1
00:00:00,301 --> 00:00:01,792
What you have here

2
00:00:01,792 --> 00:00:04,417
is an electronic cigarette.

3
00:00:04,417 --> 00:00:09,258
It's something that's, since it was invented a year or two ago,

4
00:00:09,258 --> 00:00:10,964
has given me untold happiness.

5
00:00:10,964 --> 00:00:11,931
(Laughter)

6
00:00:11,931 --> 00:00:14,943
A little bit of it, I think, is the nicotine,

7
00:00:14,943 --> 00:00:16,831
but there's something much bigger than that.

8
00:00:16,831 --> 00:00:21,290
Which is ever since, in the U.K., they banned smoking in public places,

9
00:00:21,290 --> 00:00:25,853
I've never enjoyed a drinks party ever again.

10
00:00:25,853 --> 00:00:27,000
(Laughter)

11
00:00:27,000 --> 00:00:29,792
And the reason, I only worked out just the other day,

12
00:00:29,792 --> 00:00:31,828
which is when you go to a drinks party

13
00:00:31,828 --> 00:00:34,365
and you stand up and you hold a glass of red wine

14
00:00:34,365 --> 00:00:36,050
and you talk endlessly to people,

15
00:00:36,050 --> 00:00:38,610
you don't actually want to spend all the time talking.

16
00:00:38,610 --> 00:00:40,037
It's really, really tiring.

17
00:00:40,037 --> 00:00:43,542
Sometimes you just want to stand there silently, alone with your thoughts.

18
00:00:43,542 --> 00:00:47,583
sometimes you just want to stand in the corner and stare out of the window.

19
00:00:47,583 --> 00:00:51,991
Now the problem is, when you can't smoke,

20
00:00:51,991 --> 00:00:55,609
if you stand and stare out of the window on your own,

21
00:00:55,609 --> 00:00:58,705
you're an antisocial, friendless idiot.

22
00:00:58,705 --> 00:00:59,959
(Laughter)

23
00:00:59,959 --> 00:01:03,519
If you stand and stare out of the window on your own with a cigarette,

24
00:01:03,519 --> 00:01:05,845
you're a fucking philosopher.

25
00:01:05,845 --> 00:01:08,333
(Laughter)

26
00:01:08,333 --> 00:01:13,292
(Applause)

27
00:01:13,292 --> 00:01:17,500
So the power of reframing things

28
00:01:17,500 --> 00:01:21,606
cannot be overstated.

29
00:01:21,606 --> 00:01:25,156
What we have is exactly the same thing, the same activity,

30
00:01:25,156 --> 00:01:27,488
but one of them makes you feel great

31
00:01:27,488 --> 00:01:30,477
and the other one, with just a small change of posture,

32
00:01:30,477 --> 00:01:33,042
makes you feel terrible.

33
00:01:33,042 --> 00:01:35,923
And I think one of the problems with classical economics

34
00:01:35,923 --> 00:01:38,240
is it's absolutely preoccupied with reality.

35
00:01:38,240 --> 00:01:42,875
And reality isn't a particularly good guide to human happiness.

36
00:01:42,875 --> 00:01:44,625
Why, for example,

37
00:01:44,625 --> 00:01:48,090
are pensioners much happier

38
00:01:48,090 --> 00:01:50,150
than the young unemployed?

39
00:01:50,150 --> 00:01:54,259
Both of them, after all, are in exactly the same stage of life.

40
00:01:54,259 --> 00:01:57,125
You both have too much time on your hands and not much money.

41
00:01:57,125 --> 00:02:00,292
But pensioners are reportedly very, very happy,

42
00:02:00,292 --> 00:02:04,125
whereas the unemployed are extraordinarily unhappy and depressed.

43
00:02:04,125 --> 00:02:08,083
The reason, I think, is that the pensioners believe they've chosen to be pensioners,

44
00:02:08,083 --> 00:02:10,771
whereas the young unemployed

45
00:02:10,771 --> 00:02:12,554
feel it's been thrust upon them.

46
00:02:12,554 --> 00:02:17,737
In England the upper-middle-classes have actually solved this problem perfectly,

47
00:02:17,737 --> 00:02:20,458
because they've rebranded unemployment.

