30 August 2007 at 11:17 pm Nicolai Foss 2 comments
| Nicolai Foss |
Game theory is fun to teach because the real world applications, exemplifations, etc. are legion, and the theory so often does more than merely redescribe the situation, but actually brings new insight. If, however, you are out of good examples, you may want to check out Game Theory.net’s list of game theory in film, music and fiction.
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment: A New Approach to the Firm (Cambridge University Press, 2012).
Peter G. Klein and Micheal E. Sykuta, eds., The Elgar Companion to Transaction Cost Economics (Edward Elgar, 2010).
Peter G. Klein, The Capitalist and the Entrepreneur: Essays on Organizations and Markets (Mises Institute, 2010).
Richard N. Langlois, The Dynamics of Industrial Capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the New Economy (Routledge, 2007).
Nicolai J. Foss, Strategy, Economic Organization, and the Knowledge Economy: The Coordination of Firms and Resources (Oxford University Press, 2005).
Raghu Garud, Arun Kumaraswamy, and Richard N. Langlois, eds., Managing in the Modular Age: Architectures, Networks and Organizations (Blackwell, 2003).
Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein, eds., Entrepreneurship and the Firm: Austrian Perspectives on Economic Organization (Elgar, 2002).
Organizations and Markets 
1.
Paolo MARITI | 1 September 2007 at 5:31 am
Nicolai,
thanks so much for the many interesting hints, suggestions and informations you and Peter offer through O&M.
Best,
paolo
2.
jonfernquest | 6 September 2007 at 12:12 am
Thanks for pointing this site out. I found a lot more books similar to Steven J. Brams “Theory of Moves” on their political science page:
http://www.gametheory.net/books/books.pl?Field=Poli&highlight=POLI
[IMHO the contingent strategic human agency dimension is too often ignored nowadays in economics or history, for instance, in favour of more deterministic structural factors amenable to statistical modelling. Game theory gets at this strategic dimension but their is a huge divide between the mathematicians and those who deal with the actual messiness and complexity of lived history, scholars who are able to verbalise the math and relate it to actual events still seem few and far between.]