Institute of International Finance and Zero-sum game: Difference between pages

From ACT Wiki
(Difference between pages)
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Doug Williamson
(Links ordering.)
 
imported>Doug Williamson
(Undo revision 56551 by Doug Williamson (talk))
 
Line 1: Line 1:
(IIF).
1. ''Game theory.''


The Institute of International Finance is a membership organisation of around 450 members including commercial and investment banks, asset managers, insurance companies, sovereign wealth funds, hedge funds, central banks, multilateral agencies and development banks.
Strictly, a zero-sum game is one in which the total wealth or utility of all participants adds up to exactly zero, regardless of the outcome.


Therefore any individual participant can only gain by disadvantaging others.


== See also ==
* [[Asset manager]]
* [[Bank of England]]
* [[Bank supervision]]
* [[Central bank]]
* [[Development bank]]
* [[Direct participant in an IFTS]]
* [[euro zone]]
* [[European Central Bank]]
* [[Federal Reserve Bank]]
* [[Finance]]
* [[Hedge fund]]
* [[Lender of last resort]]
* [[Market maker of last resort]]
* [[Monetary Authority of Singapore]]
* [[Oversight of payment systems]]
* [[Quantitative easing ]]
*[[Reserve Bank of Australia]]  (RBA)
* [[Reserve currency]]
* [[Reserves]]
* [[Reserves account]]
* [[Riksbank]]
* [[Sovereign wealth fund]]


In a zero-sum game, win-win strategies are therefore not appropriate or effective for participants in maximising their own utility or wealth.
2. ''Analysis paralysis.''
The term "zero-sum game" is also used more loosely, to describe any situation in which further intervention or analysis are considered not to be warranted, because no net benefits are likely to be achieved.
The expected costs of further intervention or analysis outweighing their expected benefits.
==See also==
*[[Agent based modelling]]
*[[Analysis paralysis]]
*[[Behavioural economics]]
*[[Classical economics]]
*[[Game]]
*[[Game theory]]
*[[Gaming]]
*[[Irrational]]
*[[Model]]
*[[Utility]]
*[[Win-win]]
[[Category:Influencing]]
[[Category:Working_effectively_with_others]]
[[Category:The_business_context]]
[[Category:The_business_context]]
[[Category:Investment]]
[[Category:Investment]]
[[Category:Financial_products_and_markets]]
[[Category:Financial_products_and_markets]]

Revision as of 18:50, 19 March 2023

1. Game theory.

Strictly, a zero-sum game is one in which the total wealth or utility of all participants adds up to exactly zero, regardless of the outcome.

Therefore any individual participant can only gain by disadvantaging others.


In a zero-sum game, win-win strategies are therefore not appropriate or effective for participants in maximising their own utility or wealth.


2. Analysis paralysis.

The term "zero-sum game" is also used more loosely, to describe any situation in which further intervention or analysis are considered not to be warranted, because no net benefits are likely to be achieved.

The expected costs of further intervention or analysis outweighing their expected benefits.


See also