48
00:02:20,458 --> 00:02:23,054
If you're an upper-middle-class English person,

49
00:02:23,054 --> 00:02:25,333
you call unemployment "a year off."

50
00:02:25,333 --> 00:02:27,083
(Laughter)

51
00:02:27,083 --> 00:02:31,300
And that's because having a son who's unemployed in Manchester

52
00:02:31,300 --> 00:02:32,931
is really quite embarrassing,

53
00:02:32,931 --> 00:02:36,202
but having a son who's unemployed in Thailand

54
00:02:36,202 --> 00:02:38,745
is really viewed as quite an accomplishment.

55
00:02:38,745 --> 00:02:40,208
(Laughter)

56
00:02:40,208 --> 00:02:42,894
But actually the power to rebrand things,

57
00:02:42,894 --> 00:02:47,830
to understand that actually our experiences, costs, things

58
00:02:47,830 --> 00:02:50,786
don't actually much depend on what they really are,

59
00:02:50,786 --> 00:02:51,625
but on how we view them,

60
00:02:51,625 --> 00:02:55,000
I genuinely think can't be overstated.

61
00:02:55,000 --> 00:02:57,612
There's an experiment I think Daniel Pink refers to

62
00:02:57,612 --> 00:02:59,745
where you put two dogs in a box

63
00:02:59,745 --> 00:03:03,208
and the box has an electric floor.

64
00:03:03,208 --> 00:03:08,583
Every now and then an electric shock is applied to the floor,

65
00:03:08,583 --> 00:03:11,625
which pains the dogs.

66
00:03:11,625 --> 00:03:16,614
The only difference is one of the dogs has a small button in its half of the box.

67
00:03:16,614 --> 00:03:19,669
And when it nuzzles the button, the electric shock stops.

68
00:03:19,669 --> 00:03:23,208
The other dog doesn't have the button.

69
00:03:23,208 --> 00:03:27,902
It's exposed to exactly the same level of pain as the dog in the first box,

70
00:03:27,902 --> 00:03:29,919
but it has no control over the circumstances.

71
00:03:29,919 --> 00:03:34,000
Generally the first dog can be relatively content.

72
00:03:34,000 --> 00:03:37,708
The second dog lapses into complete depression.

73
00:03:37,708 --> 00:03:42,583
The circumstances of our lives may actually matter less to our happiness

74
00:03:42,583 --> 00:03:47,917
than the sense of control we feel over our lives.

75
00:03:47,917 --> 00:03:49,777
It's an interesting question.

76
00:03:49,777 --> 00:03:53,973
We ask the question -- the whole debate in the Western world

77
00:03:53,973 --> 00:03:55,631
is about the level of taxation.

78
00:03:55,631 --> 00:03:57,958
But I think there's another debate to be asked,

79
00:03:57,958 --> 00:04:00,950
which is the level of control we have over our tax money.

80
00:04:00,950 --> 00:04:05,639
That what costs us 10 pounds in one context can be a curse.

81
00:04:05,639 --> 00:04:11,211
What costs us 10 pounds in a different context we may actually welcome.

82
00:04:11,211 --> 00:04:15,708
And pay 20,000 pounds in tax toward health

83
00:04:15,708 --> 00:04:18,085
and you're merely feeling a mug.

84
00:04:18,085 --> 00:04:21,787
Pay 20,000 pounds to endow a hospital ward

85
00:04:21,787 --> 00:04:23,950
and you're called a philanthropist.

86
00:04:23,950 --> 00:04:27,186
I'm probably in the wrong country to talk about willingness to pay tax.

87
00:04:27,186 --> 00:04:29,896
(Laughter)

88
00:04:29,896 --> 00:04:35,077
So I'll give you one in return. How you frame things really matters.

89
00:04:35,077 --> 00:04:37,073
Do you call it the bailout of Greece

90
00:04:37,073 --> 00:04:40,454
or the bailout of a load of stupid banks which lent to Greece?

91
00:04:40,454 --> 00:04:43,667
Because they are actually the same thing.

92
00:04:43,667 --> 00:04:46,065
What you call them actually affects

93
00:04:46,065 --> 00:04:49,579
how you react to them, viscerally and morally.

