像科学家一样做出商业模式决策:战略承诺、不确定性和经济绩效

IF 6.5 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Elena Novelli, Chiara Spina
{"title":"像科学家一样做出商业模式决策:战略承诺、不确定性和经济绩效","authors":"Elena Novelli, Chiara Spina","doi":"10.1002/smj.3636","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research SummaryThis study abductively investigates how a firm's degree of business model development—the extent to which strategic choices are crystallized—moderates the impact of a scientific approach to decision‐making on performance. We present findings from a field experiment involving 261 entrepreneurs, where treated entrepreneurs learn to apply a scientific approach, while control counterparts receive comparable content without this approach. Results show that the effect of scientific decision making varies with business model development. Treated entrepreneurs with higher degrees of business model development elaborated their theories of value focusing on lower‐level choices, achieving superior economic performance compared to controls. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with lower levels of business model development reevaluated fundamental aspects, resulting in increased epistemic uncertainty and less favorable short‐term economic outcomes compared to controls.Managerial Using a field experiment with 261 entrepreneurs, we explored how the degree of business strategy definition influences the benefits of adopting a scientific approach to decision‐making. In the experiment, half of the entrepreneurs were taught to use a scientific approach for making decisions (the treated group), while the others received similar training without the scientific approach (the control group). Results show that treated entrepreneurs with already defined strategies benefited more, experiencing improved performance even in the short term. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with strategies still under definition experienced more uncertainty and lower short‐term economic performance, as the scientific approach prompted them to reassess and adjust their core strategic decisions.","PeriodicalId":22023,"journal":{"name":"Strategic Management Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making business model decisions like scientists: Strategic commitment, uncertainty, and economic performance\",\"authors\":\"Elena Novelli, Chiara Spina\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/smj.3636\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research SummaryThis study abductively investigates how a firm's degree of business model development—the extent to which strategic choices are crystallized—moderates the impact of a scientific approach to decision‐making on performance. We present findings from a field experiment involving 261 entrepreneurs, where treated entrepreneurs learn to apply a scientific approach, while control counterparts receive comparable content without this approach. Results show that the effect of scientific decision making varies with business model development. Treated entrepreneurs with higher degrees of business model development elaborated their theories of value focusing on lower‐level choices, achieving superior economic performance compared to controls. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with lower levels of business model development reevaluated fundamental aspects, resulting in increased epistemic uncertainty and less favorable short‐term economic outcomes compared to controls.Managerial Using a field experiment with 261 entrepreneurs, we explored how the degree of business strategy definition influences the benefits of adopting a scientific approach to decision‐making. In the experiment, half of the entrepreneurs were taught to use a scientific approach for making decisions (the treated group), while the others received similar training without the scientific approach (the control group). Results show that treated entrepreneurs with already defined strategies benefited more, experiencing improved performance even in the short term. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with strategies still under definition experienced more uncertainty and lower short‐term economic performance, as the scientific approach prompted them to reassess and adjust their core strategic decisions.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22023,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Strategic Management Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Strategic Management Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3636\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Strategic Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3636","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究摘要本研究归纳了企业的商业模式发展程度--战略选择的具体化程度--如何调节科学决策方法对业绩的影响。我们展示了一项有 261 名企业家参与的实地实验的结果,在该实验中,接受治疗的企业家学习应用科学决策方法,而对照组的企业家则接受没有这种方法的类似内容。结果显示,科学决策的效果因商业模式的发展而异。商业模式发展程度较高的受治疗创业者在阐述其价值理论时,会侧重于较低层次的选择,与对照组相比,他们取得了更优越的经济业绩。反之,商业模式发展程度较低的受治疗企业家则会重新评估基本方面,从而导致认识上的不确定性增加,与对照组相比,短期经济效益较差。在实验中,一半的企业家接受了使用科学方法进行决策的培训(治疗组),而其他企业家则接受了类似的培训,但没有接受科学方法的培训(对照组)。结果表明,接受培训的创业者如果已经制定了明确的战略,就会获益更多,即使在短期内,他们的业绩也会有所提高。相反,战略仍未确定的受训创业者则经历了更多的不确定性,短期经济业绩较低,因为科学方法促使他们重新评估和调整其核心战略决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Making business model decisions like scientists: Strategic commitment, uncertainty, and economic performance
Research SummaryThis study abductively investigates how a firm's degree of business model development—the extent to which strategic choices are crystallized—moderates the impact of a scientific approach to decision‐making on performance. We present findings from a field experiment involving 261 entrepreneurs, where treated entrepreneurs learn to apply a scientific approach, while control counterparts receive comparable content without this approach. Results show that the effect of scientific decision making varies with business model development. Treated entrepreneurs with higher degrees of business model development elaborated their theories of value focusing on lower‐level choices, achieving superior economic performance compared to controls. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with lower levels of business model development reevaluated fundamental aspects, resulting in increased epistemic uncertainty and less favorable short‐term economic outcomes compared to controls.Managerial Using a field experiment with 261 entrepreneurs, we explored how the degree of business strategy definition influences the benefits of adopting a scientific approach to decision‐making. In the experiment, half of the entrepreneurs were taught to use a scientific approach for making decisions (the treated group), while the others received similar training without the scientific approach (the control group). Results show that treated entrepreneurs with already defined strategies benefited more, experiencing improved performance even in the short term. Conversely, treated entrepreneurs with strategies still under definition experienced more uncertainty and lower short‐term economic performance, as the scientific approach prompted them to reassess and adjust their core strategic decisions.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.70
自引率
8.40%
发文量
109
期刊介绍: At the Strategic Management Journal, we are committed to publishing top-tier research that addresses key questions in the field of strategic management and captivates scholars in this area. Our publication welcomes manuscripts covering a wide range of topics, perspectives, and research methodologies. As a result, our editorial decisions truly embrace the diversity inherent in the field.
×
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