huang, is that robots do have the capacity to make us feel. In this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, Huang delves into the effect that robots can have not just on our emotions, but on our behavior.Huang’s research shows that when people witness people helping others, they’re inspired to do the same. This is what she calls “pro-social” behavior. But she wondered: what happens when a robot is the one lending a helping hand? Are people inspired to by machines?To find out, Huang designed a study where participants were shown various news reports about natural disasters and the measures being taken in response. In some stories, the “heroes” were human first responders; in others, they were robots. “In both cases, we [explained] in detail what those heroes were doing,” says Huang. Whether dragging survivors out of ruins after an earthquake or disinfecting hospitals amidst a surging COVID-19 pandemic, “The actions are exactly the same, but the heroes are different.”Following test subjects’ exposure to these stories, Huang measured their willingness to engage in pro-social behavior, like donating to support children in need. What she found was those who saw robot heroes were significantly less likely to donate than those who saw humans take the same actions. “The robot stories actually make people feel less inspired,” says Huang. “And that has important consequences. If using robots lowers our intention to help others, it could have a pretty big negative social impact.”So what do we do as AI and robots play an increasing role in our lives? How do we embrace their benefits without downgrading our humanity and pro-sociability in the process? On this episode of If/Then, Huang explores how “humanizing” robots — highlighting their vulnerability, autonomy, and finitude — helps us connect with them and ourselves more deeply.TakeawaysWe are inspired to help people when we see others doing so. But what if it’s robots lending a helping hand? Are we still motivated to also help? How we “humanize” robots — choosing features that highlight their vulnerability, autonomy, and finitude — could help us connect with them and ourselves more deeply.More Resources:Robots or Humans for Disaster Response? Impact on Consumer Prosociality and Possible Explanations, Journal of Consumer Psychology Think Fast, Talk Smart: The Podcast: From Dreaming to Doing: How We Set and Achieve GoalsFrom Stanford GSB Insights:Why We See Rescue Robots as Helpers, Not HeroesRedefining Success: Adopt the Journey Mindset to Move ForwardIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Digital currency — whether privately-developed or government-issued — seems like an inevitability to Stanford Graduate School of Business finance professor Darrell Duffie. “Virtually all countries are exploring a central bank digital currency for potential use,” he says.An expert on banking, financial market infrastructure, and fintech payments, Duffie is interested in how central bank digital currencies (CBDC) could revolutionize economies around the world. The shift to a digital version of a fiat currency, still backed by a country’s central bank, could offer significant benefits compared to the current financial system. These include improved financial inclusion, lower cross-border payment costs, and more timely and secure transaction processing.The key, Duffie says, is striking the right regulatory balance to foster innovation while mitigating risks. As this episode of If/Then explores, if the U.S. wants to future-proof banking, then a digital dollar could be a solution.Key Takeaways:The benefits of central bank digital currencies: As digital versions of a country's fiat currency, backed by its central bank, CBDCs could provide advantages over the current financial system. These include improved financial inclusion, lower cross-border payment costs, and more timely and secure transaction processing.Challenges could be ahead: Duffie sees two major impediments — privacy concerns and the potential impact on the U.S. dollar's global dominance.The U.S. dollar's reserve currency status is secure for now: China's development of a "digital renminbi" raises questions about the dollar's dominance. Even so, Duffie believes the U.S. currency will maintain its position as the world's reserve currency for decades to come.Regulation will be crucial: Duffie says the U.S. lags behind other countries in establishing clear rules for cryptocurrencies and digital assets. Finding the right regulatory balance is critical if we’re going to foster innovation while mitigating risks.More Resources:Darrell Duffie, The Adams Distinguished Professor of Management and Professor of Finance.Capitol Gains: GSB Professors Share Their Expertise in DC and BeyondIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

A dollar is a dollar, right? While most conventional economic theories view money as an objective store of value, Mohammad Akbarpour says this misses a subtle but important fact: different people value money differently.Many economists assume that the price someone is willing to pay for a good or service is equivalent to the utility they get from it. But Akbarpour, an associate professor of economics at Stanford Graduate School of Business, isn’t convinced. “Different people have different marginal value for money,” he says. “If someone is willing to pay $1,000 for a Taylor Swift concert, they do not necessarily get more value [than] someone willing to pay $500. If you're willing to pay more for something, that does not mean that the social welfare is maximized for giving the good to you. It could be that you're rich.”As Akbarpour explores on this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, money doesn’t have to be the sole decider of how scarce resources are allocated. By considering money’s subjectivity, we can design more equitable markets that maximize value and welfare for more people.Key Takeaways: People value money differently: People have different