Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the under‐examined topic of career regrets. Although much of the careers literature has examined factors that contribute to success, little research has been completed on the regrets individuals may experience as they enact their careers.

A large internet sample of 1,480 professionals was used to examine whether individuals who had been laid off in their careers experienced greater career regrets.

Individuals who had been laid off experienced greater regrets with regard to their political behavior (e.g. lack of networking, not being more politically savvy) and their career choices (e.g. not spending more time with their family, failing to pursue more meaningful work) than individuals who had not been laid off.

The findings may have limited generalizability because of the use of a cross‐sectional, internet‐based survey design.

The regrets individuals have may influence their future career behaviors and choices, resulting in different approaches to their work and their lives. These findings may offer some insights to help individuals navigate their careers and make choices that they will be less likely to regret.

Although a great deal of research has focused on strategies for career success, relatively little research has examined career missteps or career regrets. It is hoped this exploratory research encourages further study as well as the development of a theory‐based model of career regrets.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the decision‐making implications of “regrets of the heart” versus “regrets of the head” in economic decision making.

The phenomenon in three empirical studies is examined. Study 1 is a protocol analysis of people's “regrets of the heart” and “regrets of the head”. Study 2 uses the same recall prompt and examined decision makers' choices in an ultimatum bargaining game. Study 3 tests regrets of heart versus the head in an interactive face to face negotiation setting.

Overall, it is found that people who were prompted to recall a time in which they regretted “not following their heart” were more likely to recall situations in which they experienced a loss or lost opportunity compared to people who recalled a time when they regretted “not following their head”. Recalling a regret of the heart prompts decision makers and negotiators to put a greater value on maintaining relationships and avoid loss in an interpersonal exchange situation.

These findings contribute to the literature on how emotions affect economic decision making and provide a more nuanced examination of regret.

Focusing on “regrets of the head” may lead to greater economic gains in economic decisions.

This article examines a different type of regret and demonstrates how this type of regret impacts economic decision‐making behavior.

The overwhelming frequency of failure in trying to bring a safe and effective biotech, pharmaceutical or medical device product to market is truly astounding. This research synthesizes industry leaders' insights on lessons learned from reflecting on professional disappointments.

This research used a qualitative approach to learning from the Chief Executive Officers (CEOs), Chief Scientific Officers (CSOs) and Chief Medical Officers (CMOs) of the most successful life science firms in the USA. A total of 45 industry leaders were interviewed regarding their lingering regrets about their career misadventures.

Regrets were unavoidable because there were opportunity costs for every choice each leader made. Commentary about wisdom gained comprised themes regarding valuable time lost, strategies that could have been enacted, products that failed and essential personnel who were not managed optimally. Contrary to expectations, there was little mention of money that was squandered.

Not felt as a solely negative emotion, regrets were recognized by these leaders as a potentially positive influence on their future decisions. Not felt as a solely negative emotion, regret was recognized by these leaders as a potentially positive influence on their future decisions. This exploratory study suggests that learning from retrospective and anticipated regrets benefits life science leaders in gaining clarity of thought regarding their current business challenges. Because prior research on the value of psychological regrets has mostly relied on limited samples, this inquiry contributes a new vantage point by examining a unique population of senior business leaders, thus providing broader applicability to the organizational literature.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the effect of option choice reversibility on the number of options chosen, total spending, and upset/regret from actions/inaction, using 124 Singaporean adults.

The experiment employs two levels of option choice reversibility: fully reversible without a penalty vs strictly irreversible. Participants add options to a base model or delete options from a full model and are either allowed or not allowed to change options in a condominium purchase scenario.

Compared to participants in the irreversible choice condition, those in the reversible choice select more options and end up with higher total spending. In the irreversible option choice condition, participants anticipate more upset (one aspect of regret) when they take actions than inaction, but in the reversible option choice condition, the reverse is true.

The study uses only one decision stimulus, which is a condominium purchase, and the purchase scenario might not be as realistic as an actual purchase decision.

Refunds and option change permission policies make consumers feel they can reverse their buying decisions, making them feel the decisions are less risky and thus inducing them to buy more than when no refunds or option change is allowed after purchase. To drive consumers to take actions, marketers should allow consumers to change their mind after making decisions and assure them of such policy.

