Often wrong, never in doubt: Mitigating leadership overconfidence in decision-making

IF 3.1 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Organizational Dynamics Pub Date : 2024-07-01 DOI:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2023.101011
{"title":"Often wrong, never in doubt: Mitigating leadership overconfidence in decision-making","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.orgdyn.2023.101011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Leaders are often celebrated for quick and decisive actions. Such actions include the ability to cut through the chaff and make rapid decisions in fast-paced environments. However, while decisiveness is admirable, poor decision-making is not. And an increasing amount of research informs us that leaders tend to be far too overconfident about their decision-making ability. First, this article details several ways that leaders’unconscious cognitive biases can cloud their decision-making ability. These biases such as attribution bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, the planning fallacy, and jumping to faulty conclusions are particularly dangerous because everyone is infected by them—yet, because of the bias blind spot, leaders tend to naturally believe they are immune. Second, this article details ways that leaders can “mistake proof” their decision-making process. By exercising activities like pre-mortems, speed-accuracy tradeoffs, reference class forecasting, and improving reflective capacity, leaders can impose systems and methods to help protect their decision-making against their greatest potential nemesis—themselves.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48061,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Dynamics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090261623000554","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Leaders are often celebrated for quick and decisive actions. Such actions include the ability to cut through the chaff and make rapid decisions in fast-paced environments. However, while decisiveness is admirable, poor decision-making is not. And an increasing amount of research informs us that leaders tend to be far too overconfident about their decision-making ability. First, this article details several ways that leaders’unconscious cognitive biases can cloud their decision-making ability. These biases such as attribution bias, the Dunning-Kruger effect, the planning fallacy, and jumping to faulty conclusions are particularly dangerous because everyone is infected by them—yet, because of the bias blind spot, leaders tend to naturally believe they are immune. Second, this article details ways that leaders can “mistake proof” their decision-making process. By exercising activities like pre-mortems, speed-accuracy tradeoffs, reference class forecasting, and improving reflective capacity, leaders can impose systems and methods to help protect their decision-making against their greatest potential nemesis—themselves.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经常错误,从不怀疑:减轻领导对决策的过度自信
领导人往往因行动迅速果断而受到称赞。这些行动包括在快节奏的环境中剔除冗杂和快速决策的能力。然而,虽然果断令人钦佩,但糟糕的决策却不是。越来越多的研究告诉我们,领导者往往对自己的决策能力过于自信。首先,这篇文章详述了领导者无意识的认知偏见会影响他们决策能力的几种方式。这些偏见,如归因偏见、邓宁-克鲁格效应、计划谬误,以及草率得出错误的结论,都特别危险,因为每个人都受到它们的感染——然而,由于偏见盲点,领导者倾向于自然而然地认为自己是免疫的。其次,本文详细介绍了领导者在决策过程中“防错”的方法。通过进行事前分析、速度-准确性权衡、参考班级预测和提高反思能力等活动,领导者可以采用系统和方法来帮助保护他们的决策免受最大的潜在敌人——他们自己的伤害。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Organizational Dynamics domain is primarily organizational behavior and development and secondarily, HRM and strategic management. The objective is to link leading-edge thought and research with management practice. Organizational Dynamics publishes articles that embody both theoretical and practical content, showing how research findings can help deal more effectively with the dynamics of organizational life.
期刊最新文献
Trio of human, old and new copilots: Collaborative accountability of human, manuals/standards, and artificial intelligence (AI) Positive mindset: PsyCap’s roles in PERMA+4 and positive organizational psychology, behavior, and scholarship 2.0 Design thinking: Executing your organization's commitment to customer centricity Editorial Board Often wrong, never in doubt: Mitigating leadership overconfidence in decision-making
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1