subjective valuations of money based on their own circumstances and financial well-being. $100 means something much different to the CEO of a large, successful corporation than it does to a family on the brink of eviction.Market distortions can be warranted: For some goods and services, price controls or subsidies can be more efficient than a free market at allocating resources and benefiting those with less wealth.Real-world application: From ridesharing to concert tickets, Akbarpour shares how theoretical economics can be applied to address inequality and improve society.More Resources: Mohammad AkbarpourVoices profile, Mohammad Akbarpour, "In some ways, all of academia hinges on this receptiveness to having your mind changed." Akbarpour's research in Stanford GSB Insights: What If Markets Maximized Both Efficiency and Fairness?Rigged Auctions? Why Top Bidders Don’t Always Feel Like WinnersA Beautiful Application: Using Economics to Make Kidney Exchanges More Efficient and FairIs It Ever OK to Sell (or Buy) a Kidney?Are Influencers Overrated?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we want to make better decisions, then we need to think more like an artist.Rationality is often seen as the gold standard when it comes to making decisions, but Professor Baba Shiv prompts us to consider: “Is a good decision based on reason? Or is it based on emotion?”Shiv is the Sanwa Bank, Limited, Professor of Marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Throughout his career, he’s researched how brain structures related to emotion and motivation affect the choices we make. “Emotions, these instinctual brain-body systems, have a profound influence on our decisions and we aren’t aware of it,” he says. Even when we think we’re rationally deliberating about a decision, Shiv’s research reveals that our conscious minds are often “simply rationalizing what the emotional brain has already decided to do.”In this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, Shiv explains why emotion can be just as powerful as rationality in helping guide decisions, and why, if we want to make better decisions, then we need to think more like an artist.Key Takeaways: Emotions drive decision-making: Human decision-making is much less rational than we think. Shiv emphasizes that emotions and instinctual brain-body systems operate at a nonconscious level to shape the choices we make.Decision confidence rooted in emotion: “Decision confidence,” Shiv says, is the conviction that we’ve made the right choice. That feeling, crucial for commitment to a chosen course of action, is fundamentally rooted in emotion.Balancing rationality and emotion: Both the scientific and artistic minds play into decision-making. While rationality and data-driven approaches have their place, incorporating emotional aspects, akin to thinking like an artist, can lead to more meaningful and confident decisions.More Resources:Baba Shiv is The Sanwa Bank, Limited, Professor of Marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business.Class Takeaways - The Frinky Science of the Human MindVoices of Stanford GSB faculty, Baba ShivIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Immigrants’ contributions to America include culture, cuisine — and groundbreaking ideas. “No one is that surprised that immigrants play a disproportionate role in innovation,” says Rebecca Diamond, a professor of economics at Stanford Graduate School of Business. But, she notes, “Innovation in itself is an elusive thing to measure.” By studying patents, Diamond has revealed new insights into the important role immigrants play in fueling innovation. Diamond explains more in this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society.Today, foreign-born Americans make up around 10% of the population of the United States. Yet, as Diamond found in her research, immigrants are responsible for 24% of recent U.S. patents. What’s more, she explains, these immigrant inventors serve as catalysts for their native-born collaborators, pushing them to be more creative. Altogether, Diamond says, “You find that 36% of all innovation can be attributed to immigrants.”“That’s a big number,” Diamond says. This finding not only highlights immigrants’ outsize contribution to the U.S. economy but also provides a glimpse into the teamwork that generates new ideas. “The way to have successful innovation is not to just put smart people in a room by themselves and tell ’em to think hard,” she says. “It’s to collaborate and work together and create new ideas through the synergies of their knowledge.”Immigration is a contentious political issue. Diamond notes that “any policies that would limit or lower the number of immigrants coming to the U.S. for these super high-skill innovative jobs would have a large effect on future innovation.” As this episode of If/Then explores, for America to remain a source of new ideas that contribute to economic growth and technological progress, we’ve got to understand the vital link between immigration and innovation.Key Takeaways:Outsize impact: Immigrant inventors register more patents than native-born Americans. While only 10% of U.S. citizens are immigrants, immigrants are responsible for 24% of recent patents.The collaboration connection: Immigrants positively influence the productivity of their American collaborators.The global knowledge network: Immigrants are more likely to cite foreign patents and are more likely to be cited by patents produced abroad. More Resources:Rebecca Diamond is the Class of 1988 Professor of Economics at Stanford Graduate School of Business.A New Look at Immigrants’ Outsize Contribution to Innovation int he U.S. Voices of Stanford GSB faculty, Rebecca DiamondIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we want to seriously address the climate crisis, then we need to encourage foolish business ideas.When it comes to seemingly impossible problems like the climate crisis, Professor William Barnett says we need to