Search results

The purpose of this paper is to validate cognitive style (i.e. linear, nonlinear, and balanced thinking) with innovation intentions and behaviors. It was hypothesized that a balanced linear/nonlinear thinking style and the inclination toward more innovative intentions are strongly related.

A survey questionnaire of business students in the USA and France was employed. Formally validated measures of thinking style and innovation were replicated in this project.

The results of an analysis of 186 respondents found a significant, direct relationship between balanced thinking style and innovative intention and behavior measures.

The results demonstrate that cognitive style and innovation are related, but the direct validation of actual innovative behaviors, in situ, needs to be included in the next step of this research stream. Further, the composition of groups can also be evaluated using these measures.

This is the first successful attempt to validate cognitive style measures with innovation outcome measures. These measures are now available for organizational testing, field research, and assessing team composition.

This is one of the first criterion-validity assessments of a cognitive measure related to linear and nonlinear thinking style. There are two important implications of these results. First, the authors now have a better understanding of one the links between cognition and innovation. Second, the authors have established a solid base for future research on this subject, including the importance of this effect in practice.

The purpose of this study is to theoretically link design thinking with behavioural strategy, using empirical results that relate three cognitive dimensions: design thinking personality traits, cognitive passive resistance and linear thinking, and, consequently, determine: if there is a negative relationship between design thinking traits and cognitive passive resistance and if this relationship is mediated by linear thinking.

This study used a quantitative methodology of covariance-based structural equation modelling. The data were collected from a three-scale, self-completed questionnaire, which was constructed using the existing modelling of the academic literature. The questionnaire was validated by confirmatory factor analysis and applied to a sample of 342 professional engineering and business graduates in Colombia.

The results of the structural equation modelling demonstrate a negative relationship between design thinking traits and cognitive passive resistance, and this relationship is mediated by linear thinking. These findings link design thinking and behavioural strategy and build new foundations for future studies, providing further theoretical support to the academic literature’s discussion of the relationship between design thinking and theories of managerial practices and innovation management.

The main limitation of this study is the subjectivity of the answers because of potential bias from the respondents in completing the questionnaire. Another limitation is that the research was conducted only in the context of Colombia, so it is recommended that other studies be carried to generalise the results. This study has several theoretical implications. This study contributes to existing research on design thinking, evidencing a promising field of study to support it theoretically, such as the behavioural strategy. This study also contributes to the literature on innovation management deepening into a field of study that has received less attention in the literature, such as passive cognitive resistance to innovation. Likewise, this study presents a theoretical contribution to the dual process of cognition, proposing a new dimension to the construction of the multidimensional concept of nonlinear thinking. This study also contributes to the behavioural strategy field, evidencing a growing area of application in strategic management, such as design thinking. Finally, this research also proposes the development of a new research avenue about the concept of knowledge hiding as a possible source of innovation resistance.

This research also has implications for business and engineering education and practice. This study’s results suggest that before implementing an organisational initiative such as design thinking, which seeks to change people's behaviour, it is necessary to approach it as a cognitive process and develop strategies to mitigate passive cognitive resistance to change. This research’s results also present implications for business and engineering education, evidencing the need to include other perspectives of thinking that allow non-designers to develop creative thinking.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first quantitative study on design thinking as a business management concept using linear thinking of non-designers to relate design thinking traits with cognitive passive resistance. This research provides theoretical and empirical support for framing design thinking within the field of behavioural strategy.

The purpose of this paper is to unpack the underlying mechanisms of entrepreneurs' passion, orientation and behavior by investigating the role of rational and nonrational cognitive elements. Building on dual process theory and sociointuitionism, a conceptual model is proposed in order to explore the relationship between entrepreneurial passion, entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and strategic entrepreneurship behavior (SEB). Specifically, entrepreneurs' linear thinking styles (System 2) and nonlinear thinking styles (System 1) are hypothesized as being significant moderators of such a relationship.

Covariance-based structural equation modeling (CB-SEM) is used to empirically validate the proposed conceptual model and test the moderating hypotheses on a sample of 300 entrepreneurs actively involved in European small and medium enterprises (SMEs).

Entrepreneurial passion is shown to be a significant antecedent of EO, which, in turn, strongly influences SEB. Moreover, entrepreneurs' linear thinking style positively moderates the EO-SEB relationship, but not the link between passion and EO. Instead, a nonlinear thinking style positively moderates the relationship between passion and EO, but not the links between EO and SEB.

Entrepreneurs should trust their nonlinear thinking style – related to affective/emotive and intuitive information processing systems – to foster the effect of their entrepreneurial passion on EO. Furthermore, entrepreneurs should rely on a linear thinking style, namely the rational and deliberative cognitive processes, to enhance the impact of their EO on SEB.