The paper shows the effect of decision reversibility on the total spending (i.e. the total costs of choices made) and extends the theory about omission biases by demonstrating that regrets from actions/inaction depend on decision reversibility.

Shane and Venkataraman (2000) and Venkataraman (1997) suggest that the field of entrepreneurship seeks to understand how opportunities are discovered, created, and exploited, by whom, and with what consequences (italic added). Surprisingly and despite the fact that the person – the entrepreneur – is central to the creation of new ventures, entrepreneurship scholars are reluctant to explicitly include individual differences in formal models of new venture formation. For example, notwithstanding the important role that entrepreneurs play in forging new wealth and creating new jobs, research to identify cognitive processes, attitudes, behaviors, traits, or other characteristics that distinguish entrepreneurs from others who opt to work as employees remains somewhat marginal. Indeed, only very few studies on individual differences have been published in leading management journals. One possible explanation for this reluctance is that in the past researchers might have classified most individual differences as traits research and thus criticism spilled over to include all individual difference research, regardless of whether the focus was trait, cognitions, emotions, attitudes, behaviors, or other characteristics.

Discourses on ageing and childlessness coalesce around the notion that childless women will experience regret and loneliness in old age. In the United Kingdom, the idea that children (mostly women) will provide care in old age tends to be normalised and underpins social care provision. In recent times, media coverage of childless women has also tended to sustain and promote this. This discourse occurs within a context where childlessness is on the rise and where there is little academic interest in the topic.

Our chapter will report on a constructivist grounded theory study with women who choose not to have children. A key aim of the study was to explore the consequences of participants’ choices on their lives. Twenty-one women aged between 45 and 75, from across England, Scotland and Wales participated. The age criteria were chosen to reflect the category that is used by the Office of National Statistics to denote that women’s reproduction ends at 45. This also helps to construct a social norm that women aged 45 and over are seen as older women. Findings reveal that most participants experience no regrets following their choice not to have children. Some express ‘half regrets’ while all challenge the societal expectation that without children there will be no one to care for them when they are older.

This supports the limited, mainly autobiographical literature, on loss and regret. It also refutes the unquestioned and widely believed assumption that women who choose not have children will live to regret it. For participants, the choice for motherhood was but one choice from a menu of many others. Their choice was for something more meaningful for them rather than a choice against motherhood. Consequently, participants had no reason to experience loss or regret. These findings also question the discourse, which implies that children will ensure care in older age. It presents a challenge to the myth that the family is a haven of happiness and support in an ever-changing world. Crucially, it supports calls for more inclusive policy making to address the care needs of all older people.

In searching for a new budget formula for the College of Business at California State University at Long Beach, a major university in the west, several rational budget formulas were explored. This report develops an explanation in quantitative terms of the reasoning process pursued by the department chairs in arriving at the compromise budget allocation model that is currently in place in the college. It shows that in a group decision‐making process concerning the allocation of resources, compromises are made between decision‐makers in order to come to some common agreement, if one in fact exists. Rational models based on some formula are introduced, and resources can be allocated based on the formula. However, among the models presented using a decision matrix, the model that will eventually be selected is the one that has the minimal variance in ranking regrets and monetary regrets if the highest‐ranking model is not chosen. The ranking regret provides a good guide and quick identification of the “most‐likely‐to‐succeed” compromise model. However, the monetary regret appears to be the final compromise determinant.

Due to product value uncertainty, consumers do not know the product matching rate before they get the product, which is the probability of product fitness. Taking the consumers’ anticipated regret into account, this paper aims to develop a theoretical model to explore how the anticipated regret affects pricing and advertising decisions and profits of retailers in the online to offline (O2O) supply chain.

This paper considers an O2O supply chain consisting of an e-retailer and a brick-and-mortar retailer; both retailers cooperate to provide buying online and pick up in-store (BOPS) for consumers.

It shows three major findings. Retailers should decide whether to introduce BOPS channel according to the matching rate of the product when the BOPS channel is not very convenient for consumers. When the BOPS channel does not exist in the market, the profits of two retailers increase with the online regret of consumers, while the BOPS channel exists in the market and the matching rate of the product is low, the higher offline regret can enable both retailers to increase the profits; furthermore, when the matching rate is high, the higher degree of online regret can bring more profit to the O2O supply chain. Therefore, both retailers can take measures together to induce consumers’ regrets according to the different matching rates, which makes both retailers obtain more profits. Counterintuitively, consumer surplus will not always increase due to consideration of anticipated regret.

