Exploration and Negative Feedback – Behavioral Learning, Escalation of Commitment, and Organizational Design

4区 管理学 Q3 Economics, Econometrics and Finance
T. Keil, Pasi Kuusela, Nils Stieglitz
{"title":"Exploration and Negative Feedback – Behavioral Learning, Escalation of Commitment, and Organizational Design","authors":"T. Keil, Pasi Kuusela, Nils Stieglitz","doi":"10.1108/S0742-332220180000040005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract \nHow 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.","PeriodicalId":46550,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Strategic Management-A Research Annual","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/S0742-332220180000040005","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Strategic Management-A Research Annual","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/S0742-332220180000040005","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Economics, Econometrics and Finance","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Abstract 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.
探索和负面反馈——行为学习、承诺升级和组织设计
摘要组织如何应对有关其创新活动的负面反馈?在本章中,作者调和了来自行为学习和承诺升级(EoC)视角的关于负绩效反馈下持续性的矛盾预测。作者的核心论点表明,这两种观点所表明的看似矛盾的心理过程同时发生在决策者身上,但组织角色和奖励系统的设计影响了它们在决策任务中的普遍性。具体而言,作者认为,对于负责单个项目的决策者来说,对项目负面绩效反馈的反应主要由EoC文献预测的自我辩护和避免损失机制决定,而对于负责项目组合的决策者,对项目负面表现的反应主要是行为学习理论预测的表现不佳的替代方案的抽样不足。除了将决策权分配给不同的组织角色外,组织设计者还通过设计奖励系统,特别是通过设定或多或少模糊的目标、愿望水平、提供激励的时间范围和容错水平,来塑造这些机制的力量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: Advances in Strategic Management is dedicated to communicating innovative, new research that advances theory and practice in Strategic Management. The domain of the series encompasses, but is not limited to, corporate and business unit strategy, strategic organization and process, alliances and networks, and competitive dynamics. The series is committed to expanding the scope of Strategic Management theory and analysis and enriching practice by: -Encouraging multitheoretical approaches that span multiple social science disciplines -Welcoming papers using a diversity of innovative research methods -Creating focused volumes that explore in depth promising new research directions, consolidate research streams, and address significant current theoretical and practical problems.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信