94
00:04:49,579 --> 00:04:52,956
I think psychological value is great to be absolutely honest.

95
00:04:52,956 --> 00:04:56,086
One of my great friends, a professor called Nick Chater,

96
00:04:56,086 --> 00:04:58,713
who's the Professor of Decision Sciences in London,

97
00:04:58,713 --> 00:05:01,235
believes that we should spend far less time

98
00:05:01,235 --> 00:05:02,708
looking into humanity's hidden depths

99
00:05:02,708 --> 00:05:06,333
and spend much more time exploring the hidden shallows.

100
00:05:06,333 --> 00:05:08,083
I think that's true actually.

101
00:05:08,083 --> 00:05:10,895
I think impressions have an insane effect

102
00:05:10,895 --> 00:05:13,050
on what we think and what we do.

103
00:05:13,050 --> 00:05:17,395
But what we don't have is a really good model of human psychology.

104
00:05:17,395 --> 00:05:19,233
At least pre-Kahneman perhaps,

105
00:05:19,233 --> 00:05:22,307
we didn't have a really good model of human psychology

106
00:05:22,307 --> 00:05:26,708
to put alongside models of engineering, of neoclassical economics.

107
00:05:26,708 --> 00:05:31,070
So people who believed in psychological solutions didn't have a model.

108
00:05:31,070 --> 00:05:32,840
We didn't have a framework.

109
00:05:32,840 --> 00:05:35,684
This is what Warren Buffett's business partner Charlie Munger calls

110
00:05:35,684 --> 00:05:37,792
"A latticework on which to hang your ideas."

111
00:05:37,792 --> 00:05:42,583
Engineers, economists, classical economists

112
00:05:42,583 --> 00:05:44,333
all had a very, very robust existing latticework

113
00:05:44,333 --> 00:05:47,292
on which practically every idea could be hung.

114
00:05:47,292 --> 00:05:50,583
We merely have a collection of random individual insights

115
00:05:50,583 --> 00:05:53,583
without an overall model.

116
00:05:53,583 --> 00:05:57,577
And what that means is that in looking at solutions,

117
00:05:57,577 --> 00:06:00,208
we've probably given too much priority

118
00:06:00,208 --> 00:06:03,875
to what I call technical engineering solutions, Newtonian solutions,

119
00:06:03,875 --> 00:06:07,292
and not nearly enough to the psychological ones.

120
00:06:07,292 --> 00:06:09,336
You know my example of the Eurostar.

121
00:06:09,336 --> 00:06:11,917
Six million pounds spent to reduce the journey time

122
00:06:11,917 --> 00:06:15,425
between Paris and London by about 40 minutes.

123
00:06:15,425 --> 00:06:20,196
For 0.01 percent of this money you could have put WiFi on the trains,

124
00:06:20,196 --> 00:06:22,867
which wouldn't have reduced the duration of the journey,

125
00:06:22,867 --> 00:06:26,292
but would have improved its enjoyment and its usefullness far more.

126
00:06:26,292 --> 00:06:28,917
For maybe 10 percent of the money,

127
00:06:28,917 --> 00:06:32,236
you could have paid all of the world's top male and female supermodels

128
00:06:32,236 --> 00:06:36,598
to walk up and down the train handing out free Chateau Petrus to all the passengers.

129
00:06:36,598 --> 00:06:40,791
You'd still have five billion pounds in change,

130
00:06:40,791 --> 00:06:43,569
and people would ask for the trains to be slowed down.

131
00:06:43,569 --> 00:06:45,967
(Laughter)

132
00:06:45,967 --> 00:06:49,132
Why were we not given the chance

133
00:06:49,132 --> 00:06:51,333
to solve that problem psychologically?

134
00:06:51,333 --> 00:06:53,750
I think it's because there's an imbalance, an asymmetry,

135
00:06:53,750 --> 00:06:58,542
in the way we treat creative, emotionally-driven psychological ideas

136
00:06:58,542 --> 00:07:03,431
versus the way we treat rational, numerical, spreadsheet-driven ideas.

