Search results

Managers must make numerous strategic decisions in order to initiate and implement a business model innovation (BMI). This paper examines how managers perceive the management team interacts when making BMI decisions. The paper also investigates how group biases and board members’ risk willingness affect this process.

Empirical data were collected through 26 in-depth interviews with German managing directors from 13 companies in four industries (mobility, manufacturing, healthcare and energy) to explore three research questions: (1) What group effects are prevalent in BMI group decision-making? (2) What are the key characteristics of BMI group decisions? And (3) what are the potential relationships between BMI group decision-making and managers' risk willingness? A thematic analysis based on Gioia's guidelines was conducted to identify themes in the comprehensive dataset.

First, the results show four typical group biases in BMI group decisions: Groupthink, social influence, hidden profile and group polarization. Findings show that the hidden profile paradigm and groupthink theory are essential in the context of BMI decisions. Second, we developed a BMI decision matrix, including the following key characteristics of BMI group decision-making managerial cohesion, conflict readiness and information- and emotion-based decision behavior. Third, in contrast to previous literature, we found that individual risk aversion can improve the quality of BMI decisions.

This paper provides managers with an opportunity to become aware of group biases that may impede their strategic BMI decisions. Specifically, it points out that managers should consider the key cognitive constraints due to their interactions when making BMI decisions. This work also highlights the importance of risk-averse decision-makers on boards.

This qualitative study contributes to the literature on decision-making by revealing key cognitive group biases in strategic decision-making. This study also enriches the behavioral science research stream of the BMI literature by attributing a critical influence on the quality of BMI decisions to managers' group interactions. In addition, this article provides new perspectives on managers' risk aversion in strategic decision-making.

The interplay between individual and collective creativity and its translation into innovation is a critical yet complex challenge in the ever-evolving innovation landscape. This study delves into the intricate relationship between managerial ability, intellectual property rights (IPRs) and research and development (R&D) investments contextualized within the dynamics of leverage, firm life stages and tangibility for pharmaceutical firms in the Asia-Pacific region. By exploring how micro-level factors influence macro-level innovation processes, this study aims to contribute to the broader understanding of creativity and innovation, a theme at the heart of addressing contemporary global challenges.

Econometric methodologies were used to analyse a data set comprising 2,660 firm-year observations spanning the decade from 2011 to 2020.

A key finding was that companies with lower managerial prowess strategically leverage R&D intensity to signal their value to the market and accrue reputational currency. The research unearths a significant positive relationship between managerial ability, IPRs and R&D investment. In environments characterized by strong managerial acumen and robust IPR safeguards, firms exhibit a heightened propensity to allocate resources to R&D endeavours. This underscores the role of intellectual leadership and legal protections in shaping R&D strategies within the pharmaceutical domain. Incorporating firm life stages as a moderating factor reveals that firm maturity fundamentally influences the interplay between managerial ability, IPRs and R&D expenditure.

These findings’ implications resonate profoundly within policy-making circles and pharmaceutical firms’ day-to-day operational strategies, underscoring the pivotal role of intellectual capital and legal safeguards in shaping the future of innovation in the Asia-Pacific pharmaceutical sector.

This paper aims to critically examine the accounting and information systems literature to understand the changes that are occurring in the management accounting profession. The changes the authors are interested in are linked to technology-driven innovations in managerial decision-making and in organizational structures. In addition, the paper highlights research gaps and opportunities for future research.

The authors adopted a grounded theory literature review method (Wolfswinkel et al., 2013) to achieve the study’s aims.

The authors identified four research themes that describe the changes in the management accounting profession due to technology-driven innovations: structured vs unstructured data, human vs algorithm-driven decision-making, delineated vs blurred functional boundaries and hierarchical vs platform-based organizations. The authors also identified tensions mentioned in the literature for each research theme.

Previous studies display a rather narrow focus on the role of digital technologies in accounting work and new competences that management accountants require in the digital era. By contrast, the authors focus on the broader technology-driven shifts in organizational processes and structures, which vastly change how accounting information is collected, processed and analyzed internally to support managerial decision-making. Hence, the paper focuses on how management accountants can adapt and evolve as their organizations transition toward a digital environment.

This article aims to trace the historical development of the behavioral strategy (BS) field, which implements psychology in strategic management. Mainly, it provides a contextual understanding of how this stream of research has historically evolved and what relevant future trajectories are. This work is part of the “over half a century of Management Decision” celebrative and informal Journal section.

We consider BS literature produced in management decision (MD), the oldest and longest-running scholarly publication in management, as a proxy for the evolution of management thought. Through a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) process, we collected – via the MD website and Scopus – a sample of 97 BS articles published in MD from its foundation (1967) until today (2024). Regarding the analysis, we adopted a Reflexive Thematic Analysis approach to synthesize the main BS topics, then read from a historical perspective regarding three “eras” over which the literature developed. Selected international literature outside the Journal’s boundaries was considered to complement this historical analysis.

