Promotion, turnover and preemptive wage offers

Abstract

Purpose

The reason for writing the paper is to cast doubt on the claim that the informational asymmetries uncovered by Bernhardt and Scoones constitute a market failure.

Design/methodology/approach

The main method used is to quote these authors, and then critically comment upon their views. The theoretical scope of the paper is the premise that markets are efficient, effective and ethical.

Findings

It was found in the course of the work that Bernhardt and Scoones were in error in their contentions.

Research limitations/implications

Suggestions for future research; this paper is but the tip of the iceberg in terms of claims that markets perform badly, and are hence in need of governmental rectification. This entire literature cries out for more critical analysis.

Practical implications

The public policy and practical implications emanating from this paper is that laissez‐faire capitalism is the best way to organize an economy.

Originality/value

What is new in the paper is that the work of Bernhardt and Scoones on informational asymmetries has not before been subject to critical analysis from the perspective of advocates of the free enterprise system. This is valuable, in that, when claims are subject to critique, they become more reliable. It is only through dialogue and debate of this sort that one can get that in closer to the truth.

Citation

Block, W. and Lawson, R.A. (2006), "Promotion, turnover and preemptive wage offers", Humanomics, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 133-138. https://doi.org/10.1108/08288660610703302