137
00:07:03,431 --> 00:07:06,523
If you're a creative person, I think quite rightly,

138
00:07:06,523 --> 00:07:08,858
you have to share all your ideas for approval

139
00:07:08,858 --> 00:07:10,958
with people much more rational than you.

140
00:07:10,958 --> 00:07:14,708
You have to go in and you have to have a cost-benefit analysis,

141
00:07:14,708 --> 00:07:17,587
a feasibility study, an ROI study and so forth.

142
00:07:17,587 --> 00:07:19,381
And I think that's probably right.

143
00:07:19,381 --> 00:07:21,700
But this does not apply the other way around.

144
00:07:21,700 --> 00:07:25,010
People who have an existing framework,

145
00:07:25,010 --> 00:07:27,545
an economic framework, an engineering framework,

146
00:07:27,545 --> 00:07:30,831
feel that actually logic is its own answer.

147
00:07:30,831 --> 00:07:33,838
What they don't say is, "Well the numbers all seem to add up,

148
00:07:33,854 --> 00:07:36,125
but before I present this idea, I'll go and show it to some really crazy people

149
00:07:36,125 --> 00:07:39,809
to see if they can come up with something better."

150
00:07:39,809 --> 00:07:42,577
And so we, artificially I think, prioritize

151
00:07:42,577 --> 00:07:46,873
what I'd call mechanistic ideas over psychological ideas.

152
00:07:46,873 --> 00:07:49,402
An example of a great psychological idea:

153
00:07:49,402 --> 00:07:54,375
The single best improvement in passenger satisfaction on the London Underground per pounds spent

154
00:07:54,375 --> 00:07:59,404
came when they didn't add any extra trains nor change the frequency of the trains,

155
00:07:59,404 --> 00:08:02,208
they put dot matrix display board on the platforms.

156
00:08:02,208 --> 00:08:05,458
Because the nature of a wait

157
00:08:05,458 --> 00:08:08,531
is not just dependent on its numerical quality, its duration,

158
00:08:08,531 --> 00:08:11,346
but on the level of uncertainty you experience during that wait.

159
00:08:11,346 --> 00:08:14,738
Waiting seven minutes for a train with a countdown clock

160
00:08:14,738 --> 00:08:16,952
is less frustrating and irritating

161
00:08:16,952 --> 00:08:18,979
than waiting four minutes, knuckle-biting

162
00:08:18,979 --> 00:08:22,167
going, "When's this train going to damn well arrive?"

163
00:08:22,167 --> 00:08:26,069
Here's a beautiful example of a psychological solution deployed in Korea.

164
00:08:26,069 --> 00:08:28,632
Red traffic lights have a countdown delay.

165
00:08:28,632 --> 00:08:31,871
It's proven to reduce the accident rate in experiments.

166
00:08:31,871 --> 00:08:34,750
Why? Because road rage, impatience and general irritation

167
00:08:34,750 --> 00:08:40,032
are massively reduced when you can actually see the time you have to wait.

168
00:08:40,032 --> 00:08:43,042
In China, not really understanding the principle behind this,

169
00:08:43,042 --> 00:08:45,776
they applied the same principle to green traffic lights.

170
00:08:45,776 --> 00:08:47,127
(Laughter)

171
00:08:47,127 --> 00:08:51,542
Which isn't a great idea.

172
00:08:51,542 --> 00:08:55,870
You're 200 yards away, you realize you've got five seconds to go, you floor it.

173
00:08:55,870 --> 00:08:57,458
(Laughter)

174
00:08:57,458 --> 00:09:01,292
The Koreans, very assiduously, did test both.

175
00:09:01,292 --> 00:09:05,121
The accident rate goes down when you apply this to red traffic lights;

176
00:09:05,121 --> 00:09:06,850
it goes up when you apply it to green traffic lights.

177
00:09:06,850 --> 00:09:10,442
This is all I'm asking for really in human decision making,

178
00:09:10,442 --> 00:09:12,398
is the consideration of these three things.

179
00:09:12,398 --> 00:09:15,454
I'm not asking for the complete primacy of one over the other.

180
00:09:15,454 --> 00:09:17,505
I'm merely saying that when you solve problems,

181
00:09:17,505 --> 00:09:19,807
you should look at all three of these equally

182
00:09:19,807 --> 00:09:22,333
and you should seek as far as possible

183
00:09:22,333 --> 00:09:25,167
to find solutions which sit in the sweet spot in the middle.

