Search results

This paper reports the results of an experimental study examining the joint effect of two group characteristics, responsibility and cohesiveness, on escalation of commitment in an ongoing unsuccessful project. Two levels (high/low) of group responsibility and group cohesiveness were manipulated to examine their effects on group escalation decisions. Forty-eight 3-member decision groups were formed and randomly assigned to four treatment cells with 12 groups in each cell. The results of a 2×2 ANOVA reveal a significant main effect of responsibility on escalation of commitment, as well as a significant interaction of responsibility and cohesiveness. Specifically, groups with both high responsibility and high cohesiveness committed the largest amount of resources to an ongoing unsuccessful project. These results provide support for the proposition that group responsibility and cohesiveness exert significant joint effects on group escalation of commitment in an ongoing unsuccessful project. The findings suggest that periodic changes of group membership to shift responsibility and cohesiveness may generate new attitudes and views to reduce group escalation of commitment.

This study aims to explore the challenges that the escalation of commitment poses to information security.

Two distinct scenarios of escalation behavior are presented based on literature review. Psychological, organizational and economic theories on escalation of commitment are reviewed and applied to the area of information security.

Escalation of commitment involves continuation of a course of action after receiving negative information about it. In the information security compliance context, escalation affects a firm when an employee decides to break the firm’s information security policy to complete a failing task. In the information security investment context, escalation occurs if a manager continues investment in policies and solutions that are ineffective because of psychological, organizational or economic factors. Both of these types of escalation may be prevented with de-escalation techniques including a change in management or rotation of duties, monitoring, auditing and governance mechanisms.

Implications of escalation of commitment behavior for information security decision-makers and for future research are discussed.

This study complements the literature by establishing the context of escalation of commitment in decisions related to information security and reviewing managerial and economic theories on escalation of commitment.

Escalation of commitment is one of the most influential decision-making biases in entrepreneurs which may incur substantial losses and result in failure by making entrepreneurs allocate an increasing amount of resources to failing plans. Not only is escalation one of the less-researched biases in entrepreneurship but also most of the existing studies have been either limited to specific contexts or exclusively limited to men entrepreneurs. The purpose of this study is to explore the antecedents of escalation of commitment among a sample of Iranian women and men entrepreneurs to address these gaps.

By conducting a narrative inquiry, data were collected through semi-structured and in-depth interviews with nine women and 10 men Iranian entrepreneurs who were founder/owners of a small business and had introduced at least one product to the market.

According to the findings of this study, the fear of losing autonomy and fear of being blamed by one’s family were the main drivers of escalation of commitment among the women entrepreneurs, while overconfidence, sense of responsibility and hoping to gain more profits were the main antecedents of escalation among men entrepreneurs.

This study is a pioneer in studying the antecedents of the escalation of commitment among women and men entrepreneurs comparatively in the context of a developing country.

Escalation of commitment is one of the most important decision-making biases among entrepreneurs and may deprive them of valuable resources and even result in their eventual failure. Many entrepreneurs become escalated to their ongoing plans by allocating more resources, even after receiving negative feedbacks regarding those plans. Although the escalating behavior is an inherent part of the entrepreneurial cognition, previous studies have mostly ignored its antecedents among entrepreneurs. This dearth of studies is more severe regarding women entrepreneurs, whose biases have rarely been investigated. Therefore, this paper aims to explore the antecedents of the escalation of commitment among women entrepreneurs.

To explore the antecedents of the escalation of commitment in women entrepreneurs’ decisions based on their lived experiences, this paper used a narrative inquiry. The data were collected by conducting in-depth interviews with three Iranian women entrepreneurs running small businesses and analyzed by narrative data analysis.

According to the findings, bitter memories of previous failures, overconfidence and familial pressure are the main antecedents of the escalation of commitment in women entrepreneurs.

This study has a very important managerial implication for women entrepreneurs, who should know that while decision-making biases may occur unintentionally, they are able to reduce the harmful effects and enhance the benefits of biases by knowing their most common signs.

This study is a pioneer in exploring women entrepreneurs’ biases and took a novel approach by conducting a narrative analysis of women entrepreneurs’ escalation of commitment.

This purpose of this study is to further the study of escalation of commitment by considering the supportive role of accountants in providing reports that favour continuation of unprofitable projects and whether this role is influenced by culture. Research on the escalation of commitment suggests that the decision to commit resources to a failing project is due to several factors that include sunk costs, personal responsibility and culture.

This study employs a between-subjects design to examine accountants’ willingness to provide a report that facilitates continuation of an unprofitable project. The manipulated independent variables are sunk cost (present or absent), the level of reporting responsibility (high or low) and culture (Pacific Islands or Australia).

