Charlie Munger and the Psychology of Human Misjudgment

If you know Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-B  ) , then you probably know its vice chairman, Charlie Munger -- Buffett's right-hand man. Munger's book, Poor Charlie's Almanack, collects his speeches and musings, including his intriguing thoughts on the 25 tendences that lead us humans to make really bad decisions. For your benefit and mine, this series will review each of those ill-fated impulses, the errors they create, and the antidotes that can help make us better investors.

Today, we'll start at the top with tendency No. 1: reward and punishment superresponse.

The carrot and the stick, on steroids
Incentives play a very important role in our lives. From our upbringing as children to our work lives as adults, various incentives dictate how we behave. The power of incentives is so great that if not properly addressed, it can and will produce less-than-desirable behavior.

Munger uses the example of the Xerox (NYSE: XRX  ) salesman who pushes the inferior of two products on his customers. Because of a poorly arranged incentive structure, the salesman has a strong (albeit selfish) reason to push the shoddier product, since it benefits him with better compensation. Of course, the customers end up losing: They buy a lousy product. Ultimately, if this tendency isn't corrected, Xerox loses, too, as people flee to other suppliers with better offerings.

What does this have to do with investing?
Of the many ways this lesson can relate to stocks, I keep coming back to how incentives apply to a company's management. When management's compensation structure is flawed, expect unproductive behavior to follow.

You needn't look far down the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDEX: ^DJI) to find examples. Bank of America (NYSE: BAC  ) and JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM  ) found themselves at the center of the storm when the financial crisis hit, and critics ultimately questioned both companies' compensation practices. Even today, they continue to fight the public perception that their executive pay policies reward short-term thinking with excessive generosity.

And what have we learned?
I can sum up my greatest takeaway from this tendency with a quote from the book: "Never, ever, think about something else when you should be thinking about the power of incentives." In other words: Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it.

Stock Advisor analyst Jason Moser owns shares of Berkshire Hathaway. The Motley Fool owns shares of JPMorgan Chase, Berkshire Hathaway, and Bank of America. Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of Berkshire Hathaway. Try any of our Foolish newsletter services free for 30 days. We Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read/Post Comments (2) | Recommend This Article (29)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On September 03, 2011, at 5:37 PM, Cashmenow wrote:

    Of course you should be careful for what you wish for because of you get something there about the lesser of two evils youl'll be cheating the devil twice,and that's not a good thing. So if I ask for less than what is reasonable things are good at least on the surface. But if I scratch a little and see that what is below the surface I'd probably want less of what is there and more of what is not. So the bottom line is don't always bite more than you chew because the hand that feeds you is, well let's just say quite capable of warding off dog bites from different sources.

    And you may not like the fact that quite often those people have people who bite even when not being attacked. In the final analysis the giver quite often takes more than is needed. And taker already has enough to peacefully co-exist above and beyond the average, acceptable range of comfort.

  • Report this Comment On September 15, 2011, at 8:56 AM, decbutt wrote:

    Take this example and apply to China.

    Is there any incentive for Chinese executives to dodge tax?

    Lie on their official filings?

    Embezzle shareholder's money?

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1548167, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 9/20/2014 2:08:08 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement