Abstract
Public goods games played by a group of individuals collectively performing actions towards a common interest characterize social dilemmas where both competition and cooperation are present. By using agent-based simulation, this paper investigates how collective action in the form of repeated n-person linear public goods games is affected when the interaction of individuals is driven by the underlying hierarchical structure of an organization. The proposed agent-based simulation model is based on generally known empirical findings about public goods games and takes into account that individuals may change their profiles from conditional cooperators to rational egoists or vice versa. To do so, a fuzzy logic system was designed to allow the cumulative modification of agents’ profiles in the presence of vague variables such as individuals’ attitude towards group pressure and/or their perception about the cooperation of others. From the simulation results, it can be concluded that collective action is affected by the structural characteristics of hierarchical organizations. The major findings are as follows: (1) Cooperation in organizational structures is fostered when there is a collegial model defining the structure of the punishment mechanisms employed by organizations. (2) Having multiple, and small organizational units fosters group pressure and highlights the positive perception about the cooperation of others, resulting in organizations achieving relatively high aggregate contribution levels. (3) The greater the number of levels, the higher the aggregate contribution level of an organization when effective sanctioning systems are introduced.











Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.References
Abell P (2014) Rational choice theory and the analysis of organizations. Oxford handbook of sociology, social theory and organization studies: contemporary currents, p. 318
Altman D, Machin D, Bryant T, Gardner M (eds) (2013) Statistics with confidence: confidence intervals and statistical guidelines. Wiley, New York
Archetti M, Scheuring I (2012) Review: Game theory of public goods in one-shot social dilemmas without assortment. J Theor Biol 299:9–20
Asch SE (1951) Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In: Guetzkow H (ed) Groups, leadership, and men; research in human relations. Carnegie Press, Oxford, pp 222–236
Balliet D, Mulder LB, Van Lange PA (2011) Reward, punishment, and cooperation: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 137(4):594–615
Brandt H, Hauert C, Sigmund K (2003) Punishment and reputation in spatial public goods games. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 270(1519):1099–1104
Buckl S, Ernst AM, Matthes F, Schweda CM (2009) An information model for managed application landscape evolution. J Enterp Archit 5(1):12–26
Carpenter J, Kariv S, Schotter A (2012) Network architecture, cooperation and punishment in public good experiments. Rev Econ Des 16(2–3):93–118
Chaudhuri A (2011) Sustaining cooperation in laboratory public goods experiments: a selective survey of the literature. Exp Econ 14(1):47–83
Chaudhuri A, Graziano S, Maitra P (2006) Social learning and norms in a public goods experiment with inter-generational advice. Rev Econ Stud 73(2):357–380
Child P, Diederichs R, Sanders FH, Wisniowski S (1991) The management of complexity. McKinsey Q 43(4):52–68
Cingolani P, Alcalá-Fdez J (2013) jFuzzyLogic: a java library to design fuzzy logic controllers according to the standard for fuzzy control programming. Int J Comput Intell Syst 6(1):61–75
Croson R (2007) Theories of commitment, altruism and reciprocity: evidence from linear public goods games. Econ Inq 45(2):199–216
Dufwenberg M, Kirchsteiger G (2004) A theory of sequential reciprocity. Games Econ Behav 47(2):268–298
Dykstra P, Jager W, Elsenbroich C, Verbrugge R, Renardel G (2015) An agent-based dialogical model with fuzzy attitudes. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 18(3):3
Ethiraj SK, Levinthal D, Roy RR (2008) The dual role of modularity: innovation and imitation. Manag Sci 54(5):939–955
Farjam M, Faillo M, Sprinkhuizen-Kuyper I, Haselager P (2015) Punishment mechanisms and their effect on cooperation: a simulation study. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 18(1):5
Fehr E, Gächter S (2000) Cooperation and punishment in public goods experiments. Am Econ Rev 90(4):980–994
Fehr E, Fischbacher U, Gächter S (2002) Strong reciprocity, human cooperation, and the enforcement of social norms. Hum Nat 13(1):1–25
Fischbacher U, Gächter S (2010) Social preferences, beliefs, and the dynamics of free riding in public good experiments. Am Econ Rev 100(1):541–556
Fischbacher U, Gächter S, Fehr E (2001) Are people conditionally cooperative? Evidence from a public goods experiment. Econ Lett 71(3):397–404
Gächter S (2007) Conditional cooperation: behavioral regularities from the lab and the field and their policy implications. In: Frey BS, Stutzer A (eds) Psychology and economics. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 1–30
Gächter S, Renner E, Sefton M (2008) The long-run benefits of punishment. Science 322(5907):1510
Gintis H (2009) Game theory and human behavior. In: Gintis H (ed) The bounds of reason: game theory and the unification of the behavioral sciences. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 45–83
Gogheri AS, Nawaser K, Vesal SM, Jahanshahi AA, Kazi R (2013) Which organizational culture moves towards organizational excellency. Asian Social Science 9(11):221
