Search results

Disinformation on social media is a serious issue. This study examines the effects of disinformation on COVID-19 vaccination decision-making to understand how social media users make healthcare decisions when disinformation is presented in their social media feeds. It examines trust in post owners as a moderator on the relationship between information types (i.e. disinformation and factual information) and vaccination decision-making.

This study conducts a scenario-based web survey experiment to collect extensive survey data from social media users.

This study reveals that information types differently affect social media users' COVID-19 vaccination decision-making and finds a moderating effect of trust in post owners on the relationship between information types and vaccination decision-making. For those who have a high degree of trust in post owners, the effect of information types on vaccination decision-making becomes large. In contrast, information types do not affect the decision-making of those who have a very low degree of trust in post owners. Besides, identification and compliance are found to affect trust in post owners.

This study contributes to the literature on online disinformation and individual healthcare decision-making by demonstrating the effect of disinformation on vaccination decision-making and providing empirical evidence on how trust in post owners impacts the effects of information types on vaccination decision-making. This study focuses on trust in post owners, unlike prior studies that focus on trust in information or social media platforms.

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

This study intends to investigate how an employee's proactive personality and a supervisor's idiosyncratic deals (i-deals) relate to their subordinates' affective commitment (AC) and occupational well-being (OWB), in light of the mediating role of subordinates' i-deals, using proactive motivation theory and the job demand–resource (JD-R) model as theoretical foundations.

The study consisted of 342 employees working in the hospitality industry. To examine the proposed model, the researchers used the structural equation modelling approach and bootstrapping method in AMOS.

The results affirmed the influence of subordinates' proactiveness on AC and OWB, but no direct influence of supervisors' prior i-deals on subordinates' AC and OWB was established. When investigating the mediational role of subordinates' i-deals, a partial mediation effect was found between subordinates' proactive personality with AC and OWB, whereas full mediation was established between supervisors' i-deals and subordinates' AC and OWB.

These findings shed light on how i-deals improve AC and OWB for both groups of supervisors and subordinates. In an era of increasing competition amongst organizations operating within the hospitality industry, i-deals serve as a human resource strategy to recruit, develop and retain talented individuals.

The novelty of this research lies in its specific investigation of the combined influence of proactive personality as an individual factor and supervisors' i-deals as an organizational factor on subordinates' i-deals within the context of the hospitality industry. Furthermore, it aims to analyse the potential impact of these factors on AC and OWB.