Is there an optimal selection strategy for a white elephant gift exchange?

December 17, 2006 12:29 PM

Mathematically speaking, is there an optimal strategy towards gift selection while opening gifts during a white elephant gift exchange?

Could I have done better than a creme brulee set?

Here's what happened at the office white elephant.

Instructions were that the gifts were to be "new or gently used", which at least had me thinking that some people would buy new gifts. I knew that I bought a new gift. I watched two people wrap theirs, so I knew that at least two people were bringing complete crap.

The "can only be stolen twice" rule was in effect. When it was my turn to pick (13 out of 23), there was nothing I wanted that had only been stolen once (that is, if I stole it, it was still possible that someone might steal it from me, and end up taking it home). The only thing available that I wanted was a bottle of whiskey. I didn't take it because I thought it was valuable, and that if I stole it, it would immediately be stolen from me. I took a creme brulee set instead, hypothesizing that by taking what I percieved to be a desirable gift, someone else would soon pounce on it, knowing that they could steal it and they would go home with it. I was just buying time, hoping that by the time my creme brulee set got stolen, that I would be the third person to have the whiskey.

Well, I walked home with the creme brulee set. Was there a better move I could have made in that situation? Has anyone ever done a mathematical paper outlining what the optimal strategy is for minimizing white elephant gift unhappiness?

posted by 23skidoo to human relations (14 comments total)

Your strategy, in theory, is sound. I don't think you made any mistake other than thinking that someone would steal a creme brulee set.
posted by Robot Johnny at 12:32 PM on December 17, 2006

Did your theory about the whiskey being stolen turn out to be correct?
posted by winston at 12:38 PM on December 17, 2006

good question (and I'd love to see the responses). We play with different rules though. A gift can be stolen thrice & person #1 can choose any gift at the end (setting off a chain of exchanges except for the ones that have already been stolen 3 times).
I'm surprised that you didn't have better luck (under your rules). Its good to be in the middle so all the good ones have already been opened (I mean, don't people pick the shiny big ones first?), and really good ones have probably stolen at least once, giving you the opportunity for the final steal.
posted by special-k at 12:39 PM on December 17, 2006

The problem with applying math to this is that you cant assign a fixed value to each item. For some people (you), the whiskey was of highest value. Others may agree or may value something else differently. On top of that, other people may be playing smartly or stupidly and that has to be taken into account too...so the problem quickly becomes complex.

In short, this is the kind of situation human instinct is best at. Like robot johnny I think you made a wise move - its just that in this case it didnt pan out. You overestimated how desirable the creme brulee set was or how valuable the whiskey was (i.e. it wouldnt have been taken from you) or both.

The best strategy involves probably not mathematics but things such as looking around the room and trying to notice what gifts people seem to be eye-ing.
posted by vacapinta at 12:41 PM on December 17, 2006

Clearly, the mathematically optimal strategy is to have contributed the crappiest possible gift to the pool. Whether or not this is socially optimal is left as an exercise for the reader.
posted by flabdablet at 12:52 PM on December 17, 2006 [1 favorite has favorites]

As others have pointed out, your strategy was pretty good. The only mistake was that you overestimated the potential value of the set to others. What you could have done to improve your chances is to try to get people to say what presents they want. Pay attention to every what things people express interest in. Also look at their non-verbal cues so you can see when someone is interested in something, despite trying to hide it, and to tell if people are lying about what they like to better their chances. That way you can hopefully figure out a gift that someone is almost sure to steal, by their own admission.
posted by gauchodaspampas at 12:59 PM on December 17, 2006

I think this is a great question while at the same time it renews my loathing for white elephant exchanges. I guess I don't bother with a strategy considering 1) I usually end up with crap because by far the pool of presents are overwhelmingly crap and 2) there's usually a $20+ limit and I can go buy something I actually want for myself.
posted by Kimberly at 1:27 PM on December 17, 2006

Also, take each thing that gauchodaspampas says to watch for in others and send out misleading signals yourself.
posted by winston at 2:22 PM on December 17, 2006

The problem with applying math to this is that you cant assign a fixed value to each item.

True, but it really reminded me of a fair division problem but with added twists.

Did your theory about the whiskey being stolen turn out to be correct?

The whiskey was thirded like one or two turns after it was seconded.
posted by 23skidoo at 2:36 PM on December 17, 2006

Really, White Elephant exchanges are only satisfying if everyone brings goofy crap or if the gifts are otherwise themed. I'm saddled with a poorly-wrought exchange with family for Christmas and am dreading it.

Your strategy could have worked if you had talked up the set. For instance: highlight all the other things you can do with the torch. As it was, however, you relied on there being a creme brule–lover who was sans set. Putting aside true desirability (e.g. the whiskey), perhaps the generally most desirable gifts would be the ones that are smallest or easier to get rid of?
posted by wemayfreeze at 3:34 PM on December 17, 2006

The optimal strategy in that situation would appear to choose the most desirable thing that you yourself didn't want. It sounds like that's what you did. The mistake you made was in thinking that anyone would ever want a creme brulee set.
posted by reklaw at 4:24 PM on December 17, 2006

I've been in such a thing two years in a row and my strategy has been to buy a joke gift and to try to get one particular friend to take it. It worked perfectly last year and it was very funny. This year I thought I'd try a double bluff and after a lot of searching I managed to buy the exact same joke gift and wrap it so that it looked identical to last year's, guessing that this particular friend would presume that there would be no way that I would prank him two years in a row. He did think this, he took that gift and of course it was even funnier this time around. Needless to say, I can't do this next year, but my point is that in these things it might be better to not worry about what you're getting but to put all your energy into what you're giving as can be much more fun that way. The main caveat being that you need to know someone very well for this to work.
posted by ob at 7:33 AM on December 18, 2006

Identify the people whose tastes are most similar to yours, and bring something you know one of them will lust after. They're not likely to open it first, but they'll steal it and set off a train of swaps that you might be able to benefit from. And once they're satisfied, you have less competition for the other items you might like.
posted by Myself at 7:50 AM on December 18, 2006

Myself has a good point. Heck, at my white elephant on Friday, there was only me and one other guy who liked silly office toys- everyone else gave candles and foodstuffs and jars. We ended up with each other's gifts in the end, and we were happy.

But really, you should have gone for the booze and taken your shot instead of trying to figure out the math and guess what's going to be popular, because you can be surprised. One person's trash is another's treasure, etc. This game is to some degree a crapshoot, though. Some people have to go home unhappy, this time it was you. Sorry you didn't do well.
posted by jenfullmoon at 3:44 PM on December 18, 2006