Goldstone RL, Janssen MA (2005) Computational models of collective behavior. Trends Cogn Sci 9(9):424–430
Hájek P (2009) On vagueness, truth values and fuzzy logics. Stud Logica 91(3):367–382
Hardin R (1971) Collective action as an agreeable n-prisoners’ dilemma. Behav Sci 16(5):472–481
Hauert C, De Monte S, Hofbauer J, Sigmund K (2002) Replicator dynamics for optional public good games. J Theor Biol 218(2):187–194
Helbing D, Szolnoki A, Perc M, Szabó G (2010) Punish, but not too hard: how costly punishment spreads in the spatial public goods game. New J Phys 12(8):083005
Indik BP (1964) The relationship between organization size and supervision ratio. Adm Sci Q 9(3):301–312
Isaac RM, Walker JM (1988) Group size effects in public goods provision: the voluntary contributions mechanism. Q J Econ 103(1):179–199
Izquierdo LR, Olaru D, Izquierdo SS, Purchase S, Soutar GN (2015) Fuzzy Logic for Social Simulation Using NetLogo. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 18(4):1
Jablin FM (1982) Formal structural characteristics of organizations and superior-subordinate communication. Hum Commun Res 8(4):338–347
Keser C, Van Winden F (2000) Conditional cooperation and voluntary contributions to public goods. Scand J Econ 102(1):23–39
Kirst-Ashman KK, Hull GH Jr. (2014) Brooks/cole empowerment series: generalist practice with organizations and communities. Cengage Learning, Boston
Knoke D (2009) Organizing for collective action: the political economies of associations. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick
Kreps DM, Milgrom P, Roberts J, Wilson R (1982) Rational cooperation in the finitely-repeated prisoners’ dilemma. J Econ Theory 27:245–252
Lazega E (2001) The collegial phenomenon: the social mechanisms of cooperation among peers in a corporate law partnership. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Li Y, Shen B (2013) The coevolution of partner switching and strategy updating in non-excludable public goods game. Physica A 392(20):4956–4965
Lotito G, Migheli M, Ortona G (2013) Is cooperation instinctive? Evidence from the response times in a public goods game. J Bioecon 15(2):123–133
Lucas P, De Oliveira A, Banuri S (2014) The effects of group composition and social preference heterogeneity in a public goods game: an agent-based simulation. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 17(3):5
Masclet D (2002) Peer pressure in work teams: the effects of inequity aversion. Working paper du GATE 2002-15. 2002
Meinzen-Dick R, Raju KV, Gulati A (2002) What affects organization and collective action for managing resources? Evidence from canal irrigation systems in India. World Dev 30(4):649–666
Nikiforakis N (2010) Feedback, punishment and cooperation in public goods experiments. Games Econ Behav 68(2):689–702
Olson M (2009) The logic of collective action, vol 124. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Ostrom E (2010) Collective action and the evolution of social norms. J Econ Perspect 14(3):137–158
Pedrycz W (1994) Why triangular membership functions? Fuzzy Sets Syst 64(1):21–30
Poteete AR, Janssen MA, Ostrom E (2010) Working together: collective action, the commons, and multiple methods in practice. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Rand DG, Nowak MA (2013) Human cooperation. Trends Cogn Sci 17(8):413–425
Reed LL, Vidaver-Cohen D, Colwell SR (2011) A new scale to measure executive servant leadership: development, analysis, and implications for research. J Bus Ethics 101(3):415–434
Reuben E, Riedl A (2009) Enforcement of contribution norms in public good games with heterogeneous populations. Games Econ Behav 77(1):122–137
Rockenbach B, Milinski M (2006) The efficient interaction of indirect reciprocity and costly punishment. Nature 444:718–723
Samek AS, Sheremeta RM (2014) Recognizing contributors: an experiment on public goods. Exp Econ 17(4):673–690
Sefton M, Shupp R, Walker J (2007) The effect of rewards and sanctions in provision of public goods. Econ Inq 45(4):671–690
Szolnoki A, Szabó G, Perc M (2011) Phase diagrams for the spatial public goods game with pool punishment. Phys Rev E 83(3):036101
Van de Ven AH, Lifschitz A (2013) Rational and reasonable microfoundations of markets and institutions. Acad Manag Perspect 27(2):156–172
Wang Z, Xia CY, Meloni S, Zhou CS, Moreno Y (2013) Impact of social punishment on cooperative behavior in complex networks. Sci Rep 3:3055
Welch D (1993) Just another day at the office. Prof Ethics Multidiscip J 2(3/4):3–14
Wu ZX, Holme P (2009) Effects of strategy-migration direction and noise in the evolutionary spatial prisoner’s dilemma. Phys Rev E 80(2):026108
Xiao E, Houser D (2011) Punish in public. J Pub Econ 95(7):1006–1017
Ye H, Tan F, Ding M, Jia Y, Chen Y (2011) Sympathy and punishment: evolution of cooperation in public goods game. J Artif Soc Soc Simul 14(4):20
Zhang H, Perc M (2016) Evolution of conditional cooperation under multilevel selection. Sci Rep 6:23006
Acknowledgements
This work has been supported by Asociación Mexicana de Cultura, A.C. and by the Mexican Council for Science and Technology (CONACYT) through Grant 216101.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Góngora y Moreno, S.F., Gutierrez-Garcia, J.O. Collective action in organizational structures. Comput Math Organ Theory 24, 1–33 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-017-9244-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10588-017-9244-6