Socio-cognitive theory conceptualizes individual contributors as both enactors of cognitive processes and targets of a social context's determinative influences. The present research investigates how contributors’ metacognition or self-beliefs, combine with others’ views of themselves to inform collective team states related to learning about other agents (i.e., transactive memory systems) and forming social attachments with other agents (i.e., collective team identification), both important teamwork states that have implications for team collective intelligence. We test the predictions in a longitudinal study with 78 teams. Additionally, we provide interview data from industry experts in human–artificial intelligence teams. Our findings contribute to an emerging socio-cognitive architecture for COllective HUman-MAchine INtelligence (i.e., COHUMAIN) by articulating its underpinnings in individual and collective cognition and metacognition. Our resulting model has implications for the critical inputs necessary to design and enable a higher level of integration of human and machine teammates.
Rationality is an elusive and increasingly debated concept in entrepreneurship research. We offer a novel conceptualization of rationality based on reasoning motivations. We posit that logical, probabilistic, and heuristic reasoning logics are motivationally rational because the decision-maker attempts to accurately perceive the external world and problem-solve (even if rapidly and approximately). By contrast, when the reasoning ignores an assessment of reality and accuracy in problem-solving and instead is deluded by psychological (e.g., hedonic) urges that prompt self-serving inferences, we categorize such decisions as motivationally irrational. We develop a theoretical account for how motivational irrationality is adaptive under extreme uncertainty as it enables entrepreneurs to dare action when even heuristic reasoning is inconclusive or entirely ineffective.
Mediation analysis is one of the most widely used statistical techniques in the social, behavioral, and medical sciences. Mediation models allow to study how an independent variable affects a dependent variable indirectly through one or more intervening variables, which are called mediators. The analysis is often carried out via a series of linear regressions, in which case the indirect effects can be computed as products of coefficients from those regressions. Statistical significance of the indirect effects is typically assessed via a bootstrap test based on ordinary least-squares estimates. However, this test is sensitive to outliers or other deviations from normality assumptions, which poses a serious threat to empirical testing of theory about mediation mechanisms. The R package robmed implements a robust procedure for mediation analysis based on the fast-and-robust bootstrap methodology for robust regression estimators, which yields reliable results even when the data deviate from the usual normality assumptions. Various other procedures for mediation analysis are included in package robmed as well. Moreover, robmed introduces a new formula interface that allows to specify mediation models with a single formula, and provides various plots for diagnostics or visual representation of the results.
Mediation analysis is central to theory building and testing in organizational sciences. Scholars often use linear regression analysis based on normal-theory maximum likelihood estimators to test mediation. However, these estimators are very sensitive to deviations from normality assumptions, such as outliers, heavy tails, or skewness of the observed distribution. This sensitivity seriously threatens the empirical testing of theory about mediation mechanisms. To overcome this threat, we develop a robust mediation method that yields reliable results even when the data deviate from normality assumptions. We demonstrate the mechanics of our proposed method in an illustrative case, while simulation studies show that our method is both superior in estimating the effect size and more reliable in assessing its significance than the existing methods. Furthermore, we provide freely available software in R and SPSS to enhance its accessibility and adoption by empirical researchers.
By synthesizing the argumentation theory of new rhetoric with research on heuristics and motivated reasoning, we develop a conceptual view of argumentation based on reasoning motivations that sheds new light on the morality of decision-making. Accordingly, we propose that reasoning in eristic argumentation is motivated by psychological (e.g., anxiety reduction) or material (e.g., vested interests) gains that do not depend on resolving the problem in question truthfully. Contrary to heuristic argumentation, in which disputants genuinely argue to reach a practically rational solution, eristic argumentation aims to defeat the counterparty rather than seeking a reasonable solution. Eristic argumentation is susceptible to arbitrariness and power abuses; therefore, it is inappropriate for making moral judgments with the exception of judgments concerning moral taboos, which are closed to argumentation by their nature. Eristic argumentation is also problematic for strategic and entrepreneurial decision-making because it impedes the search for the right heuristic under uncertainty as an ecologically rational choice. However, our theoretical view emphasizes that under extreme uncertainty, where heuristic solutions are as fallible as any guesses, pretense reasoning by eristic argumentation may be instrumental for its adaptive benefits. Expanding the concept of eristic argumentation based on reasoning motivations opens a new path for studying the psychology of reasoning in connection to morality and decision-making under uncertainty. We discuss the implications of our theoretical view to relevant research streams, including ethical, strategic and entrepreneurial decision-making.
