Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the capital investment process, guided by concepts from cognitive and social psychology. The intention is to gauge the extent to which managerial judgement can be detected by applying a psychological lens to the process. Initial fieldwork is subsequently reported on the extent to which managerial judgement is managed. Discovery of variations suggest an alternative perspective on understanding capital investment decisions (CIDs) that may be potentially worthwhile in understanding the long‐term success and survival of modern commercial enterprises.

Following a systematic review, employing the psychological concepts of heuristics, framing and concensus to prior case and fieldwork studies, the CID process in three companies engaged in new market/site development projects is reported. The participants initially responded to a survey and subsequently agreed to be interviewed about their processes and involvement.

The psychological concepts provided a satisfactory gauge of managerial judgement. The fieldwork revealed variety in the management of the CID process and the influence of managerial judgement.

There is an increasing call to examine the CID by case or fieldwork but, to date, the role managerial judgement plays has not been directly addressed. Applying psychological concepts to the CID process offers an opportunity to focus enquiries and improve understanding of corporate practices.

The relative reliance companies place on heuristics, framing and consensus within their specific organizational contexts ultimately may provide insights to the long‐term survival of companies.

The paper provides useful information on the cognitive and social psychology in the capital investment process.

Mergers and acquisitions strategies are not risk-free, potential problems in achieving success include integration difficulties, inadequate evaluation of target, inability to achieve synergy, and complexity. Such strategies can fail for many reasons including inadequate evaluation of targets or inadequate pre-decision control mechanisms. Mergers and acquisitions are reviewed in this chapter as strategic investment decision-making perspective. Established financial analyses remain important in appraising investment choices, despite their limiting assumptions and their recognised shortcomings in capturing strategic project dimensions. However, managers balance these economic analyses with less-structured, strategic analyses underpinned by informed judgement. The fact that empirical studies reveal a continued reliance on judgement by investment decision-makers does not mean that rational economic analysis is a futile exercise. What studies of practice do seem to suggest is that the theory and practice of strategic investment decision-making need to take into account both economically rational and intuitive decision processes. Reflecting on the research evidence, we conclude that strategic investment appraisal will be best supported by approaches that (i) couple sound economic analysis with the development of managerial judgement and (ii) take account of the broader decision-making context within which both economic and strategic analyses are used.

Making rational and undistorted corporate investment decisions is critically important to organisations. “Scientific” investment appraisal can play a central role, particularly setting the hurdle rate. Empirical research reveals that actual rates generally exceed organisations’ cost of capital – the so-called hurdle rate premium (HRP) puzzle. Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the purpose of this paper is to mobilise the retrievability cognitive bias as one explanation of this paradox.

A systematic structuring and investigation of the legacy of eight scenarios, representing “correct” and “incorrect” decisions on “good” and “bad” proposals, is used to explain the inconsistency between normative capital investment theory and actual practice.

Decision makers’ cognitive processes based on informal perceptions, strengthened by the scope of formal post-audit routines, provide a plausible explanation why investment decision makers tend to systematically set hurdle rates too high.

The findings have still to be explored in more depth by fieldwork and experimental research.

The policy implications of this study are that corporate success could be enhanced by making executives aware of the HRP phenomenon and of its behavioural causes; also by including significant rejected investment proposals in the post-audit programme and communicating the opportunity cost of “false negative” decisions on proposals not adopted.

The paper provides a new explanation for a recognised phenomenon: Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the paper applies research on a cognitive bias to the setting of the hurdle rate in investment appraisal.

This study brings together cognitive and organizational aspects of the strategic investment decision-making process. It focuses on the early stages of strategic investment decision-making. This paper aims to augment the limitations of previous survey-based research through an archival case study that describes pre-decision screening in detail.

This paper draws on archival data covering an investment decision undertaken by a large brewing company. The data cover a period of about six years, focusing on the decision to invest in West Africa. A rational/intuitive orientation model of the process is used as a framework to help analyze the archival evidence.

Strategic investment decisions are non-programmed, complex and uncertain. For some companies (e.g. those with a strategic focus on new expansions), certain non-programmed decisions may become semi-programmed in the course of time by applying knowledge learned from having successfully handled non-programmed decision situations in the past. However, other companies without such a focus may not be able to programme part of their strategic decisions. Pre-decision control mechanisms constitute a form of strategic control by detecting potential problem areas in the investment option before formal approval.

Given the narrow scope of this paper – a single case study – the findings are used for theorization rather than offering generalizable results. There is a need for unified models to enrich our understanding of the influence that contextual factors have on strategic investment decision-making. Effective strategic pre-decision control mechanisms that maintain a good balance between rational and intuitive approaches are matters that remain open for debate in future research.

Research on organizational and cognitive aspects of the strategic investment decision-making process is inherently practical. To achieve successful strategic investment decisions, it is essential to devote more attention to the choice and design of strategic control mechanisms.

