What are Wall Street’s smartest people reading? Lasse Pedersen’s EFFICIENTLY INEFFICIENT

Pedersen jacketLasse Pedersen’s new book, Efficiently Inefficient, a look at the key trading strategies used by hedge funds, just made two lists of top investment books. The Wall Street Journal included it in a list of “the books Wall Street’s smartest people think you should read this summer”, where it was recommended by Torsten Slok, ‎chief international economist at Deutsche Bank. ETF.com also gave the book a shout out, naming it one of the “must read books for serious investors”.

Lasse Pedersen, a finance professor at Copenhagen Business School and New York University’s Stern School of Business, and a principal at AQR Capital Management, is determined to show how markets really work in a world where they are neither perfectly efficient nor completely inefficient. So what exactly does he mean by the contradiction in terms “efficiently inefficient”? From ETF.com:

Imperfectly Efficient

Regarding the book’s title, Pedersen explains: “Markets cannot be perfectly efficient and always reflect all information. If they were perfect, no one would have any incentive to collect information and trade on it, and then how could markets become efficient in the first place? Markets also cannot be so inefficient that making money is very easy because, in that case, hedge funds and other active investors would have an incentive to trade more and more.”

Efficiently Inefficient includes an array of interviews with leading hedge fund managers, including Lee Ainslie, Cliff Asness, Jim Chanos, Ken Griffin, David Harding, John Paulson, Myron Scholes, and George Soros. Free problem sets are available online on Pedersen’s website. The introduction is available for download here.

Lauren Rivera, author of PEDIGREE, on the trouble with “cultural fit” in hiring

Rivera jacketLauren Rivera, associate professor of management and organizations at Northwestern University’s Kellogg School of Management and author of the new book Pedigree: How Elite Students get Elite Jobs, has an important op ed on class bias in the Sunday New York Times. In “Guess Who Doesn’t Fit in at Work” she argues that even in a hiring culture that emphasizes diversity, the idea of “cultural fit” has ‘gone rogue’, and interviewers at prestigious organizations practice a little-recognized form of discrimination in which they are “primarily interested in new hires whose hobbies, hometowns and biographies [match] their own.” From her piece:

ACROSS cultures and industries, managers strongly prize “cultural fit” — the idea that the best employees are like-minded. One recent survey found that more than 80 percent of employers worldwide named cultural fit as a top hiring priority.

When done carefully, selecting new workers this way can make organizations more productive and profitable. But cultural fit has morphed into a far more nebulous and potentially dangerous concept. It has shifted from systematic analysis of who will thrive in a given workplace to snap judgments by managers about who they’d rather hang out with. In the process, fit has become a catchall used to justify hiring people who are similar to decision makers and rejecting people who are not.

Rivera explains that “fit” can be used productively in the hiring process, but that it should emphasize behaviors associated with performance and not personal similarity. She outlines a better approach:

First, communicate a clear and consistent idea of what the organization’s culture is (and is not) to potential employees. Second, make sure the definition of cultural fit is closely aligned with business goals. Ideally, fit should be based on data-driven analysis of what types of values, traits and behaviors actually predict on-the-job success. Third, create formal procedures like checklists for measuring fit, so that assessment is not left up to the eyes (and extracurriculars) of the beholder.

Read the rest of her New York Times piece here, as well as her recent Q&A in Inside Higher Ed.

Chapter 1 is available here.

George Akerlof and Robert Shiller pose with their new book jacket

Nobel Prize winners Robert Shiller and George Akerlof got the chance to pose with the phenomenal cover for their forthcoming book, Phishing for Phools, the lead title on our Fall 2015 list (stay tuned for the posting of our new seasonal catalog!)  The drawing on the cover is an original by New Yorker cartoonist Edward Koren, and the jacket design is by our own Jason Alejandro. You can catch George talking about the book, which is a fascinating look at the central role of manipulation in economics, at this lecture at Duke University.

Akerloff and Shiller

 

Michael Chwe explains common knowledge, and why it matters to Mark Zuckerberg

Michael Chwe for UCOMM - 130321Michael Chwe, whose book, Rational Ritual: Culture, Coordination, and Common Knowledge has, in his words, “made its way out of the backwaters of course syllabi” to catch the attention of Mark Zuckerberg, had a terrific piece on the Monkey Cage blog of the Washington Post explaining exactly what common knowledge is, and why it’s so important. According to Chwe, common knowledge is generated by large scale social media platforms like Facebook, and this matters because of the many ways it can be leveraged, among them, stopping violence against women, and helping to foster collective political action.