Acquisitions are important means to internalize novel technological capabilities. Yet, choosing targets remains a challenge for many firms. In this paper, we investigate to what extent do acquirers value targets’ technological relatedness (i.e., similarity and complementarity) in acquisition target selection, and when are some firms better than others at recognizing similarities and complementarities in technology acquisitions. We propose that an acquirer top management team’s (TMT’s) understanding of target relatedness depends on the team’s information processing capabilities, driven primarily by demographic faultlines within the TMT. Our analysis of 96 realized acquisitions among 2,322 potential acquisition targets in pharmaceutical as well as information and communications technology industries supports that technological relatedness is a determinant of acquisition target selection. While technological similarity and complementarity both increase the likelihood of selection, only the impact of technological complementarity is affected by TMT faultlines. We discuss implications of our findings for the acquisition literature and the upper echelons theory.
Drawing from visionary leadership and strategy process research, we theorize and test the mechanism through which middle and lower-level managers’ visionary leadership affects their teams’ strategic commitment. The management literature extols the virtues of visionary leadership. In contrast to this positive stance, we reveal a dark side to visionary leadership. Our theoretical framework suggests that team manager visionary leadership harms team strategic consensus when the manager is not strategically aligned with the CEO, which in turn diminishes team commitment to the strategy. In contrast, when a team manager is strategically aligned with the CEO, team manager visionary leadership is positively related to team strategic consensus and subsequently to team strategic commitment. Data from 136 teams from two organizations support our moderated mediation model. A supplemental analysis of the content of strategic consensus and additional qualitative interviews with managers and employees in one of these organizations provide additional insights concerning the meaning of the theorized relations in practice.
Implementing strategy demands an organizationwide effort, where teams should not operate in isolation. A challenge many organizations face in implementing their strategy is eradicating silo thinking and creating shared understanding of strategy between interdependent teams—that is, intergroup strategic consensus. However, strategy process research is silent on how such intergroup strategic consensus can emerge. Drawing on social identity theory, we offer a lens to understand what influences the degree of intergroup strategic consensus. We unveil a tension between organizational and group identification such that organizational identification enhances intergroup strategic consensus, whereas group identification reduces it. Moreover, we hypothesize that high group identification crowds out positive effects of organizational identification on intergroup strategic consensus. Data from 451 intergroup relationships between 92 teams within a service organization support these hypotheses. We replicate our results using 191 intergroup relationships between 37 teams from another organization. These results allow us to develop an understanding of intergroup strategic consensus, expand the conversation in strategy process research to between-team interdependencies, and challenge the assumption in management literature and practice that higher identification is always desirable.
Research Summary: What drives middle managers to search for new strategic initiatives and champion them to top management? This behavior—labeled divergent strategic behavior—spawns emergent strategies and thereby provides one of the essential ingredients of strategic renewal. We conceptualize divergent strategic behavior as a response to performance feedback. Data from 123 senior middle managers overseeing 21 multi‐country organizations (MCOs) of a Fortune 500 firm point to social performance comparisons rather than historical comparisons in driving divergent strategic behavior. Moreover, managers’ organizational identification affects whether they attend to organizational‐ or individual‐level feedback. These results contribute to research on performance aspirations and strategy process by providing a multilevel, multidimensional framework of performance aspirations in middle management driven strategic renewal.
Managerial Summary: Middle managers are essential actors in strategic renewal. Their unique positions offer insights into operations alongside knowledge of strategy. In contrast to typical assessments of managerial performance with reference to a prior year, this research shows that performance comparisons relative to peers and other organizational units better motivate managers’ divergent strategic behavior. Our results also show that managers who identify with the firm are more attentive to organizational rather than individual performance discrepancies. Thus, our study unveils an important approach for organizations aiming to spark strategic renewal.
Research on strategic consensus focuses primarily on the extent of agreement among team members regarding organizational strategy. It does not include elements such as the content of the agreement, between‐group consensus, or the significance of differences in consensus (e.g., for evaluating the effectiveness of strategic interventions). We propose a new analytical approach, Strategic Consensus Mapping, that provides a comprehensive analysis of strategic consensus within and between groups and that includes intuitive and easy‐to‐understand visualizations. This approach offers researchers the necessary tools for integrative theory building in strategic consensus, as well as in the broader managerial and organizational cognition domain. Using a case example, we illustrate the proposed methods for a multidimensional, multilevel, and longitudinal analysis of strategic consensus.