The model has some limitations that are worth further discussing. First, in practice, the O2O supply chain includes many forms except the BOPS channel, for example, order online and pick-up in-store (ROPS) channel; future research can discuss and consider the impact of consumers’ anticipated regret on ROPS. Second, the authors consider that O2O is a supply chain composed of two retailers. In reality, there is also a situation where an oligopoly retailer opens two channels to realize O2O supply chain, in the case the inventory decision-making of the product is worth studying. Finally, to highlight the impact of the anticipated regret on consumers’ decision-making, the return of the product is not considered. Future research can take the return of the product into account to assess the robustness of the results.

The contributions are in two main aspects. First, this paper considers an O2O supply chain with consumer value uncertainty, where there are duopoly retailers in the market and most of the existing literature focus on oligopoly retailer operates both online and offline channels; meanwhile, consumers’ value perceptions of the product is deterministic. Second, this paper explores how the consumer anticipated channel regret affects the pricing and advertising decisions of O2O supply chain, and the authors take behavioral theory into account when studying omnichannel operations, while most studies on anticipated regret consider traditional two-stage price reduction management, product innovation, etc.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a practical method to be used in team decision making when allocating resources.

The paper proposes the following hypothesis: the selected team consensus strategy from among all available strategies must have minimum sum of squares of monetary regrets. A general algebraic representation of the above hypothesis is developed.

This hypothesis can be interpreted as a Nash equilibrium involving mixed strategies when the entire problem is viewed in game theoretic framework. The paper provides an explanation in quantitative terms of the reasoning process pursued by five business college department chairs faced with three strategies, in an actual consensus decision making to illustrate the above hypothesis. By making observations of the behavior of decision makers in the selection of a budget allocation formula, the paper shows that the hypothesis holds true for the specific reasoning process pursued by the chairs in arriving at the consensus solution. However, the chairs' consensus solution is found to be a local solution vis‐à‐vis the global optimal solution found by solving the game theoretic model.

The authors plan to conduct further empirical testing of the hypothesis using allocation strategies found in diverse decision‐making environments involving diverse decision makers such as business executives, government officers, education administrators, and others.

If this hypothesis can be validated to be true, decision makers should propose for consideration only those rational strategies that have minimal or low variance in monetary regrets since these are the strategies that would most likely be selected in team decision making.

Team decision making involving resource allocation abounds in all organizations, at all levels and in diverse applications. The practical procedure proposed in this paper, based on analytical foundation of game theory, provides decision makers a viable tool for allocating resources that results in consensus of all rational parties involved.

Despite the merit of extant studies on career decision regrets, they are not well integrated, are developed at different speeds and differ in focus. Specifically, they do not address an important question about the levels and antecedents of regret arising from choosing entrepreneurship instead of paid employment and vice versa. The authors adopted the regret regulation theory as foundation to examining the moderated effect of entrepreneurial potential (EP) on career choice regret (CCR) among employees and entrepreneurs.

The authors surveyed 721 employees and 724 entrepreneurs from a developing country and applied partial least squares-structural equation modelling (PLS-SEM) to test the hypotheses.

Employees regretted their career choice three times more when compared with entrepreneurs. However, the authors failed to conclude that the latter had three times better living conditions when compared with the former. EP negatively influenced the regret of being an entrepreneur in lieu of an employee while it positively influenced the regret of being an employee in lieu of an entrepreneur. The perceived opportunity cost of being a higher EP employee was three times greater when compared with that of being a lower EP entrepreneur. The effect of EP on CCR was mitigated or amplified by duration in the career, former career status, decision justifiability, and perceived environment's supportiveness.

The design was cross-sectional, thus, the findings cannot be interpreted in the strict sense of causality.

The authors rely on an important yet often overlooked context of the choice between entrepreneurship and paid employment to test, clarify, and extend the regret regulation theory. The findings have novel human resource management and entrepreneurship policy implications.