Historically, within the BS field, the interest passed from the rules to rationally govern strategic decision-making processes, to studying what causes cognitive errors, to understanding how to avoid biases and to being prepared for dramatic changes. The article also identifies six future research trajectories, namely “positive heuristics,” “context-embedded mental processes,” “non-conventional thinking,” “cognitive evolutionary triggers,” “debiasing strategies” and “behavioral theories for new strategic challenges” that future research could investigate.

The limitation of the study lies in its exclusive focus on MD for investigating the historical evolution of BS, thereby overlooking critical contributions from other journals. Therefore, MD’s editorial preferences have influenced results. A comprehensive SLR on the BS field is still needed, requiring broader journal coverage to mitigate selection biases and enhance field appraisal.

This contribution is the first to offer a historical evolutionary view of the BS field, complementing the few other reviews on this stream of research. This fills a gap in the study of the evolution of management thought.

Extant research supports the importance of dynamic managerial capabilities in capturing managers’ individual roles in organisations’ adjustments to change. This paper develops a multidimensional scale for measuring dynamic managerial capabilities consisting of sensing, seizing and reconfiguration capacities that mediate between managers’ affective states and their firms’ performance.

The scale is validated in a survey-based study among 204 managers in companies in the United States of America (USA). We applied a multiple regression model (a triple mediation) using each of DMCs’ three dimensions to test the effects of managers’ affective states on their firms’ performance.

The multidimensional construct of DMCs adds about 15 % of variance explained to a firm’s performance, as perceived by its managers. So managers’ affective states do have an impact on DMCs and, later, on their firms’ performance.

We show the impact of negative and positive affect on DMCs. We also show that DMCs’ three dimensions should be treated in a formative manner that advances discussion on DMCs and their role in a firm’s performance.

Understanding managers’ affective states helps incorporate “hot cognition” into firms’ strategising processes. Although both positive and negative emotions can be helpful, depending on the situation, positive affect is generally more valuable than negative affect as it relates to a firm’s performance.

Our work proposes measuring DMCs based on Teece’s (2007) disaggregation of DMCs into sensing, seizing and reconfiguration capacities. We approach each of these dimensions separately and show that managers’ affective states influence each dimension differently.

Despite the unparalleled importance of value within healthcare, value-based models remain underutilised in the procurement of medical devices. Research is needed to understand what factors incentivise standard, low-priced device purchasing as opposed to value-adding devices with potentially higher overall health outcomes. Framed in agency theory, we examine the conditions under which different actors involved in purchasing decisions select premium-priced, value-adding medical devices over low-priced, standard medical devices.

We conducted 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects scenario-based vignette experiments on three UK-based online samples of managers (n = 599), medical professionals (n = 279) and purchasing managers (n = 449) with subjects randomly assigned to three treatments: (1) cost-saving incentives, (2) risk-sharing contracts and (3) stronger (versus weaker) clinical evidence.

Our analysis demonstrates the harmful effects of intra-organisational cost-saving incentives on value-based purchasing (VBP) adoption; the positive impact of inter-organisational risk-sharing contracts, especially when medical professionals are involved in decision-making; and the challenge of leveraging clinical evidence to support value claims.

Our results demonstrate the need to align incentives in a context with multiple intra- and inter-organisational agency relationships at play, as well as the difficulty of reducing information asymmetry when information is not easily interpretable to all decision-makers. Overall, the intra-organisational agency factors strongly influenced the choices for the inter-organisational agency relationship.

We contribute to VBP in healthcare by examining the role of intra- and inter-organisational agency relationships and incentives concerning VBP (non-) adoption. We also examine how the impact of such mechanisms differs between medical and purchasing (management) professionals.

Although businesses continue to take up artificial intelligence (AI), concerns remain that companies are not realising the full value of their investments. The study aims to provide insights into how AI creates business value by investigating the mediating role of Business Process Management (BPM) capabilities.

The integrative model of IT Business Value was contextualised, and structural equation modelling was applied to validate the proposed serial multiple mediation model using a sample of 448 organisations based in the EU.

The results validate the proposed serial multiple mediation model according to which AI adoption increases organisational performance through decision-making and business process performance. Process automation, organisational learning and process innovation are significant complementary partial mediators, thereby shedding light on how AI creates business value.

In pursuing a complex nomological framework, multiple perspectives on realising business value from AI investments were incorporated. Several moderators presenting complementary organisational resources (e.g. culture, digital maturity, BPM maturity) could be included to identify behaviour in more complex relationships. The ethical and moral issues surrounding AI and its use could also be examined.

The provided insights can help guide organisations towards the most promising AI activities of process automation with AI-enabled decision-making, organisational learning and process innovation to yield business value.

While previous research assumed a moderated relationship, this study extends the growing literature on AI business value by empirically investigating a comprehensive nomological network that links AI adoption to organisational performance in a BPM setting.

From the buying club’s perspective, the transfer of a player can be interpreted as an investment from which the club expects uncertain future benefits. This paper aims to develop a decision-oriented approach for the valuation of football players that could theoretically help clubs determine the subjective value of investing in a player to assess its potential economic advantage.