184
00:09:25,167 --> 00:09:27,375
If you actually look at a great business,

185
00:09:27,375 --> 00:09:30,833
you'll nearly always see all of these three things coming into play.

186
00:09:30,833 --> 00:09:33,281
Really, really successful businesses --

187
00:09:33,281 --> 00:09:35,787
Google is great, great technological success,

188
00:09:35,787 --> 00:09:38,521
but it's also based on a very good psychological insight:

189
00:09:38,521 --> 00:09:42,721
People believe something that only does one thing

190
00:09:42,721 --> 00:09:46,923
is better at that thing than something that does that thing and something else.

191
00:09:46,923 --> 00:09:49,875
It's an innate thing called goal dilution.

192
00:09:49,875 --> 00:09:51,873
Ayelet Fishbach has written a paper about this.

193
00:09:51,873 --> 00:09:54,192
Everybody else at the time of Google, more or less,

194
00:09:54,192 --> 00:09:55,548
was trying to be a portal.

195
00:09:55,548 --> 00:09:56,864
Yes, there's a search function,

196
00:09:56,864 --> 00:10:00,690
but you also have weather, sports scores, bits of news.

197
00:10:00,690 --> 00:10:03,208
Google understood that if you're just a search engine,

198
00:10:03,208 --> 00:10:06,871
people assume you're a very, very good search engine.

199
00:10:06,871 --> 00:10:08,452
All of you know this actually

200
00:10:08,452 --> 00:10:10,137
from when you go in to buy a television.

201
00:10:10,137 --> 00:10:13,700
And in the shabbier end of the row of flatscreen TV's

202
00:10:13,700 --> 00:10:19,002
you can see are these rather despised things called combined TV and DVD players.

203
00:10:19,002 --> 00:10:22,094
And we have no knowledge whatsoever of the quality of those things,

204
00:10:22,094 --> 00:10:26,042
but we look at a combined TV and DVD player and we go, "Uck.

205
00:10:26,042 --> 00:10:30,448
It's probably a bit of a crap telly and a bit rubbish as a DVD player."

206
00:10:30,448 --> 00:10:32,738
So we walk out of the shops with one of each.

207
00:10:32,738 --> 00:10:38,042
Google is as much a psychological success as it is a technological one.

208
00:10:38,042 --> 00:10:40,944
I propose that we can use psychology to solve problems

209
00:10:40,944 --> 00:10:43,727
that we didn't even realize were problems at all.

210
00:10:43,727 --> 00:10:46,827
This is my suggestion for getting people to finish their course of antibiotics.

211
00:10:46,827 --> 00:10:49,210
Don't give them 24 white pills.

212
00:10:49,210 --> 00:10:52,081
Give them 18 white pills and six blue ones

213
00:10:52,081 --> 00:10:55,698
and tell them to take the white pills first and then take the blue ones.

214
00:10:55,698 --> 00:10:57,750
It's called chunking.

215
00:10:57,750 --> 00:11:00,854
The likelihood that people will get to the end is much greater

216
00:11:00,854 --> 00:11:03,458
when there is a milestone somewhere in the middle.

217
00:11:03,458 --> 00:11:06,417
One of the great mistakes, I think, of economics

218
00:11:06,417 --> 00:11:08,844
is it fails to understand that what something is,

219
00:11:08,844 --> 00:11:11,163
whether it's retirement, unemployment, cost,

220
00:11:11,163 --> 00:11:16,417
is a function, not only of its amount, but also its meaning.

221
00:11:16,417 --> 00:11:20,333
This is a toll crossing in Britain.

222
00:11:20,333 --> 00:11:23,858
Quite often queues happen at the tolls.

223
00:11:23,858 --> 00:11:25,960
Sometimes you get very, very severe queues.

224
00:11:25,960 --> 00:11:27,958
You could apply the same principle actually, if you like,

225
00:11:27,958 --> 00:11:29,583
to the security lanes in airports.

