Search results

Strategic decision making influences organizational performance. However, close examination of this relationship reveals a subtle paradox. It appears that the products of strategic decision making, all of which are necessary for enhanced organizational performance, do not peacefully coexist. Conflict seems to be the crux of this conundrum. As such, a better understanding of conflict's effects on strategic decision making is needed This paper integrates a multidimensional conceptualization of conflict Into a model of strategic decision making and organizational performance and develops propositions to guide empirical study of the effects of conflict on strategic decision making.

Past research on strategic decision making has emphasized the influence of cognitive conflict and affective conflict on the decision outcomes. Early researchers demonstrated that affective conflict has negative outcomes whereas cognitive conflict has positive outcomes. While the negative outcomes of affective conflict remain non‐controversial, the positive outcomes of cognitive conflict are not always consistent. The research on the outcomes of cognitive conflict is perplexedly mixed. Taking an information processing perspective, the present study aims to examine the relationship between cognitive conflict on decision outcomes, while controlling for affective conflict.

The authors surveyed 109 hospitals in the USA and collected data from top management teams (CEOs and senior executives). After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data were analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to examine the curvilinear relationships between cognitive conflict among the teams and its influence on decision quality and decision understanding.

Analysis of team data supports the hypotheses that there exists curvilinear (inverted‐U shaped) relationship between cognitive conflict and decision quality, and between cognitive conflict and decision commitment.

Since the data were collected from self‐report measures, limitations of social desirability bias may be inherent.

Evidence for a curvilinear relationship between cognitive conflict and decision outcomes extends to the existing strategic management literature. Further, the findings from this study are particularly useful for practicing managers. This study suggests that CEO and team members need not overemphasize cognitive conflict beyond a limit because it may have deleterious consequences. The findings reveal that a moderate level of cognitive conflict, instead of too much conflict, is always desirable.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on the healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

This paper aims to reveal the effects of birth order in decision-making style, conflict handling style and propensity for participative decision-making. The intention is to open the perspective of birth order research in organizational studies, as an important individual difference of managers.

A survey was conducted with 230 managers from different industries in Kosovo. Self-report measures were used for decision-making style, conflict handling style and participatory decision-making constructs.

Results indicate that only children are more avoidant and spontaneous decision-makers. Firstborns are rational in decision-making and prefer problem-solving in conflict handling. Middleborns are intuitive decision-makers and use compromising in conflict handling. Lastborns make decisions rationally and use both compromising and problem-solving in conflicting situations. In addition, lastborns appeared to have a more positive attitude toward participative decision-making, followed by middleborns, firstborns and only children.

Birth order affects managers’ behaviors in decision-making and conflict situations. Relationship dynamics in sibships are reflected in organizational settings, affecting how people behave in decision-making and conflict handling.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to attest how birth order influences the ways managers make decisions, handle conflicts and involve others in decision-making. As birth order cannot be changed, such knowledge is critical.

There are two goals of this study. First, it seeks to offer a cultural perspective with regard to the aspects of conflict in strategic decision making in Egypt. Second, it aims to examine the impact of conflict on decision effectiveness, taking into account the moderating effect of environmental uncertainty and environmental munificence.

The study is a multi method one in which both semi‐structured interviews and survey questionnaires were utilized. In total, 36 semi‐structured interviews were conducted and 135 usable questionnaires were collected from manufacturing firms. Various statistical techniques were used to validate the instrument and analyze the data.

This article offers new insights into the perception of conflict in Egypt. It also corroborates prior research in that conflict was found to significantly influence decision outcomes and strategic decision‐making process matters.

Both task and affective conflicts are treated in the context of their cultural and economic underpinnings and thus enable managers and researchers to have realistic views on the nature and impact of conflict in strategic decision making.

This article is designed to address a management concept which may be perceived differently across cultures – conflict. It also contributes to fill a gap in the strategic management literature by examining the perception of conflict and its impact on decision effectiveness considering the effects of setting and environment.

The purpose of this paper is to develop a conceptual model that uses dialectical inquiry (DI) to create cognitive conflict in strategic decision‐makers for the purpose of improving strategic decisions. Activation of the dialectical learning process using DI requires strategic decision‐makers to integrate conflicting information causing cognitive conflict. Cognitive conflict is the catalyst that stimulates the creation of new knowledge in strategic decision‐makers resulting in improved organizational performance.

A conceptual model is developed that explicitly links DI to the dialectical learning process of strategic decision‐makers. This model extends previous research on DI by identifying cognitive conflict as the critical component that links DI as a learning method to the process of dialectical learning in strategic decision‐making.

The major finding of the model of dialectical learning is that the model is an important resource that can be applied to create cognitive conflict in strategic decision‐makers for the purpose of expanding the strategic options of organizations.

Empirical research on DI that focuses on the role of cognitive conflict in the dialectical learning process is lacking. It is hoped that this conceptual paper will stimulate further interest on the topic and a greater appreciation of this method of learning. Strategic decision‐makers must consider alternative ways of generating new knowledge that is crucial for organizational performance.

It is important that the benefits of creating cognitive conflict in the dialectical learning process are understood by strategic decision‐makers. Training for participants in a DI learning intervention is essential to help minimize any dysfunctional behaviors that could result from affective conflict.

This conceptual model identifies the importance of cognitive conflict in the dialectical learning process of strategic decision‐makers and the critical role of cognitive conflict rather than affective conflict in the use of this learning method.

