Search results

How do organizations respond to negative feedback regarding their innovation activities? In this chapter, the authors reconcile contradictory predictions stemming from behavioral learning and from the escalation of commitment (EoC) perspectives regarding persistence under negative performance feedback. The authors core argument suggests that the seemingly contradictory psychological processes indicated by these two perspectives occur simultaneously in decision makers but that the design of organizational roles and reward systems affects their prevalence in decision-making tasks. Specifically, the authors argue that for decision makers responsible for an individual project, responses given to negative performance feedback regarding a project are dominated by self-justification and loss-avoidance mechanisms predicted by the EoC literature, while for decision makers responsible for a portfolio of projects, responses to negative performance regarding a project are dominated by an under-sampling of poorly performing alternatives that behavioral learning theory predicts. In addition to assigning decision-making authority to different organizational roles, organizational designers shape the strength of these mechanisms through the design of reward systems and specifically by setting more or less ambiguous goals, aspiration levels, time horizons of incentives provided, and levels of failure tolerance.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the dynamics of social positioning and interpersonal conflicts in management teams. This paper utilizes positioning theory to analyze team conflicts by combining microlevel interaction analysis and explicit, meso-level team research in the context of managerial work.

This research is based on an analysis of 34 conflict episodes that occurred during management board meetings conducted by two Finnish public research institutions. By analyzing naturally occurring interactions and video material, this paper presents a discursive analysis of conflict from the perspective of positioning theory, focusing on local moral orders, social positions and the construction of dialogue.

This study’s findings illuminate how team conflicts may be understood in terms of positioning theory, as well as how positioning is connected to managing conflicts and constructing either degenerative or generative dialogue in teams. The present study indicates possibilities for applying positioning theory as a methodological tool when studying team interactions and dialogue.

The study offers practical implications regarding team conflict management. By developing an understanding of the positioning dynamics of managers and other team members, one can help create constructive and generative dialogue in teams.

From a methodological perspective, this paper presents a novel approach to the study of team conflicts and outlines several suggestions regarding the theoretical approach in the analysis of team interaction and dynamics.