Erratic strategic decisions: when and why managers are inconsistent in strategic decision making

While decision makers in organizations frequently make good decisions rooted in stable and consistent preferences, such consistency in outcomes is not always the case. In this study, we adopt a psychological perspective of judgment to investigate managers' erratic strategic decisions, which we define as a manager's inconsistent judgments that can shape the direction of the firm. In a study of 2,048 decisions made by 64 CEOs of technology firms, we examine how both metacognitive experience and perceptions of the external environment (hostility and dynamism) could affect the extent to which managers make erratic strategic decisions. The results indicate that managers with greater metacognitive experience make less erratic strategic decisions. The results also indicate that in hostile environments managers make more erratic strategic decisions. But contrary to our expectations, in dynamic environments managers make less erratic strategic decisions. Similarly, hostility and dynamism interact in their effect on erratic strategic decisions in that the positive relationship between environmental hostility and erratic strategic decisions will be less positive for managers experiencing high environmental dynamism than those experiencing low environmental dynamism. These results have important implications for strategic decision‐making research. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Fluctuating levels of personal role engagement within the working day: A multilevel study

In this diary study, we examined a theoretical model in which the psychological conditions of meaningfulness, availability, and safety serve as mechanisms through which the work context during discrete situations within the workday influences “state” engagement. We further theorised that a person's “trait” level of engagement would exert cross‐level effects on the state level relationships. Multilevel analyses based on a sample of 124 individuals in six organisations and 1,446 situational observations revealed that meaningfulness and availability (but not safety) mediated the relationships between perceptions of the work context and state engagement. High levels of trait engagement strengthened the within‐person relation between availability and state engagement, yet weakened the within‐person relation between meaningfulness and state engagement, suggesting two different processes may be at play. Overall, the findings advance our understanding of engagement as a multilevel and temporally dynamic psychological phenomenon and promote a contextually based HRM approach to facilitating engagement.     

Do we understand each other? Toward a simulated empathy theory for entrepreneurship

Entrepreneurs often face the daunting task of predicting consumer demand before it exists—what consumers will want if and when the entrepreneur might make it available to them. Such alertness and judgment require an entrepreneur's vicarious imagination—the supposition of what a value experience would be like for another—such as empathy. Prevailing theories of empathy, however, are ill-suited for entrepreneurship theory as they are defined as and focused on an emotion-matching process. We propose that empathy be understood instead as a vicarious mental simulation of another's experience that, when accurate, produces similar emotions but also similar experiential knowledge. According to our ‘simulated empathy theory,’ empathy is a rational imagination process, intentional and knowledge-based. We connect this empathy process to contemporary entrepreneurship theory, namely opportunity recognition and evaluation processes. We also revise the concept of empathic accuracy accordingly, and derive therefrom some practical implications regarding how entrepreneurs can increase their empathic accuracy and, thereby, their chances of success.