More from these Authors

• Working Paper | HBS Working Paper Series | 2019

  Communicating Resource Scarcity

  Grant E. Donnelly, Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans and Michael I. Norton

  The development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships require investments of both money and time—resources that are often limited in supply, but in great demand. Indeed, consumers are regularly asked to dedicate their money and time to social engagements, and need to manage these resources efficiently. Therefore, consumers often choose to cite insufficient time or money as an excuse for rejecting social invitations. But how does using the excuse of financial versus time scarcity influence interpersonal relationships? Across eight experiments, we demonstrate that using financial scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have money”) increases perceptions of interpersonal closeness and helping behavior compared to using time scarcity as an excuse (e.g., “I don’t have time”). This effect is explained by the fact that time is perceived as a more personally controllable resource than money, resulting in consumers who cite financial (vs. temporal) constraints as being perceived as more trustworthy. However, excuse-givers do not correctly predict this difference in interpersonal outcomes. These findings advance our theoretical understanding of how excuses revolving around resource constraints affect interpersonal perceptions and behaviors and provides practical insights for consumers desiring to minimize social repercussions when turning down social invitations.

  Keywords: interpersonal relationships; time; Communication; Relationships; Money; Perception;

  Citation:

  Donnelly, Grant E., Anne Wilson, A.V. Whillans, and Michael I. Norton. "Communicating Resource Scarcity." Harvard Business School Working Paper, No. 19-066, January 2019.  View Details

  CiteView Details Read Now

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | October 2018 (Revised January 2019)

  Testing Autonomy in Pittsburgh (A)

  Mitchell Weiss and Brittany Urick

  Pittsburgh’s mayor had been among the first to welcome self-driving vehicles, but was now one of many needing to react after a pedestrian fatality involving an autonomous Uber in Arizona. He had originally preferred to roll out “the red carpet” instead of the “red tape”. Now he found himself needing to balance technological advancement and the city’s economic trajectory against public health and safety concerns and, simply, citizens’ fears. Post-Arizona, should he allow AV firms to double down on experimentation? When it came to testing new technology, how safe was safe enough?

  Keywords: public entrepreneurship; government innovation; government experimentation; autonomous vehicles; mayor; mayor peduto; cities; mobility; automation; Uber; argo ai; aurora innovation; aptiv; Entrepreneurship; Public Sector; Innovation and Invention; Transportation; City; Safety; Business and Government Relations; Transportation Industry; Auto Industry; United States; Pennsylvania; Pittsburgh;

  Citation:

  Weiss, Mitchell, and Brittany Urick. "Testing Autonomy in Pittsburgh (A)." Harvard Business School Case 819-059, October 2018. (Revised January 2019.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducators

  Related

• Case | HBS Case Collection | September 2017 (Revised January 2019)

  Public Entrepreneurs? Picking a Path

  Mitchell Weiss and Matthew Segneri

  Direct entry into government remained an uncommon post-HBS path, with only 1%–2% of recent classes going directly into the public sector. But, for public-minded MBAs, government wasn’t the sole province for public problem-solving. MBAs could join or launch companies that sell to government (or directly to citizens), lead venture funds, operate as ecosystem partners, and more. What felt like a new array of opportunities, though, raised a host of additional questions: What does a career path for a public entrepreneur actually look like? In which sector (private vs. public) should I start? Should I run for elective office? What does that imply for how I pursue my career? And often, and perhaps especially, what do I need in order to be able to move back and forth between sectors? In the spring of 2017, four students in the MBA class felt incredibly fortunate. After two years of business school, strong opportunities awaited each of them. None was wanting for work. However, they still had to decide which posts to take at the moment, if any at all.

  Keywords: public entrepreneurship; careers; tri-sector athlete; job searching; government innovation; govtech; CivicTech; civic technology; civic innovation; government technology; MBA Class of 2017; Social Enterprise; Social Entrepreneurship; Public Sector; Government Administration; Job Search; Jobs and Positions; Innovation Leadership; Technology Industry; Public Administration Industry; United States;

  Citation:

  Weiss, Mitchell, and Matthew Segneri. "Public Entrepreneurs? Picking a Path." Harvard Business School Case 818-005, September 2017. (Revised January 2019.)  View Details

  CiteView DetailsEducatorsPurchase

  Related