reach for equally impossible solutions — ideas so crazy, they just might work. “Foolishness,” he says, “is the price of genius.”A professor of organizational behavior at Stanford Graduate School of Business and a professor at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability, Barnett is equally interested in how organizations produce innovation. According to him, organizations need to embrace failure as a stepping stone to big breakthroughs and create cultures that encourage unconventional and even "foolish" ideas. “Ideas might well be foolish, but if they're right, they're going to be genius. Organizations that create lots of foolishness also create a lot of genius.”In this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society, Barnett unpacks how farfetched thinking could be the key to addressing climate change, and how organizations can foster the cultures necessary to fail forward and find innovative solutions.Key Takeaways:Failure is a stepping stone to innovation: Each unsuccessful attempt provides an opportunity to learn, grow, and redirect.Foolishness is the price of genius: Organizations need to promote non-consensus thinking and risk-taking, even if that means pursuing ideas that initially seem "foolish."Minimize the effects of failure: Give crazy ideas a shot, but do so at a small scale to keep failures quick and inexpensive.More Resources: William P. Barnett, The Thomas M. Siebel Professor of Business Leadership, Strategy, and Organizations at Stanford Graduate School of Business and professor at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability.The Red Queen Among Organizations: How Competitiveness Evolves, by William P. BarnettVoices of Stanford GSB faculty, William P. BarnettIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we can manage our emotions about AI, then it can be a powerful decision-making tool.  Artificial intelligence’s surge in power and accessibility has inspired polarized reactions. Some people are flocking to the technology with feverish excitement. Others can’t stay far enough away. Yet according to Kuang Xu, both of these responses might be the wrong ones."When people hear ‘AI,’ their brain kind of shuts down,” says Kuang, an associate professor of operations, information, and technology at Stanford Graduate School of Business. Whether someone feels exhilarated by the possibilities of AI or terrified by its uncertain impact, Kuang says these emotionally charged reactions are like “a fight or flight response,” inhibiting our ability to make good decisions. Yet when implemented in strategic ways, AI can enable leaders to make decisions that are driven by data. With just a few simple lines of code, data becomes a powerful tool for businesses to leverage. “What decision can you change if you had the information?” Kuang asks. “Remember, at the moment, AI or data science is all about information. At the end of the day, even in the best case, you have to take that information and do something about it.” It’s clear that artificial intelligence will integrate into every industry. Yet to harness its power, leaders need to make an emotional shift. They must, as this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society explores, move away from the fear of the change AI will bring, and instead see AI for the job it can do: provide data so leaders can make more informed decisions.Key Takeaways:Effects of emotional stress: Emotional stress clouds our decision making about how we can best implement this tool.AI is a Tool, not a god: Organizations need to rise above the narrative that AI is an all-knowing oracle and reframe it as a tool for targeted decision-making.Think of AI as an intern: The tool can carry out tasks, but we still want to double check its work. More Resources: Kuang Xu, Associate Professor of Operations, Information & TechnologyStanford GSB stories featuring Kuang Xu:Class Takeaways - Data Science and AI StrategyIs Your Business Ready to Jump Into A.I.? Read This First.Kuang Xu VoicesIf/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

If we want to generate better ideas, then we need to get people back to the office.Jonathan Levav, a professor of marketing at Stanford Graduate School of Business, details his study of remote work and creativity. “Pairs that worked face-to-face generated 15 to 20% more ideas than pairs that worked on Zoom,” he notes. What’s more, in-person brainstorming helped people consider a wider and more diverse range of possibilities. “Working on Zoom was a double penalty. Fewer ideas — and a narrower set of ideas.”Remote work may be the new normal in our post-pandemic world, but Levav cautions us from accepting the status quo — especially if we want to keep our creative edge. As this episode of If/Then: Business, Leadership, Society. explores, our best ideas could still lie ahead of us — if we can all get in the same room.If/Then is a podcast from Stanford Graduate School of Business that examines research findings that can help us navigate the complex issues we face in business, leadership, and society. Each episode features an interview with a Stanford GSB faculty member. Key Takeaways: For hybrid work environments, managers should select “in-office” days based on tasks we perform better in person, such as collaboration and brainstorming.More flexible schedules for remote and office work allow employees to bring their best selves and perform better at their jobs.  More Resources: Listen to Jonathan Levav’s Webby-Award winning episode on Think Fast, Talk Smart: "Leading From Home: How to Create the Right Environment for Communication" on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts.Jonathan Levav, The King Philanthropies Professor of MarketingStanford GSB Insights featuring Levav's research:7 Insights to Boost Creativity at WorkEffective Recommendations Are Better Heard Than SeenCustomer Psychology: Why Don’t People Buy Your Stuff?See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.