The framework of this study can help practitioners to gauge the strengths and weaknesses of their decision-making practices. It focuses on three aspects that are relatively absent in the literature: the strategic problem, the strategic choice and the chronological relations between the five stages of the strategic investment decision-making process. The use of historical data is suited to providing illustrations of intuitive/heuristic-based practices that would otherwise be hard to capture.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) are arguably one of the CEOs greatest challenges, and there is a critical need to get these decisions right. It is clear that no single theory is adequate to describe or inform how M&A are evaluated in uncertain conditions, but there are several that offer partial explanations or at least contribute toward our understanding of how managers can deal with the uncertain environment and assess the likely risks associated with M&A. The literature suggests how relevant theories might be aggregated to make sense of strategic investment decision and investment appraisal techniques in an organizational context and considers the implications for further research in this important area of M&A. This chapter focuses on strategic investment appraisal, and draws together a variety of theoretical perspectives, especially from the field of psychology, which may be unfamiliar to both scholars in and practitioners.

There is a great divide between the degree to which academic research accounts for the role of managerial discretion in firm performance and the weight given by the popular press and financial community to the importance of the management of an organization. The purpose of this paper is to bridge this gap by quantifying the way managerial beliefs influence the quality of firm performance in a turbulent environment based on e‐business.

An e‐business research setting is used that is associated with a situation of environmental turbulence to allow for sufficient variance in managerial beliefs to measure their effect on firm performance. The sample contains 293 firms.

Aggregate level results indicate that managerial beliefs have a positive and significant effect on firm performance. Four distinctive segments were also found to exist. These segments vary in terms of the strength of the position that a manager holds regarding the value of e‐business and firm performance.

The paper shows that the affect of e‐business on firm performance is not structural in the sense that firm performance does not depend on the firm or industry but is reflective of the strength of the beliefs held by managers. This implies that the “black box” approach that is characteristic of much management research may be problematic because it fails to measure the variables that may matter most to performance.

This chapter reviews key research on the similarities and differences in leadership and management across different regions of the world. It also looks at similarities and differences on other relevant aspects, that is, commitment, work values, personality and emotional intelligence. Research has tended to focus on drawing out the differences as that appears to be worthy of news and attracts interest. We also report on the types of errors in research which might actually make real differences appear much larger. The reality is that what we find is a great deal of similarity in leadership and management behaviour across the different regions of the world. Given these similarities, can we develop a management level Situational Judgment Test (SJT) that can be used effectively across different world regions? We believe this can be achieved by identifying SJT items that work consistently across world regions and then assembling a bias-free test with robust psychometric properties.

Conceptualizes the impact of information technology on marketing decision making. Argues that developments in information technology affect the performance of marketing decision‐makers through different routes. Advances in information technology enhance the possibilities of collecting data and of generating information for supporting marketing decision making. Potentially, this will have a positive impact on decision‐making performance. Managerial expertise will favor the transformation of data into market insights. However, as the cognitive capabilities of marketing managers are limited, increasing amounts of data may also increase the complexity of the decision‐making context. In turn, increased complexity enhances the probability of biased decision processes, thereby negatively affecting decision‐making performance. Marketing management support systems, also being the result of advances in information technology, are tools that can help marketers to benefit from the data explosion. The analysis leads to the expectation that the combination of marketing data, managerial judgment, and marketing management support systems will be a powerful factor for improving marketing management.

Focuses on the work of managers in new forms of organisations which are flexible, horizontally integrated, and decentralised. Although much has been written about managers, including their roles, functions, and skills, the organisational context is changing, and new perspectives are needed. A process perspective is a way of understanding the work of managers in these contexts. The paper suggests two pivotal management processes, the exercise of judgment and the use of influence, through which managers add value to more general organisational processes. Some directions for research are suggested and a classroom exercise for introducing graduate students to this topic area is outlined.

Prior research identified conflicts in implementing performance measurement systems that include both financial and non-financial measures. Attempts to incorporate non-financial measures, for example, balanced scorecards (BSCs), have shown short-term success, only to be replaced with systems that rely on financial measures. We develop a theoretical model to explore evaluators’ choice and use of the most important performance measurement criterion among financial and non-financial measures.

Our model links participants’ prior evaluation experiences with their attitudes about relative accounting qualities and with their choice of the most important performance measure. This choice subsequently affects their evaluation judgments of managers who perform differentially on financial versus non-financial measures.

Experimental testing of our structural equation model indicates that it meets the accepted goodness of fit criteria. We conclude that experience has an influence on choice of performance measures and on decision heuristics in making such evaluations. We suggest that an “experience gap” must be considered when deciding which performance metrics to emphasize in scorecards or similar performance reports. We analyzed four accounting qualities, importance, relevance, reliability, and comparability and found that importance, relevance, and reliability have strong effects on how managers prioritize and use accounting measures.

We conducted our study in a controlled, experimental setting, including participants with diverse experiences. We provide direct evidence of participants’ experience and attitudes about the relative accounting qualities of financial and non-financial measures which we link to their choice of the most important performance measure. We link this choice to their performance evaluations.