226
00:11:29,583 --> 00:11:33,408
What would happen if you could actually pay twice as much money to cross the bridge,

227
00:11:33,408 --> 00:11:35,792
but go through a lane that's an express lane?

228
00:11:35,792 --> 00:11:39,527
It's not an unreasonable thing to do. It's an economically efficient thing to do.

229
00:11:39,527 --> 00:11:41,992
Time means more to some people than others.

230
00:11:41,992 --> 00:11:44,292
If you're waiting trying to get to a job interview,

231
00:11:44,292 --> 00:11:48,259
you'd patently pay a couple of pounds more to go through the fast lane.

232
00:11:48,259 --> 00:11:50,446
If you're on the way to visit your mother in-law,

233
00:11:50,446 --> 00:11:55,287
you'd probably prefer to stay on the left.

234
00:11:55,287 --> 00:11:59,715
The only problem is if you introduce this economically efficient solution,

235
00:11:59,715 --> 00:12:01,061
people hate it.

236
00:12:01,061 --> 00:12:04,250
Because they think you're deliberately creating delays at the bridge

237
00:12:04,250 --> 00:12:05,787
in order to maximize your revenue,

238
00:12:05,787 --> 00:12:09,283
and "Why on earth should I pay to subsidize your imcompetence?"

239
00:12:09,283 --> 00:12:11,892
On the other hand, change the frame slightly

240
00:12:11,892 --> 00:12:14,500
and create charitable yield management,

241
00:12:14,500 --> 00:12:19,571
so the extra money you get goes not to the bridge company, it goes to charity,

242
00:12:19,571 --> 00:12:22,125
and the mental willingness to pay completely changes.

243
00:12:22,125 --> 00:12:25,792
You have a relatively economically efficient solution,

244
00:12:25,792 --> 00:12:28,834
but one that actually meets with public approval

245
00:12:28,834 --> 00:12:31,023
and even a small degree of affection,

246
00:12:31,023 --> 00:12:33,267
rather than being seen as bastardy.

247
00:12:33,267 --> 00:12:36,977
So where economists make the fundamental mistake

248
00:12:36,977 --> 00:12:39,083
is they think that money is money.

249
00:12:39,083 --> 00:12:44,475
Actually my pain experienced in paying five pounds

250
00:12:44,475 --> 00:12:46,237
is not just proportionate to the amount,

251
00:12:46,237 --> 00:12:48,737
but where I think that money is going.

252
00:12:48,737 --> 00:12:51,756
And I think understanding that could revolutionize tax policy.

253
00:12:51,756 --> 00:12:54,152
It could revolutionize the public services.

254
00:12:54,152 --> 00:12:56,379
It could really change things quite significantly.

255
00:12:56,379 --> 00:12:59,175
Here's a guy you all need to study.

256
00:12:59,175 --> 00:13:01,079
He's an Austrian school economist

257
00:13:01,079 --> 00:13:06,290
who was first active in the first half of the 20th century in Vienna.

258
00:13:06,290 --> 00:13:08,135
What was interesting about the Austrian school

259
00:13:08,135 --> 00:13:11,204
is they actually grew up alongside Freud.

260
00:13:11,204 --> 00:13:13,880
And so they're predominantly interested in psychology.

261
00:13:13,880 --> 00:13:19,000
They believed that there was a discipline called praxeology,

262
00:13:19,000 --> 00:13:21,083
which is a prior discipline to the study of economics.

263
00:13:21,083 --> 00:13:25,860
Praxeology is the study of human choice, action and decision making.

264
00:13:25,860 --> 00:13:27,088
I think they're right.

265
00:13:27,088 --> 00:13:29,496
I think the danger we have in today's world

266
00:13:29,496 --> 00:13:31,365
is we have the study of economics

267
00:13:31,365 --> 00:13:35,823
considers itself to be a prior discipline to the study of human psychology.

268
00:13:35,823 --> 00:13:38,588
But as Charlie Munger says, "If economics isn't behavioral,

269
00:13:38,588 --> 00:13:40,833
I don't know what the hell is."

270
00:13:40,833 --> 00:13:47,371
Von Mises interestingly believes economics is just a subset of psychology.

271
00:13:47,371 --> 00:13:49,010
I think he just refers to economics as

272
00:13:49,010 --> 00:13:52,602
"The study of human praxeology under conditions of scarcity."