Our results show that the presence of sunk cost is a motivation for accountants to provide reports that favour continuation of an unprofitable project. The results on cultural difference are also consistent with the contention that culture is influential in decision-making with respect to providing reports that favour continuation of an unprofitable project. We do not, however, find evidence consistent with a personal responsibility affect using the manipulation defined in this study.

Consistent with this type of research, the results must be interpreted with respect to the specific design choices used in the experiment.

Continued research is needed to examine the impact of sunk costs and specific attributes of culture, such as the willingness to follow superiors, on the escalation of commitment to unprofitable projects. The mitigation of such effects through education of accountants to provide reports that do not favour continuation of unprofitable projects would, for example, be of interest to aid agencies and others investing in projects in developing economies in particular.

While previous research generally examines the decision-making role of managers in escalation of commitment to unprofitable projects, this study examines the supportive role that accountants play in facilitating managers’ escalation decisions. This issue is studied within a context examining the potential cultural impact of respect for authority.

Business managers are constantly faced with the decision to continue or abandon new product development projects. However, this type of decision may not be easy. These decisions are usually prone to bias of managers. Managers are known to escalate their commitment toward failed projects. It is also not easy to identify projects that are suffering from escalation of commitment. The purpose of this paper is to propose an objective escalation identification method.

This paper proposes an objective escalation identification method using data envelopment analysis (DEA). The results from DEA are compared with those of subjective methods of identifying escalation.

The objective estimate of escalation given by DEA was comparable to the subjective estimate of escalation given by the managers in the survey.

DEA is sensitive to outliers and managers should be careful in selecting projects that are to be included for comparison. DEA does not give statistical fit indices as it is an operational research based technique.

DEA is an objective and automatic tool that makes the decision of managers easier. Managers can use this tool by inputting the output and input variables of their projects and then see which ones are escalated, therefore need to be abandoned. As a consequence, escalation of commitment and big losses can be prevented especially in new product development area.

By using the proposed objective approach, escalation of commitment and associated big losses can be prevented especially in new product development area.

Research in escalating commitment has shown that escalation situations are primarily a function of psychological traits such as self‐justification and risk propensity. However, the extent to which these factors affect decision making is dependent upon a number of variables which include the situation, the level of commitment, and the cultural norms involved No studies to date examine the relationship between escalating commitment and cultural values. The purpose of this paper is to extend the work on escalating commitment by examining it from an international perspective. Research propositions explore cultural values and their impact on the escalation of commitment process.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate commitment escalation tendencies and magnitude in groups of entrepreneurship-minded decision makers.

The paper uses a software-based management simulation to expose 447 graduate business students in the USA and India to research stimuli under conditions that resemble important aspects of entrepreneurs’ business environment, such as a focus on overall firm performance. Unlike most previous escalation research that studied individuals, the primary unit of analysis is a three-person group.

The paper demonstrates a positive relationship between the groups’ entrepreneurial intentions and escalation magnitude. The paper also finds a direct relationship between sunk costs and subsequent investment amounts, suggesting an additional route through which sunk costs may impact escalation behavior – anchoring and insufficient adjustment.

The authors hope that the findings will stimulate further research on commitment escalation modalities and mechanisms among entrepreneurship-minded decision makers and provide impetus for efforts to develop effective debiasing strategies.

The study addresses a long-standing gap in entrepreneurship research, by demonstrating a significant positive relationship between entrepreneurial intentions and escalation behaviors. Also noteworthy, the results are generated using a different research method (simulation) than the experimental approach used in most extant escalation research. As such, the exploration provides important triangulating evidence that is currently lacking from the rich escalation literature.

This chapter addresses the criticisms that escalation of commitment research has focused only on individual (as opposed to team or group) decision-making. It has been suggested that research findings of individual-based decision on managers’ escalation behaviors may not be applicable in today’s business environment which is increasingly dominated by team or group-based decision. Specifically, this chapter examines the effects of information availability (public vs. private information) and type of responsibility (sole and joint responsibility) on managers’ project evaluation decisions. A laboratory experiment was conducted to test the hypotheses developed for this study. The results indicate that, consistent with prior research, project managers exhibited a greater tendency to continue a failing project under private information than public information conditions. In addition, in the private information condition, project managers with joint responsibility for an investment project expressed a greater tendency to continue a failing project than those with sole responsibility. Implications of our results for the design of management control systems are discussed.

A manager who is responsible for making the initial decision to invest in a project will typically have a tendency to “over‐commit” additional resources to the project (Staw, 1976, 1981; Staw and Fox, 1977; Staw and Ross, 1978, 1980). This increased total investment can occur even when the project shows poor economic performance. The terms “escalation of commitment” or “escalation effects” are used to describe such investment tendencies.