Dual process theory and sociointuitionism are integrated to simultaneously investigate the effect of nonrational and rational cognitive mechanisms on entrepreneurs' orientation and behavior. Moreover, the proposed model is empirically tested on a sample of entrepreneurs working in SMEs located in Europe, which have received little attention from entrepreneurship scholars in comparison to their US counterparts. The authors’ findings suggest important implications for entrepreneurs, policymakers and entrepreneurial universities educators.

The last 15 years or so have seen the emergence of a powerful management philosophy known as value‐based management (VBM). The premiss underlying this philosophy is that management’s primary responsibility is to maximize value for shareholders. Much of the work which has been done in this field has focused on value measurement rather than value creation. Argues that we need to shift the focus from value measurement to value creation and to do this, we need to accept that shareholder value creation is a creative act, not an analytical process. Value creation requires a combination of creative and analytical thinking skills. These skills can be developed, and if properly integrated into a hybrid thinking process, can lead to better strategies, better financial performance and much more satisfied employees.

This paper aims to review the latest management developments across the globe and pinpoint practical implications from cutting-edge research and case studies.

This briefing is prepared by an independent writer who adds personal impartial comments and places the articles in context.

In a study to validate cognitive style (i.e. linear, nonlinear and balanced thinking) with innovative intentions and behaviors, it was found that a balanced linear/nonlinear thinking style was strongly related toward more innovative intentions. Results found a significant, direct relationship between balanced thinking style and innovative intention and behavior measures.

The paper provides strategic insights and practical thinking that have influenced some of the world’s leading organizations.

The briefing saves busy executives and researchers hours of reading time by selecting only the very best, most pertinent information and presenting it in a condensed and easy-to-digest format.

Systems thinking calls for a shift of our mindset from seeing just parts to seeing the whole reality in its structured dynamic unity and interconnectedness. Systems thinking fosters a sensibility to see subtle connections between components and parts of reality, especially the free enterprise capitalist system (FECS). It enables us to see ourselves as active participants or partners of FECS and not mere induced factors of its production–distribution–consumption processes. Systems thinking seeks to identify the economic “structures” that underlie complex situations in FECS that bring about high versus low leveraged changes. A system is strengthened and reinforced by feedback of reciprocal exchanges that makes the system alive, transparent, human, and humanizing.

In Part I, we explore basic laws or patterns of behaviors as understood by systems thinking; in Part II we examine the basic archetypes or structured behaviors of systems thinking; in both parts we strive to see reality through the lens of critical thinking to help us understand patterns and structures of behavior among systems and their component parts. In conclusion, we argue for compatibility and complementarity of critical thinking and systems thinking to identify and resolve management problems created by our flawed thinking, and sedimented by our wanton assumptions, presumptions, suppositions and presuppositions, biases, and prejudices. Such thinking will also identify unnecessary economic and political structures of the self-serving policies we create, which imprison us.

Preparing forces and their allies to operate in a world where asymmetry appears to be the only logical option for adversaries will require some significant and innovative adaptations to training and education methods. New models in leadership, selection, training, and education of leaders and troops are necessary to cope with complexity, non-predictability in conflict solving, and peace support operations. Multidimensional thinking and acting in military decision-making and applying new learning models to build up a climate of change and innovation on all levels of the armed forces is necessary. Organizational learning models, already applied in reshaping civil enterprises, are also useful in restructuring military forces and prepare them for the new challenges. T. Edmunds argues that the emerging new roles of the military cannot only be derived from an “objective functional reassessment” of the nature of new threats but are emerging, rather, as “a consequence of domestic and international socio-political influences that shape state’ perception of what their Armed Forces should look like and the purposes they should serve.” There is a higher priority for intercultural competences for leaders of all levels of responsibility, especially regarding the operational regions of the future and the globalized outcomes of conflicts in general. Research in this domain shows that methods of “face work” are best accomplished by Ting-Toomey's “identity negotiation.” Reshaping, restructuring, and preparing for new core rolls of the military and civil task forces are only to master when the responsible leaders manage to overcome the so-called “blind spot in leadership theories” (C.O. Scharmer), so leadership seems to be more and more a collective method of finding the “self.”

The purpose of this paper is to explore an effective educational method for leadership development.

In order to achieve the objective of the paper, Chester Barnard's insights on leadership and its development are reviewed: the gap between action and thinking; practitioners' ways of thinking and moral senses; combinations of abilities and qualities for leaders; and an educational method for leaders.

The paper concludes that when business school students write their own cases and explain them comprehensibly for others who did not experience the situation, they can enhance their abilities to observe and deeply analyze situations and are given opportunities to reflect and share their experiences.

The paper proposes the idea of the educational method, so, in the future it would be possible to show how to implement this method concretely.

The paper suggests that it would be effective to develop an educational method based on practitioners' ways of thinking and sensing.

The paper indicates that practitioners develop their own ways of thinking and sensing that are different from researchers' ways of scientific thinking. Practitioners' ways of thinking and moral senses can be learned in educational institutions by using rich cases including participants' intentions and interpretations.