Veil Of Ignorance

The Veil of Ignorance is employed in social contract theory to promote impartiality in ethical and political discussions. It suggests that to ensure fairness in society, one must assume the other does not know their characteristics, such as social status, gender, wealth, or abilities when making decisions. In finance and accounting, this applies to making financial decisions without bias, i.e., a decision-maker should not have an inclination towards a specific outcome.

Philosopher John Rawls introduced the concept as part of his Theory of Justice—a political philosophy and ethics ideology. This approach aims to ensure fairness by encouraging people to make choices that benefit everyone, keeping aside their motives or interests. Although not a financial concept, it facilitates honest decision-making in finance, accounting, business, and corporate governance.

• The veil of ignorance or original position refers to a social contract approach whereby individuals responsible for decision-making should ignore or assume not to know their personal status, wealth, abilities, and other attributes and think from the perspective of society as a whole.
• This phrase was coined by John Rawls in 1971 in his book Theory of Justice.
• Although this concept is not found in finance, it can serve as a valuable ethical framework for making financial decisions that prioritize fairness, reduce potential biases, and achieve more equitable outcomes by considering the well-being of society in general.

Veil of Ignorance is a concept initially used by philosopher John Rawls in his 1971 book Theory of Justice. Under this philosophical idea, individuals in the original position are asked to imagine designing the rules and structure of a just society without recognizing or being aware of their true circumstances, such as their gender, race, or social status. Rawls used this thought experiment to advocate for a more equitable and impartial approach to societal organization, suggesting people would make fairer decisions without bias from behind a curtain of self-ignorance.

The two critical aspects of this concept are discussed below:

1. Ensuring Equitability: When individuals make decisions without knowledge of their characteristics, they are more inclined to define principles of justice that are unbiased and equitable. The motivation is to build a society that is fair for all.
2. Preventing Self-interest: The veil of ignorance discourages individuals from favoring their interests or those of specific social groups they like. It encourages them to adopt a neutral perspective, concentrating on what would be reasonable and fair for everyone, irrespective of their circumstances.

While it does not have a direct application in finance, the veil of ignorance theory can be implemented in corporate governance and business to promote fair and ethical financial decision-making. It prompts individuals to make financial choices, forgetting their future financial situation or social position. It emphasizes that these decisions should benefit a broader spectrum rather than favoring specific individuals or groups.

For instance, when formulating financial policies like taxation or wealth distribution, decision-makers should employ this concept by imagining they are unaware of whether they will be wealthy or impoverished in the future. This perspective can lead to more equitable and just financial systems.

The original position and veil of ignorance are synonyms since the individual in the decision-making position should always reason, considering all the possible consequences of a decision that members of society will need to bear.

Let us look at some instances where this concept can help decision-makers adopt an impartial approach.

#1 - Designing a Mutual Fund

Suppose Karen, a fund manager, follows John Rawls' veil of ignorance concept while devising investment strategies and equity-debt distribution for the mutual funds she manages for her clients (investors). She assumes she has no idea about her financial objectives, like commission percentage from each equity, fund management charges, etc. Hence, she designs a progressive, profitable, diversified fund for investors that accommodates various plausible circumstances.

In this way, she ensures no bias creeps in and clouds her judgment, precisely in line with Rawls’ philosophical approach.

#2 - Equitable Corporate Decisions

Adam is a human resources manager at XYZ Ltd. He has two employees on his team, Brian and Laura. Adam and Brian are not only colleagues but also friends. During annual appraisals, Adam assumes he does not know Brian is his friend. He thinks of Brian as just another colleague, bringing Brian and Laura on the same platform.

This ensures that Adam’s salary increment decisions for his teammates are based on fairness rather than favoritism. Thus, managers can use this principle when administering the compensation and benefits policy or any other action that demands equality and fairness.

#3 - Fixing Executive Options

Applying Rawls’ philosophy to executive compensation designing offers an innovative strategy to mitigate potential distortions in executive behavior stemming from their knowledge of compensation details. This idea draws inspiration from philosopher John Rawls' veil of ignorance theory.

It suggests executives should not know the specifics of their compensation contracts, including strike prices and vesting periods for options, until later. While they may still be informed about the overall value of compensation packages, details must not be disclosed. This approach aims to ensure executives receive substantial incentives while discouraging opportunistic actions related to compensation.

However, implementing this strategy brings challenges related to accounting. It also highlights confidentiality issues, as compensation committees must effectively withhold contract details from the relevant parties. Despite these challenges, it presents a unique perspective on addressing executive compensation problems and promoting the long-term interests of shareholders.

The veil of ignorance is a concept from political philosophy. Let us discuss the potential advantages and disadvantages of applying this concept in the finance and economics fields.

Pros

• Fairness: The veil of ignorance encourages decision-makers to make ethical choices because they do not know their position or interests in society. Thus, it ensures equitable resource allocation and just or fair policy decisions.
• Minimizes Impartiality: It can help reduce bias in economic and financial decision-making by overlooking individual interests and motives and prioritizing benefits for society in its entirety.
• Long-term Perspective: Due to this theory, decision-makers become more responsible and inclined to assess the long-term outcomes of their choices rather than focusing solely on short-term personal gains.

Cons

• Impracticality: Applying the veil of ignorance in finance and economics can be challenging. It is not easy to make decisions without being aware of the specific circumstances and interests of the stakeholders involved in a given endeavor.
• Ethical Concerns: Some may argue that removing individual identities entirely from decision-making processes is ethically problematic, as it could undermine personal responsibility and accountability.
• Lack of Incentives: Decision-makers need to get personal incentives to drive economic growth and innovation. Hence, this concept could potentially suppress motivation and entrepreneurship.
• Risk Aversion: In an attempt to be fair, decisions made under the veil of ignorance might overly prioritize risk aversion, which could hinder economic development and investment.

This article has been a guide to what is Veil Of Ignorance. Here, we explain the concept in detail with examples, and pros and cons. You may also find some useful articles here -

• Social Exclusion
• Social Justice
• Social Good