Purchasing can play a multitude of roles in contributing to successful implementation of business sustainability strategies, such as finding sustainable suppliers, identifying supplier sustainability risks, and engaging in sustainable supplier development. However, a precondition for achieving such benefits is the alignment of the purchasing function with corporate goals and other business functions. In this chapter, we investigate purchasing alignment for sustainability by adopting a multi-level framework, and distinguishing between (i) vertical alignment (between the top management team and the purchasing function), (ii) horizontal alignment (between the purchasing function and other functions), and (iii) internal alignment (between the individual members of the purchasing function). We provide an integrative review of the literature and introduce a tool from the strategy literature to assess and visualize purchasing alignment for sustainability at multiple levels. We illustrate the use of this tool via a single case study. The implications for theory and practice are discussed.
Organizations rely on middle managers’ championing novel strategic initiatives to provide a much needed competitive edge. Existing literature on championing focus on structural conditions regarding whether or when managers fulfill the championing role, and neglect managers’ individual motivational drivers for championing. Integrating goal orientations theory and team contextual factors, this paper develops and tests a cross-level model which proposes that individual differences in goal orientations motivates managers to search for or avoid new strategic initiatives, and that individual motivational orientations flourish in different intra- and inter-team contexts. This manuscript adds to the conversation on middle managers' strategic roles by developing and testing a cross-level theory that explains the psychological and contextual underpinnings of middle managers' championing behavior. It makes a two-fold contribution. First, it responds to the calls for research on broadening the the investigation of the psychological foundations of middle management behavior by demonstrating that dispositional differences in goal orientations motivate individual managers to search for and identify new strategic alternatives. Second, existing research has been criticized for its tendency to isolate managerial activity and overemphasize individuals at the expense of group and organizational processes. Through its focus on cross-level effects of team contextual factors, this study responds to the calls for examining individual managerial roles within the context of group and organizational level activity.
Amaç – Bir strateji ne kadar iyi tasarlanmış olursa olsun, etkin bir şekilde uygulanmazsa kurumun performansına olumlu bir katkıda bulunmaz. Orta düzey yöneticilerin kurumsal stratejilerin uygulanmasında aldıkları rol, stratejilerin başarılı bir şekilde hayata geçirilmesi açısından hayati öneme sahiptir. Bu araştırmada, orta düzey yöneticilerin strateji uygulama rolünün bilişsel, sosyal ve duygusal öncülleri incelenmektedir.
Yöntem – Küresel alanda faaliyet gösteren uluslararası bir firmanın orta düzey yöneticilerinden bir anket çalışması ile veri toplanmıştır. Firmanın 232 orta düzey yöneticisinin 168’iniden elde edilen veriler, çalışmada geliştirilen teorik modelin ampirik olarak sınanmasında kullanılmıştır. Hipotezler, R-4.0.2 programında hiyerarşik regresyon analizi yöntemi ile test edilmiştir. Değişkenler arasındaki üçlü etkileşim basit eğimler sınaması ile görselleştirilmiştir.
Bulgular – Çalışma kapsamında incelenen bilişsel, sosyal ve duygusal etmenler sırasıyla yöneticinin üst yönetim takımıyla stratejik hizalanması (uyumu), sosyal ağındaki stratejik konsensüs ve kurumsal aidiyetidir. Araştırmanın bulguları tüm bu etmenlerin teker teker etkileri ötesinde, birbirleriyle olan üçlü etkileşimlerinin orta düzey yöneticilerin strateji uygulama rolünü açıkladığı göstermektedir.
Tartışma – Çalışma, stratejilerin başarılı bir biçimde uygulanabilmesi için bilişsel, duygusal ve sosyal etmenlerin bir arada düşünülmesi gerektiğini ortaya koyarak davranışsal strateji literatürüne katkıda bulunmaktadır.
Strateji uygulama yetkinliği —bir organizasyonun eylemlerinin stratejik niyetleri ile örtüşme derecesi— organizasyonun stratejik hedeflerine ulaşması için çok önemlidir. Ancak, organizasyonların strateji uygulama yetkinliklerini nasıl geliştirebilecekleri hakkında yeterince çalışma bulunmamaktadır. Bu araştırma, strateji uygulama yetkinliğinin öncülleri ile ilgili bir teorik çerçeve geliştirmeyi ve bu çerçevenin uygulamasının bir ampirik vaka çalışması ile göstermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Strateji uygulama yetkinliği kavramı geleneksel strateji süreci yaklaşımıyla kıyaslanarak tanımlanmış ve üç öncülü stratejik katılım, uyum ve bağlılık olarak belirlenmiştir. Strateji uygulama yetkinliğinin öncülleri ile ilgili geliştirilen bu teorik çerçeve lastik sektöründe faaliyet gösteren uluslararası bir firma olan Brisa Bridgestone Sabancı Lastik ve Ticaret A.Ş’nin strateji süreci ile ilgili bir vaka analizinde tatbik edilmiştir. Vaka analizi bulguları, stratejilerin tüm kademelerden yeni önerilerin ortaya çıkmasına imkân verecek şekilde yüksek katılım ile belirlenmesinin ve süreç katılımcılarının stratejilerin arkasında yatan niyetler hakkında ortak anlayışa ve stratejilere bağlılığa sahip olmalarının kurumun üstün strateji uygulama yetkinliğine işaret ettiğini göstermektedir.