We build on a semi-investment-theoretical risk-value model and elaborate an approach that can be applied in imperfect markets under uncertainty. Furthermore, we illustrate the valuation process with a numerical example based on fictitious data. Due to this explicitly intended decision support, our approach differs fundamentally from a large part of the literature, which is empirically based and attempts to explain observable figures through various influencing factors.

We propose a semi-investment-theoretical valuation approach that is based on a two-step model, namely, a first valuation at the club level and a final calculation to determine the decision value for an individual player. In contrast to the previous literature, we do not rely on an econometric framework that attempts to explain observable past variables but rather present a general, forward-looking decision model that can support managers in their investment decisions.

This approach is the first to show managers how to make an economically rational investment decision by determining the maximum payable price. Nevertheless, there is no normative requirement for the decision-maker. The club will obviously have to supplement the calculus with nonfinancial objectives. Overall, our paper can constitute a first step toward decision-oriented player valuation and for theoretical comparison with practical investment decisions in football clubs, which obviously take into account other specific sports team decisions.

How can managers reduce information asymmetry in dyadic manager-external stakeholder relationships in a complex and evolving environment? Addressing this question has significant implications for firm survival, growth, and competitive advantage.

We have adopted a multiparadigm approach to theory building, known as metatriangulation. We integrate the dynamic capabilities, sensemaking, and evolutionary theory literatures to theorize how managers can relate to stakeholders in a complex and evolving environment.

We propose, via a conceptual framework and three propositions, “evolutionary sensemaking” as the managerial metacognitive dynamic capability that helps managers hone their understanding based on the evolutionary changes in the stakeholder’s interpretations of information quality preferences. The framework unfolds across three evolutionary stages: sensing preferences' variation of the stakeholder, seizing preferences, and transforming for complexity alignment and retention. The propositions focus on managing complexity in stakeholder information quality preference, employing cognitive capabilities to simplify, interpret, and align interpretations for effective information asymmetry reduction.

To develop the metacognitive dynamic capability of evolutionary sensemaking, managers need to train for and foster the underlying complex cognitive capabilities by enhancing their (1) perception and attention skills, (2) problem-solving and reasoning skills, and (3) language, communication, and social cognition skills, focusing specifically on reducing the complexity embedded in stakeholder cognition and diverse stakeholder preferences for information quality. Contrary to the current advice to “keep things simple” and provide “more” information to the stakeholders for opportunism reduction, trust-building, and superior governance, our framework suggests that managers hone their cognitive capabilities by learning to deal with the underlying complexity.

The proposed framework and propositions address research gaps in reducing information asymmetry. It enriches the dynamic capabilities literature by recognizing complexity (as opposed to opportunism) as an alternative source of information asymmetry, which needs to be addressed in this stream of research. It extends the sensemaking literature by identifying the complexity sources – i.e. stakeholder preferences for diverse information quality attributes and the associated cognitive preference interpretation processes. The article enhances evolutionary theory by delving into microprocesses related to information asymmetry reduction, which the existing literature does not thoroughly investigate.

Charles Sanders Peirce (1839–1914), recognized as the father of philosophical pragmatism, has been described as a philosopher’s philosopher. Eliyahu Moshe Goldratt (1947–2011), considered the father of the management philosophy theory of constraints (TOC), has been described as being, first and foremost, a philosopher. The TOC body of knowledge is mainly preserved as concrete methodologies used in the management discipline. By examining the foundational elements of synechism and the TOC, the purpose of this study is to investigate the intellectual connections between the arguments and legacies of Goldratt and Peirce. Although this connection is worthy of much further investigation, the research emphasizes the possible implications from a management philosophy perspective.

Based on a “review with an attitude,” the authors first examined the foundations of Goldratt’s TOC through the lens of Peirce’s synechism. Next, the authors then examined how the study of Peirce combined with a selection of contemporary research in the management and organizational studies domain could point out a direction toward completing Goldratt’s unfinished intellectual work to establish a unified science management while addressing some of the current gaps in the TOC body of knowledge.

Major findings show that synechism’s growth may extend TOC knowledge, improving managerial practice in organizations. Findings on the convergent ideas of both also reveal that Goldratt valued all synechism categories, emphasizing the importance of not overlooking Firstness. Furthermore, the study analyzes the abductive inference demonstrated in the two use cases, introducing an additional metaphor to the management of organizational systems inspired by Peirce’s philosophical concepts. The research concludes that incorporating TOC and synechism principles can enhance management and organizational practices and enrich management philosophy and theories.

This pioneering research opens promising opportunities to draw parallels between Peirce and Goldratt. Interdisciplinary collaboration will enhance the rigor and validity of integrating synechism and TOC. Experts in organizational behavior, systems theory and complexity science can provide valuable insights into this debate, while practitioners and consultants could help identify barriers and opportunities for integrating synechistic principles.

The study proposes a novel abductive approach using Peirce’s cable metaphor as an initial framework to build a unified science of management based on evolutionary stages: TOC, common sense and connectedness.

This research reinforces the argument that contemporary management practices need philosophical thinking. The authors argue that re-evaluating the foundations of management thought enriches the decision-making process in organizations and the understanding of contemporary theories in management and organizational studies.