Search results

This study aims to identify antecedents to noncompliance behavior influenced by decision contexts where investments in time, effort and resources are devoted to a task – referred to as a task unlikely to be completed without violating the organization’s information security policy (ISP).

An empirical test of the suggested relationships in the proposed model was conducted through a field study using the survey method for data collection. Pre-tests, pre-study, main study and a follow-up study compose the frame of our methodology where more than 500 respondents are involved across different organizations.

The results confirm that the antecedents that explain the escalation of commitment behavior in terms of the effect of lost assets, such as time, effort and other resources, give us a new lens to understand noncompliance behavior; employees seem to escalate their commitments to the completion of their tasks at the expense of becoming noncompliant with ISP.

One of the key areas that requires further attention from this study is to better understand the role of risk perceptions on employee behavior when dealing with value conflicts. Depending on how risk-averse or risk seeking an employee is, the model showed no significant support in either case to influence their noncompliance behavior. The authors therefore argue that employees' noncompliance may be influenced by more powerful beliefs, such as self-justification and sunk costs.

The results show that when employees are caught in tasks undergoing difficulties, they are more likely to increase noncompliance behavior. By understanding better how project obstacles result in such tasks, security managers can define new mechanisms to counter employees’ shift from compliance to noncompliance.

Apart from encouraging compliance with enforcement mechanisms (using direct behavioral controls like sanctions or rewards), indirect behavior controls may also encourage compliance. The authors suggest that the ISPs should state that the organization would take positive actions toward task completion and help their employees to resolve their problems quickly.

This study is the first to tackle escalation of commitment theories and use antecedents that explain the effect of lost assets, such as time, effort and other resources can also explain noncompliance with ISP in terms of the value conflicts, where employees would often choose to forego compliance at the expense of finishing their tasks.

Merit pay plans are often used by companies as a way to motivate and reward employees. While several theories of motivation suggest that rewarding employees for individual accomplishments will produce positive results, there are potential threats that may lead to negative outcomes. Research in psychology and organizational behavior suggests that personal involvement in a decision‐making process can influence current and future behavior. This paper reports the results of an experiment examining individuals’ tendencies to overcommit to a previous decision. Results show that when an individual is personally involved in both the hiring and subsequent merit allocation process for an employee, this prior commitment has a significant effect on the amount of money allocated relative to an individual participating in the merit allocation decision but not the hiring process. Personal involvement with an employee leads to an increase in the merit allocation despite evidence that the individual did not meet the standards for merit pay.

The innovative process of new product development remains unique within most organizations. This uniqueness stems from the requirements of the new product development manager to grapple with both the universe of emerging technologies from which a new feature or improvement must be found and to simultaneously maintain a constant awareness of the requirements of an ever-changing customer base. Amongst all of this uncertainty, there is still a time when new product development managers choose to ignore the warning signals that a project is failing and continue to commit resources. This paper refers to this as irrational commitment. This paper aims to examine the uncertainty of new product development and the reasons for this irrational commitment to failed projects.

The paper used a structured systematic review of literature to identify the most common types of irrational commitment in new product development and their impact on the corporation.

The paper provides insights into the causes and effects of management irrationally committing to new product development projects that are doomed to failure. It suggests that the three major areas of knowledge that need to be better integrated into the decision-making process are technology trends, marketing knowledge and the capabilities of the company itself.

Because of the chosen research approach of using a systematic review of literature, primary research needs to be conducted in the future to validate and refine the findings of the paper.

The paper provides leadership with guidelines to avoid irrationally committing to failed new product development efforts.

This paper adds to the literature on innovation systems.

Although heuristics and biases seal the fate of entrepreneurial enterprises by directly influencing entrepreneurs’ decisions, previous studies have ignored the role of gender in this regard by considering female and male entrepreneurs homogeneous in their susceptibility to heuristics and biases. Thus, this paper aims to advance the existing body of knowledge on heuristics and biases in the field of entrepreneurship by exploring two heuristics of affect and representativeness as well as three biases of overconfidence, escalation of commitment and illusion of control in female and male entrepreneurs’ entry and opportunity-related decisions.

The data were gathered through semi-structured and in-depth interviews with ten male and nine female Iranian techno-entrepreneurs active in advanced medicine and biotechnology. The gathered data were analyzed by thematic and narrative data analysis.

According to the results, while both male and female entrepreneurs show certain heuristics and biases, there are some noteworthy distinctions. More precisely, contrary to their male counterparts, the female entrepreneurs neither rely on the representativeness heuristic nor show any signs of the escalation of commitment in their decisions.

There are some valuable implications emanated from this study which could be of use for not only future researchers but also entrepreneurs, especially the ones founding and running small businesses themselves.

While there is a strong body of literature on heuristics and biases in the field of entrepreneurship, previous studies have considered female and male entrepreneurs homogeneous in their proneness to heuristics and biases. Thus, the current study enriches the body of knowledge by being the first comparative study of heuristics and biases in female and male entrepreneurs’ decisions.

The purpose of this study is to investigate whether, in the context of making a go/no-go decision regarding a failing new product, the use of a stopping rule and/or a new decision-maker would reduce the escalation of commitment (EOC).

This study uses a classroom experiment design and uses logistic regression and a chi-square test to analyze its data.

The findings show that both responsible and non-responsible participants are more likely to perceive the negative performance of a new product as less negative and believe that the goal for the product can be reached when there is a stopping rule and proximal negative feedback indicates a level of performance below but very close to it than when there is no stopping rule. Therefore, they are more likely to continue the failing new product, whether they are responsible for the product or not. However, non-responsible decision-makers are more likely than their responsible counterparts to discontinue the failing new product in the absence of a stopping rule.