From his piece on the Washington Post:

When Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg chose my book “Rational Ritual” last week for his “A Year of Books” book club, I was surprised. “Rational Ritual” came out in 2001, and has somehow slowly made its way out of the backwaters of course syllabi into the elevated spheres of technology companies. This is gratifying to me, because even though it is a scholarly book published by a university press, “Rational Ritual” is essentially a popularization.

“Rational Ritual” tries to popularize the concept of “common knowledge” as defined by the philosopher David Lewis and the sociologist Morris Friedell in 1969. A fact or event is common knowledge among a group of people if everyone knows it, everyone knows that everyone knows it, everyone knows that everyone knows that everyone knows it, and so on.

When I was a graduate student in economics in the late 1980s, most people considered common knowledge as an idea of only theoretical interest. People who thought about collective action (and its flip side, political repression) were mostly interested in the problem of free riding, rather than how people communicate. But social change isn’t just about tackling incentives to free ride – it’s also a problem of coordination.

Read the rest here.

Recently, Michael Chwe, a master of interdisciplinary applications for otherwise “rarified mathematical theories” has been particularly active in exploring how game theory can help curb sexual violence. Check out his piece on the topic on the PBS Newshour blog here. His recent Q&A with Facebook Books is up here.

Math Drives Careers: Author Ignacio Palacios-Huerta

Logical thinking, analytical skills, and the ability to recognize patterns are crucial in an array of fields that overlap with mathematics, including economics. But what does math (or economics, for that matter) have to do with the world’s most popular sport? Economist Ignacio Palacios-Huerta’s recent book, Beautiful Game Theory: How Soccer Can Help Economics  made a splash during the last World Cup, showing how universal economic principles can be understood through soccer. Read on for his thoughts on why the language of modern economics, including behavioral economics, is mathematics.

The Role of Mathematics in my Life as an Economist

To describe the role of mathematics in my life as an economist, I first need to explain what, to me, Economics is all about. So let me take you to one of my favorite books, A Treatise of Human Nature, written almost 300 years ago by David Hume.

Beautiful Game TheoryIn the introduction Hume writes, “‘Tis evident that all the sciences have a relation, more or less, to human nature … Even Mathematics, Natural Philosophy, and Natural Religion, are in some measure dependent on the science of Man, [which is] the only solid foundation for the other sciences”. By the science of man Hume means the understanding of all facets of human nature, including preferences, senses, passions, imagination, morality, justice, and society. This science applies wherever men are making decisions, be it running public institutions or countries, as employees in firms, or as individuals investing in education, taking risks in financial markets, or making family decisions. This science of man is thus what one may initially be tempted to call Economics for, as George Bernard Shaw puts it in my favorite definition, “Economy is the art of making the most of life”.

But of course this definition is incomplete because other social sciences (e.g., sociology, history, psychology, political science) are also concerned with human behavior. So what makes Economics “different”? Here is the difference: the difference is not the subject matter but the approach. The approach is totally different, and a very mathematical one. As such, mathematics plays a critical role in the life of any economist.

Let me elaborate. Continuing with Hume, it turns out that he also anticipated our methodological approach in modern Economics: observation and logical arguments. Which can be translated as: data and data analysis (what we call econometrics), and mathematics, for mathematics is, after all, the language of logic. So in Economics, as in physics, we write down our ideas and theories in mathematical terms to make logical arguments, and then we use more math (statistical, econometrics, etc) to check whether the data appear to be consistent with the theoretical arguments. If they are, the evidence can be said to support the theory; if they aren’t, the theory needs to be refined or discarded. Yes, lots of math and related techniques provide what is our distinct “economics approach to human behavior.” It is not the subject matter but the approach that is different, and it heavily relies on mathematics.

To economists and other social scientists, mathematics has many methodological virtues: it can lend precision to theories, can uncover inconsistencies, can generate hypothesis, can enable concision and promote intelligibility, and can sort out complex interactions, while statistical and econometric analysis can organize and carefully interpret voluminous data.

None of this is obvious when you begin studying Economics (“Why should I take all this math, statistics and econometrics? Why all this pain?”). But I think most of us soon learn to appreciate that the language of modern economics is mathematics, and that it is rightly so. And this is not math for the sake of math (as in pure mathematics), but math with a purpose: modeling human behavior.

Let me conclude by saying that since the economic approach is applicable to all human behavior, any type of data about human activity can be useful to evaluate economic theories. This includes, why not, sports data, which in many ways can be just perfect for testing economic theories: the data are abundant, the goals of the participants are clear, the outcomes are easy to observe, the stakes are high, and the subjects are professionals with experience. If a theory is “correct”, sport is a good setting to check it.