This paper aims to investigate the effect of cooperative conflict management on agreement-seeking behavior, agreement-seeking behavior on decision outcomes, moderating role of competence-based trust on the relationship between agreement-seeking behavior and decision outcomes, and mediating role of agreement-seeking behavior between cooperative conflict management and decision outcomes.

Using a structured survey instrument, this paper gathered data from 348 students enrolled in a strategic management capstone course that features strategic decision-making in a simulated business strategy game. The data from 94 teams were collected from the student population using a carefully administered instrument. The data were aggregated after running the inter-rater agreement test and the analyzed to test the hypotheses.

The results from the hierarchical regression of the complex moderated mediation model reveal that cooperative conflict management is positively related to agreement-seeking behavior, and agreement-seeking behavior mediates the relationship between cooperative conflict management and decision outcomes. The results also suggest that competence-based trust acts as a moderator in the relationship between agreement-seeking behavior and decision quality; agreement-seeking behavior and team effectiveness, and agreement-seeking behavior and decision commitment. Results also support mediation of agreement-seeking behavior between cooperative conflict management and decision outcomes.

The present research is based on self-report measures, and hence, the limitations of social desirability bias and common method bias are inherent. However, adequate care is taken to minimize these limitations. The research has implications for the strategic decision-making process literature.

In addition to the strategic management literature, this study contributes to practicing managers. The study suggests that competence-based trust plays a vital role in decision effectiveness. Administrators need to select the members in the decision-making process who have competence-based trust on one another and engage in agreement-seeking behavior.

The findings from the study help in creating a fruitful social environment in organizations.

This study provides new insights about the previously unknown effects of cooperative conflict management and agreement-seeking behavior in strategic decision-making process.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the influence of conflict and intuition on explorative new products and performance in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

The study proposes a theoretical model that was tested using two survey instruments: one instrument was administered to the owners of 150 SMEs within the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the second was administered to senior managers within the same SMEs.

The results show that within the decision-making process both objective and personal conflicts drive decision makers to the use of intuition, with high levels of market turbulence strengthening the effect of objective conflict on the use of intuition. Furthermore, the use of intuition was found to have an adverse effect on explorative new products, negating the positive effectiveness of explorative new products on SME performance.

The study’s conceptual model may not completely represent the perspective it aims to elucidate. An alternative model with equally well-conceived explanatory variables could provide further interesting results.

Drawing on the perspective of the decision-making process, an interpretation of the model results and some practical implications are discussed.

The primary contribution of this study is the introduction of a model investigating the influence of conflict on the use of intuition in strategic decisions. Furthermore, the study collected empirical evidence from SMEs operating in the dynamic economy of the UAE, which is a less studied setting.

Research on strategic decision making has over‐emphasized the importance of cognitive conflict because of its potential benefits. Recent research documented that, apart from the benefits, cognitive conflict leads to affective conflict. Taking information processing perspective, the present study seeks to argue that the benefits of cognitive conflict can be stimulated by the cognition‐based trust, while the interplay between cognitive conflict and affective conflict can be influenced by affect‐based trust. The present study therefore aims to demonstrate the divergent roles of the perceived trustworthiness as potential moderators in strategic decision‐making teams.

Using structured survey instrument, multi‐informant data was collected from CEOs and senior executives of 109 US hospitals. After performing confirmatory factor analysis of the measures used, the data was analyzed using hierarchical regression techniques to analyze divergent roles of cognition‐ and affect‐based trust as moderators in the relationship between conflict and decision outcomes.

Results showed that cognition‐based trust is the key to fortify the benefits of cognitive conflict while affect‐based trust is the panacea for the ills of cognitive conflict.

The sample consisted of hospitals in healthcare industry only. Self‐report measures may have some inherent social desirability bias.

This study contributes to both practicing managers as well as to strategic management literature. This study suggests that trust between the executives involved in strategic decision‐making process plays an important role in enhancing decision quality. It is therefore suggested that CEOs and administrators engage the executives who have both cognition‐ and affect‐based trust with each other to have successful decision outcomes.

Though the sample in the present study focuses only on healthcare industry, to the extent strategic decision‐making process is similar in other industries, the findings can be generalizable across other industries.

Research into the antecedents of TMT conflict has become increasingly popular in light of the effects that conflict can have on strategic decision making and organizational performance. Of course, such performance becomes a part of the contextual backdrop against which future decisions are made. Thus, organizational performance is itself an important antecedent of TMT conflict. Using data drawn from the TMTs of 44 mid‐sized public firms, we demonstrate that cognitive and affective conflict relate differently to past performance. The implications of this research for efforts to effectively manage conflict during strategic decision making are discussed.

States that the use of work teams is becoming more and more prominent in organizations today, and that these work teams are empowered to formulate and solve an organization’s problems and thus involve the naturally occurring dynamic of conflict. Explains that conflict is perceived as negative but with positive qualities that are beneficial to the organization. Focuses on the dynamic of conflicts; its effect on work teams’ decision‐making process; and the types of conflict, A‐type and C‐type, and their effects on the decision‐making process of work teams. Finds that C‐type conflict focuses members’ discussion of differences on issues related to the task at hand; fosters creativity, open and honest communication; and utilizes members’ skills and abilities. Claims that this creates a desirable environment for C‐type conflict to exist and impact the decision‐making process. Presents an eight‐step technique through which C‐type conflict can be managed noting that, as the use of work teams increases, the effectiveness of those teams will come into question. Argues that the ability to understand the different types of conflict and to manage it successfully will give work teams the competitive edge.