This paper extends the theory of EOC by showing that the use of a stopping rule and/or a new decision-maker may not reduce EOC.

This paper provides useful guidelines for managers on how to reduce EOC.

The originality and value of this paper are found in the investigation of a situation in which the use of a stopping rule and/or a new decision-maker may not reduce the EOC.

This paper examines the influence of corporate culture and organisational commitment on financial performance in Malaysian companies. Based on the work of Deshpande and Farley on corporate cultural types and Allen and Meyer on organisational commitment, a structured questionnaire was developed and self‐administered to managers in Malaysian companies. A total of 202 managers in public listed companies participated in the study. The results show that there is a significant correlation between corporate culture and organisational commitment. Both corporate culture type and organisational commitment have an influence on the financial performance of these companies. The implications of the study are also discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate practicing auditors' beliefs regarding the effect of prior involvement on the occurrence of quality threatening behaviour (QTB) during an audit. The authors examine the extent to which auditors' beliefs about QTB are consistent with the theoretical framework of Kanodia et al., according to which prior involvement in audit work would increase the likelihood of auditors suppressing evidence inconsistent with earlier audit decisions.

The authors conduct an experiment in which auditors assess the likelihood of perceived reputation threats associated with encountering disconfirming evidence late in the audit, and the likelihood that such evidence will be suppressed.

Auditors participating in the study believe that prior involvement will induce a perception of personal reputation threats in an auditor encountering evidence inconsistent with the conclusions of earlier audit work. Participants perceive an auditor with prior involvement in the audit work to be more likely to suppress audit evidence than an auditor with no prior involvement; this effect is largely explained by the personal reputation threats believed to be induced by prior involvement.

The findings provide important information, from the perspective of practicing auditors, about a situational antecedent of QTB that is present on most audit engagements. Prior involvement is perceived by auditors to induce a conflict of interest in reporting troublesome evidence uncovered late in the audit. These perceptions suggest it is important to raise reviewers' awareness of the possibility of undesirable behavior in such situations. Potential limitations of the study relate to generalizability of the results under different levels of misstatement risk and under different environments in audit practice. Also, the authors do not measure auditors' actual behaviour, but their assessment of hypothetical situations and beliefs about others' actions. Future research can examine actual auditor behaviour in the presence of prior involvement.

The paper provides evidence on auditors' beliefs about the effects on QTB of prior involvement, a factor that has not been previously studied in this line of research. The authors show that auditors' beliefs about QTB are consistent with Kanodia et al.'s theoretical framework. The study is the first to measure auditors' assessments of perceived reputation threats and to show their mediating effect on the predicted behavior of audit professionals.

Compare and contrast how the accounting, organizational behavior and other literatures analyze sunk costs. Sunk costs form a key part of the decision-making component of the management accounting literature, which generally include previously incurred and unrecoverable costs. Management accountants believe, since current or future actions cannot change sunk costs, decision makers should ignore them. Thus, ongoing fixed costs or previously incurred sunk costs, while relevant for matters of accountability such as costing, income determination, and performance evaluation are irrelevant for most short- and long-term decisions. However, the organizational behavior literature indicates that sunk costs affect decision makers’ actions – especially their emotional attachments to the related project and the asymmetry of attitudes regarding the recognizing of losses and gains. Called the “sunk cost effect” or “sunk cost fallacy,” this conflict in sunk costs’ underlying nature reflects one element of incoherence in contemporary accounting discourse. We discuss this sunk cost conflict from an accounting and a philosophical perspective to denote some ambiguities that decision usefulness and accountability introduces into accounting discourse.

Review, summarize and analyze the above literatures

Managerial accountants can apply many lessons from the various literature sources.

We also show how differing opinions on how to treat sunk costs impact a firm’s decision-making process both economically and socially.

This study aims to partially replicate and extend prior escalation of commitment (e.g., Harrell & Harrison, 1994; Harrison & Harrell, 1993). It extends prior studies by examining the impact of risk propensity on managers’ project evaluation decisions. In addition, the study examines the joint effects of private information, potential for personal gain, and risk propensity on managers’ project evaluation decisions. A laboratory experiment involving 146 subjects was conducted to test the various hypotheses developed for this study. The results are consistent with prior studies, suggesting that managers exhibit a greater tendency to continue unprofitable projects under conditions of private information and potential for personal gain. Furthermore, the results reveal that managers with high risk propensity exhibit a greater tendency to commit additional resources to unprofitable projects than those with low risk propensity. The results support the proposition that high risk propensity managers who experience conditions of private information and potential for personal gain exhibit a greater tendency to commit additional resources to unprofitable projects than low risk propensity managers who experience only one or neither of these conditions.

Examines a case study of an unsuccessful employment decision. Explains that although it was apparent soon after the appointment that the employee’s performance fell short of expectations, the employer (a lone trader responsible only to himself), persisted with the appointment for over a year, damaging his business in the process. Seeks to identify the reasons for such apparently irrational behaviour. Concludes that escalation theory overemphasizes the conflict between economic rationality and ego‐defensiveness. Persistence reflects a complex combination of variables, and any judgement of the decision maker’s behaviour is ultimately subjective. Calls into question the bounding assumption of escalation theory that decisions are objectively verifiable. Discusses the theoretical, practical and policy implications of the study.