So just as data involving falling stones and apples were useful to Galileo Galilei and  Isaac Newton to test for the first time theories that were important in physics, data from sports can be useful in Economics to do exactly the same. As such in some of my contributions to Economics I have used math to develop theoretical models, and further mathematical tools applied to this type of data to test them.

Interview with Adam Levine, author of American Insecurity on MSNBC.com

Adam Levine talked with MSNBC co-host Krystall Ball on her popular vodcast Krystal Clear about his new book, American Insecurity: Why Our Economic Fears Lead to Political Inaction. Check out the first chapter of American Insecurity for free, here.


 

bookjacket American Insecurity:
Why Our Economic Fears Lead to Political Inaction

Adam Seth Levine

Author profile: Ken Elzinga

An inside look at one of the men behind the Henry Spearman Mystery trilogy.

If you haven’t picked up copies of the mysteries, check out the first chapters of each for free (linked below). You will not be disappointed.

A Deadly Indifference: A Henry Spearman Mystery
Murder at the Margin: A Henry Spearman Mystery
The Mystery of the Invisible Hand: A Henry Spearman Mystery

 


 

bookjacket

A Deadly Indifference:
A Henry Spearman Mystery

Marshall Jevons

 

bookjacket

Murder at the Margin:
A Henry Spearman Mystery

Marshall Jevons
With a new foreword by Herbert Stein and a new afterword by the author
bookjacket

The Mystery of the Invisible Hand:
A Henry Spearman Mystery

Marshall Jevons

Mass Flourishing by Edmund Phelps is a certified bestseller in China

Nobel prize-winning economist, Edmund Phelps’s book Mass Flourishing: How Grassroots Innovation Created Jobs, Challenge, and Change is a bestseller in China. Phelps’s success in China includes the prestigious Friendship Award, “China’s highest honor for foreign experts who have made outstanding contributions to the country’s economic and social progress.” He was also named dean of China’s New Huadu Business School, which operates in Fuzhou, Beijing, and Shanghai. More information on Phelps’s achievements in China can be found, here.

Congratulations to Edmund Phelps!


 

bookjacket

Mass Flourishing:
How Grassroots Innovation Created Jobs, Challenge, and Change
Edmund Phelps

Congratulations to Jean Tirole, recipient of 2014 Nobel Prize in Economic Science

Around this time last year the Press could not have been more excited. Why? Two of the three 2013 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences awards went to PUP authors Lars Peter Hansen and Robert J. Shiller, authors of Robustness and Irrational Exuberance, respectively. To see just how excited we were, click here, here, or here. Amazingly enough, there was no shortage of excitement at the Press following this year’s announcement of the 2014 Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences award as Jean Tirole, author of Financial Crises, Liquidity, and the International Monetary System, The Theory of Corporate Finance, and co-author of Balancing the Banks: Global Lessons from the Financial Crisis, is the sole recipient.


“If we had more researchers like Jean Tirole it would be a very good thing for the world.”


The official Nobel Prize press release states Jean Tirole, head of economics at Toulouse University in France, won The Sveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel for 2014, “for his analysis of market power and regulation,” but this is just a fraction of the contribution he has made to economic theory and its real world implications. In an interview (which can be seen below) Chairman of the Committee for the Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel, Tore Ellingsen, praised Tirole for his tireless efforts to better understand and explain how governments could regulate industries dominated by monopolies. When asked if it was difficult to choose a winner for the award this year, Ellingsen explained, “Yes and no. It’s been clear for some time now that Jean Tirole is a worthy recipient, but the question has been for what, alone or with whom, and when?” The interview concludes with wishful thinking; “If we had more researches like Jean Tirole it would be a very good thing for the world.”

Tirole has been an active member and contributor to economic theory since the 1980’s, and although “his work is largely theoretical…it has translated easily to practical use.” As a New York Times article further notes, “[Tirole’s] work is also wide ranging. A description of his influence published by the prize committee cited more than 60 papers, an unusually large number.”

Peter J. Dougherty, Director of Princeton University Press had the following to say about Tirole’s impact on the field of economics and his much deserved recognition. “Jean Tirole’s 2006 book, The Theory of Corporate Finance, marked an important moment in economics as well as in the history of Princeton’s economics list. We extend our most heartfelt congratulations to Professor Tirole on the occasion of his Nobel prize.”

Again, on behalf of all of us at PUP, we would like to congratulate and thank Jean Tirole for keeping the Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences award in house. And who knows, maybe next year we’ll be posting about a three-peat… fingers crossed!