273
00:13:52,602 --> 00:13:55,665
But von Mises, among many other things,

274
00:13:55,665 --> 00:14:01,633
I think uses an analogy which is probably the best justification and explanation

275
00:14:01,633 --> 00:14:04,490
for the value of marketing, the value of perceived value

276
00:14:04,490 --> 00:14:08,902
and the fact that we should actually treat it as being absolutely equivalent

277
00:14:08,902 --> 00:14:10,417
to any other kind of value.

278
00:14:10,417 --> 00:14:13,059
We tend to, all of us -- even those of us who work in marketing --

279
00:14:13,059 --> 00:14:14,575
to think of value in two ways.

280
00:14:14,605 --> 00:14:15,727
There's the real value,

281
00:14:15,727 --> 00:14:17,125
which is when you make something in a factory and provide a service,

282
00:14:17,125 --> 00:14:19,750
and then there's a kind of dubious value,

283
00:14:19,750 --> 00:14:22,056
which you create by changing the way people look at things.

284
00:14:22,056 --> 00:14:25,217
Von Mises completely rejected this distinction.

285
00:14:25,217 --> 00:14:26,933
And he used this following analogy.

286
00:14:26,933 --> 00:14:32,148
He referred actually to strange economists called the French Physiocrats

287
00:14:32,148 --> 00:14:36,475
who believed that the only true value was what you extracted from the land.

288
00:14:36,475 --> 00:14:39,071
So if you're a shepherd or a quarryman or a farmer,

289
00:14:39,071 --> 00:14:40,836
you created true value.

290
00:14:40,836 --> 00:14:43,304
If however, you bought some wool from the shepherd

291
00:14:43,319 --> 00:14:46,458
and charged a premium for converting it into a hat,

292
00:14:46,458 --> 00:14:48,792
you weren't actually creating value,

293
00:14:48,792 --> 00:14:50,759
you were exploiting the shepherd.

294
00:14:50,759 --> 00:14:54,625
Now von Mises's said that modern economists make exactly the same mistake

295
00:14:54,625 --> 00:14:56,777
with regard to advertising and marketing.

296
00:14:56,777 --> 00:14:59,167
He says, "If you run a restaurant,

297
00:14:59,167 --> 00:15:01,375
there is no healthy distinction to be made

298
00:15:01,375 --> 00:15:03,833
between the value you create by cooking the food

299
00:15:03,833 --> 00:15:06,000
and the value you create by sweeping the floor."

300
00:15:06,000 --> 00:15:09,212
One of them creates, perhaps, the primary product --

301
00:15:09,212 --> 00:15:10,681
the thing we think we're paying for --

302
00:15:10,681 --> 00:15:11,920
the other one creates a context

303
00:15:11,920 --> 00:15:15,652
within which we can enjoy and appreciate that product.

304
00:15:15,652 --> 00:15:18,667
And the idea that one of them should actually have priority over the other

305
00:15:18,667 --> 00:15:20,833
is fundamentally wrong.

306
00:15:20,833 --> 00:15:22,093
Try this quick thought experiment.

307
00:15:22,093 --> 00:15:24,670
Imagine a restaurant that serves Michelin-starred food,

308
00:15:24,700 --> 00:15:26,958
but actually where the restaurant smells of sewage

309
00:15:26,958 --> 00:15:31,434
and there's human feces on the floor.

310
00:15:31,434 --> 00:15:33,534
The best thing you can do there to create value

311
00:15:33,565 --> 00:15:36,925
is not actually to improve the food still further,

312
00:15:36,925 --> 00:15:40,042
it's to get rid of the smell and clean up the floor.

313
00:15:40,042 --> 00:15:44,036
And it's vital we understand this.

314
00:15:44,036 --> 00:15:46,321
If that seems like some strange, abstruse thing,

315
00:15:46,321 --> 00:15:50,787
in the U.K., the post office had a 98 percent success rate

316
00:15:50,787 --> 00:15:53,125
at delivering first-class mail the next day.

317
00:15:53,125 --> 00:15:55,492
They decided this wasn't good enough

318
00:15:55,492 --> 00:15:57,454
and they wanted to get it up to 99.