Purpose – Strategic alliances are essential vehicles for knowledge acquisition from alliance partners especially in the technology related sectors. This research examines the interplay between top management team (TMT) functional background diversity and CEO duality on learning from alliance partners.
Design/methodology/approach – Data for 1012 strategic alliances from Information and Communications sectors (computer equipment, electronics and telecommunications) in US are collected from multiple databases: Firm data is retrieved from Compustat database, strategic alliance date is retrieved from SDC Platinum database, patent data is retrieved from NBER database and finally the TMT information is coded from U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) database. We tested our hypotheses using the negative binomial regression model since our dependent variable is discrete and non-negative (patent citation counts).
Findings – CEO duality moderates the relationship between TMT functional background and learning from alliance partner such that the effect of TMT functional background on learning from alliance partner is positive when CEO does not have dual roles and negative when he or she does.
Discussion – This study contributes to the strategic alliance and inter-organizational learning literature by demonstrating the roles of influential actors in the strategy process (i.e., the CEO and TMT). The study findings also extend the scope of upper echelons literatures by establishing the relevance of upper echelons theory for a novel dependent variable (i.e., learning from alliance partners).
KOBİ’lerin performansı operasyon stratejileri ile yakından ilgilidir. Önceki çalışmalar, CEO özelliklerinin firma stratejileri ve performansı üzerindeki etkilerinin büyük işletmelere kıyasla KOBİ’lerde daha fazla olduğunu göstermişlerdir. Düzenleme odağı teorisine göre, CEO kaçınma ve yönelim odağı yöneticilerin temel güdülenme eğilimlerini açıkladığı için önemli bir CEO özelliğidir. Bu araştırma, operasyon stratejisi, düzenleme odağı ve firma performansı arasındaki ilişkiyi incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Araştırmanın örneklemi olarak Hollanda bahçecilik endüstrisine odaklanılmış ve veriler 627 CEO’dan anket yolu ile toplanmıştır. Kümeleme analizi kullanılarak, rekabetçi önceliklere dayalı bir operasyon stratejisi taksonomisi geliştirilmiş ve dört farklı operasyon stratejisi bulunmuştur: “Gelenekçiler”, “Mükemmeliyetçiler”, “Niş Oyuncular” ve “Odaksızlar”. Bulgular göstermektedir ki “Mükemmeliyetçiler” ve “Niş Oyuncular” stratejileri ağırlıklı olarak yönelimci baskın odağa sahip CEO’lar tarafından, “Gelenekçiler” stratejisi ise ağırlıklı olarak kaçınmacı baskın odağa sahip CEO’lar tarafından tercih edilmektedir. “Odaksızlar” stratejisini uygulayan CEO’ların ise baskın bir düzenleme odağı sergilemediği gözlemlenmiştir. Ayrıca, sonuçlar eşsonluluk görüşünü destekleyerek “Odaksızlar” stratejisi dışındaki diğer tüm operasyon stratejilerinin benzer performans ile uygulanabileceğini göstermiştir.
Stratejik kararlar çoğunlukla yüksek belirsizlik içeren koşullarda, kurum içinde farklı birimleri temsil eden, dolayısıyla farklı bireysel çıkarları olan ve farklı stratejik gündemlere sahip koalisyonlar tarafından alınır. Bu koşullarda, pratik akıl yürütme içeren sezgisel yöntemlerin etkin olarak kullanılması kaliteli stratejik kararların oluşturulması için gereklidir. Bu araştırma, stratejik karar vermede sezgisel yöntemlerin etkin kullanılmasına tehdit oluşturan eristik gerekçelendirme kavramını sunan teorik bir çalışmadır. Eristik gerekçelendirme, muhakeme süreçlerini istismar ederek, karşı tarafı ne pahasına olursa olsun alt etmeyi amaçlar. Bu çalışma eristik gerekçelendirmenin temelini, işaretçilerini ve kurumlar açısından sonuçlarını tartışarak strateji literatürünün mikro temellerine katkıda bulunmaktadır.