Book trailer for Atlas of Cities edited by Paul Knox


Princeton University Press senior designer Jason Alejandro created this book trailer for Atlas of Cities edited by Paul Knox. (The catchy song in the background is the aptly named “Weekend in the City” by Silent Partner.)

8-7 Atlas of Cities Atlas of Cities
Edited by Paul Knox

 

And the REAL World Cup Winner is…

IPHWell, surely everybody knows by now – the 2014 World Cup is over, and Germany went home with the trophy.

But there’s another “winner” worth mentioning: Princeton University Press author and London School of Economics professor Ignacio Palacios-Huerta, whose latest book, Beautiful Game Theory: How Soccer Can Help Economics, garnered some wonderful press over the course of the tournament. Mr. Palacios-Heurta not only received a mention in the Science section of the New York Times and was the subject of a full-length article in strategy+business; he also penned an op-ed for the New York Times’s Sunday Review and was featured in stories in both the Financial Times and Worldcrunch.

Sure, he can’t rally like Ronaldo or kick it like Klose; but this fùtbol fanatic’s research presents advantages that extend far beyond the pitch.

Palacios-Huerta is unique in that he utilizes soccer data to test economic theories. In his op-ed in the Times, Palacios-Huerta lays out the basics of this experiment by explaining its origins in the Nash Equilibrium, which analyzes how people should behave in “strategic situations” and stresses that, in order to “win,” they shouldn’t repeat their choices. He says that, “according to Mr. Nash’s theory, in a zero-sum game (i.e., where a win for one player entails a corresponding loss for the other) the best approach is to vary your moves unpredictably and in such proportions that your probability of winning is the same for each move.”

He chooses penalty kicks to demonstrate this theory because they’re zero-sum games, wherein it’s ill-advised to use a strategy repeatedly. The explanation for this is relatively simple: a player’s shots become predictable if he always kicks to the same side of the net, making them easier to block. A lot of legwork (pun somewhat-intended) has gone into proving this idea: Palacios-Huerta analyzed 9,017 penalty kicks between 1995 and 2012, to find that successful players typically distributed their shots unpredictably and in just the right proportions. We won’t get into the numbers here, but they’re abundant in both the book and the op-ed.


Other research by me and others has shown that data from soccer can shed light on the economics of discrimination, fear, corruption and the dark side of incentives in organizations. In other words, aspects of the beautiful game that are less than beautiful from a fan’s perspective can still be illuminating for economists.”


And penalty kicks are just one handy example. Data from soccer can also illuminate one of the most prominent theories of the stock market: the efficient-market hypothesis, which essentially posits that the market processes economic data so quickly that any news relating to a stock is incorporated into its price before anyone can even act on it, diminishing the risk of insider trading.

We’re excited to see more of what these soccer stats can do to advance economic theory, and more importantly, how Palacios-Huerta can translate something so complicated, using something so, well…beautiful.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ignacio Palacios-Huerta is the author of:

BGT Beautiful Game Theory: How Soccer Can Help Economics by Ignacio Palacios-Huerta
Hardcover | 2014 | $35.00 / £24.95 | ISBN: 9780691144023
224 pp. | 6 x 9 | 30 line illus. | eBook | ISBN: 9781400850310 | Reviews Table of Contents   Introduction[PDF] 

Congratulations Martin Ruhs, Winner of the 2014 Best Book Award for the Migration and Citizenship Section of the American Political Science Association

Martin RuhsThe Migration and Citizenship Section of the American Political Science Association has named Martin Ruhs’s The Price of Rights: Regulating International Labor Migration  the winner of the 2014 Best Book Award in the Migration and Citizenship category. The judging committee lauded Ruhs for his “innovative, rigorous, and very comprehensive treatment of the subject of international labor migration” saying additionally that his “command of knowledge and research skills demonstrates the best practices of scholarship.”

Martin Ruhs is an Associate Professor of Political Economy at the Oxford University Department for Continuing Education and a Senior Researcher at COMPAS. He is also an Associate Member of the Department of Economics, the Department of Social Policy and Intervention and the Blavatnik School of Government. Ruhs’s research focuses on the economics and politics of international labor migration within an internationally comparative framework, which he draws on to comment on migration issues in the media and to provide policy analysis and advice for various national governments and institutions.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Martin Ruhs is the author of:

The Price of Rights The Price of Rights: Regulating International Labor Migration by Martin Ruhs
Hardcover | 2013 | $35.00 / £24.95 | ISBN: 9780691132914
272 pp. | 6 x 9 | 13 line illus. 16 tables. |eBook | ISBN: 9781400848607 | Reviews Table of Contents Chapter 1[PDF]