319
00:15:57,454 --> 00:16:01,583
The effort to do that almost broke the organization.

320
00:16:01,583 --> 00:16:04,833
If at the same time you'd gone and asked people,

321
00:16:04,833 --> 00:16:08,125
"What percentage of first-class arrives the next day?"

322
00:16:08,125 --> 00:16:12,476
the average answer, or the modal answer would have been 50 to 60 percent.

323
00:16:12,476 --> 00:16:15,233
Now if your perception is much worse than your reality,

324
00:16:15,233 --> 00:16:18,733
what on earth are you doing trying to change the reality.

325
00:16:18,733 --> 00:16:22,750
That's like trying to improve the food in a restaurant that stinks.

326
00:16:22,750 --> 00:16:25,000
What you need to do

327
00:16:25,000 --> 00:16:26,660
is first of all tell people

328
00:16:26,660 --> 00:16:30,835
that 98 percent of mail gets there the next day, first-class mail.

329
00:16:30,835 --> 00:16:32,542
That's pretty good.

330
00:16:32,542 --> 00:16:35,167
I would argue, in Britain there's a much better frame of reference,

331
00:16:35,167 --> 00:16:36,765
which is to tell people

332
00:16:36,765 --> 00:16:38,790
that more first-class mail arrives the next day

333
00:16:38,790 --> 00:16:40,125
in the U.K. than in Germany.

334
00:16:40,125 --> 00:16:43,375
Because generally in Britain if you want to make us happy about something,

335
00:16:43,375 --> 00:16:45,125
just tell us we do it better than the Germans.

336
00:16:45,125 --> 00:16:47,500
(Laughter)

337
00:16:47,500 --> 00:16:48,375
(Applause)

338
00:16:48,375 --> 00:16:54,250
Choose your frame of reference and the perceived value

339
00:16:54,250 --> 00:16:57,000
and therefore the actual value is completely tranformed.

340
00:16:57,000 --> 00:16:59,229
It has to be said of the Germans

341
00:16:59,229 --> 00:17:01,196
that the Germans and the French are doing a brilliant job

342
00:17:01,196 --> 00:17:03,327
of creating a united Europe.

343
00:17:03,327 --> 00:17:05,765
The only thing they don't expect is their uniting Europe

344
00:17:05,765 --> 00:17:08,445
through a shared mild hatred of the French and Germans.

345
00:17:08,460 --> 00:17:10,750
But I'm British, that's the way we like it.

346
00:17:10,750 --> 00:17:16,833
What you also notice is that in any case our perception is leaky.

347
00:17:16,833 --> 00:17:19,166
We can't tell the difference between the quality of the food

348
00:17:19,166 --> 00:17:22,375
and the environment in which we consume it.

349
00:17:22,375 --> 00:17:23,250
All of you will have seen this phenomenon

350
00:17:23,250 --> 00:17:25,908
if you have your car washed or valeted.

351
00:17:25,908 --> 00:17:29,333
When you drive away, your car feels as if it drives better.

352
00:17:29,333 --> 00:17:32,542
And the reason for this,

353
00:17:32,542 --> 00:17:34,292
unless my car valet mysteriously is changing the oil

354
00:17:34,292 --> 00:17:37,542
and performing work which I'm not paying him for and I'm unaware of,

355
00:17:37,542 --> 00:17:39,958
is because perception is in any case leaky.

356
00:17:39,958 --> 00:17:44,083
Analgesics that are branded are more effective at reducing pain

357
00:17:44,083 --> 00:17:46,250
than analgesics that are not branded.

358
00:17:46,250 --> 00:17:48,558
I don't just mean through reported pain reduction,

359
00:17:48,558 --> 00:17:50,556
actual measured pain reduction.

360
00:17:50,556 --> 00:17:55,067
And so perception actually is leaky in any case.

361
00:17:55,082 --> 00:17:58,621
So if you do something that's perceptually bad in one respect,

362
00:17:58,621 --> 00:18:00,398
you can damage the other.

363
00:18:00,398 --> 00:18:00,898
Thank you very much.

364
00:18:00,898 --> 00:18:02,167
(Applause)