机敏的企业家与系统的管理者:决策能力的比较分析

IF 1.6 Q2 Business, Management and Accounting Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship Pub Date : 2023-07-24 DOI:10.1108/ebhrm-11-2022-0267
F. Tommasi, R. Sartori, Sara Bollarino, Andrea Ceschi
{"title":"机敏的企业家与系统的管理者:决策能力的比较分析","authors":"F. Tommasi, R. Sartori, Sara Bollarino, Andrea Ceschi","doi":"10.1108/ebhrm-11-2022-0267","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeDecision-making competence (DMC) of entrepreneurs and managers is a longstanding topic in this increasingly globalized world. These figures operate in conditions not within their own control, and good levels of DMC are often considered to be desirable for the flourishing of business and society. This paper reports an empirical investigation on the DMC of entrepreneurs and managers, in an attempt to inform about their tendencies to incur in risky and costly choices.Design/methodology/approachThree cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics of entrepreneurs and managers, namely under/overconfidence (UOC, i.e. self-confidence in taking decisions), resistance to sunk costs (RSC, i.e. propensity to take cost investments) and consistency in risk perception (CRP, i.e. how well individuals understand probability rules) were considered . Cognitive biases measures were used in a cross-sectional study on a sample of n = 639 entrepreneurs and n = 512 managers. Data collected via online survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics to determine differences among entrepreneurs and managers DMC.FindingsAnalyses reveal that entrepreneurs exhibit higher levels of UOC compared to managers with a marked presence of UOC among entrepreneurs at younger ages. Conversely, performance regarding RSC improves with higher education levels while age and RSC are positively correlated only for managers, regardless of education. Lastly, entrepreneurs and managers resulted as not being affected by CRP. This study discusses these results to provide initial insights for further avenues of research and practice.Originality/valueThe study offers an innovative, evidence-based viewpoint on how entrepreneurs and managers deal with risky and costly decisions. It offers an initial understanding of the role of UOC, RSC and CRP, that is specific cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics, in the DMC of these working figures. The study forwards avenues of scrutiny of quick-witted entrepreneurs and systematic managers.","PeriodicalId":51902,"journal":{"name":"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quick-witted entrepreneurs versus systematic managers: a comparative analysis of decision-making competence\",\"authors\":\"F. Tommasi, R. Sartori, Sara Bollarino, Andrea Ceschi\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/ebhrm-11-2022-0267\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeDecision-making competence (DMC) of entrepreneurs and managers is a longstanding topic in this increasingly globalized world. These figures operate in conditions not within their own control, and good levels of DMC are often considered to be desirable for the flourishing of business and society. This paper reports an empirical investigation on the DMC of entrepreneurs and managers, in an attempt to inform about their tendencies to incur in risky and costly choices.Design/methodology/approachThree cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics of entrepreneurs and managers, namely under/overconfidence (UOC, i.e. self-confidence in taking decisions), resistance to sunk costs (RSC, i.e. propensity to take cost investments) and consistency in risk perception (CRP, i.e. how well individuals understand probability rules) were considered . Cognitive biases measures were used in a cross-sectional study on a sample of n = 639 entrepreneurs and n = 512 managers. Data collected via online survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics to determine differences among entrepreneurs and managers DMC.FindingsAnalyses reveal that entrepreneurs exhibit higher levels of UOC compared to managers with a marked presence of UOC among entrepreneurs at younger ages. Conversely, performance regarding RSC improves with higher education levels while age and RSC are positively correlated only for managers, regardless of education. Lastly, entrepreneurs and managers resulted as not being affected by CRP. This study discusses these results to provide initial insights for further avenues of research and practice.Originality/valueThe study offers an innovative, evidence-based viewpoint on how entrepreneurs and managers deal with risky and costly decisions. It offers an initial understanding of the role of UOC, RSC and CRP, that is specific cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics, in the DMC of these working figures. The study forwards avenues of scrutiny of quick-witted entrepreneurs and systematic managers.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51902,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/ebhrm-11-2022-0267\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Business, Management and Accounting\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evidence-based HRM-A Global Forum for Empirical Scholarship","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/ebhrm-11-2022-0267","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Business, Management and Accounting","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这个日益全球化的世界里,企业家和管理者的决策能力(DMC)是一个长期存在的话题。这些数字是在他们无法控制的条件下运行的,良好的DMC水平通常被认为是商业和社会繁荣所需要的。本文对企业家和管理者的DMC进行了实证调查,试图了解他们在风险和成本选择方面的倾向。设计/方法/方法与企业家和管理者的经营策略和个人特征相关的三种认知偏差,即自信不足/过度自信(UOC,即决策的自信),对沉没成本的抵制(RSC,即进行成本投资的倾向)和风险感知的一致性(CRP,即个人对概率规则的理解程度)。在对n = 639名企业家和n = 512名经理的样本进行的横断面研究中,使用了认知偏差测量。通过在线调查收集的数据,采用描述性统计和推理统计分析企业家和管理者DMC之间的差异。研究结果分析表明,与管理者相比,企业家表现出更高的UOC水平,在年轻的企业家中明显存在UOC。相反,与RSC相关的绩效随着受教育程度的提高而提高,而年龄和RSC仅与管理人员呈正相关,而与受教育程度无关。最后,企业家和管理者没有受到CRP的影响。本研究讨论了这些结果,为进一步的研究和实践途径提供初步的见解。独创性/价值这项研究为企业家和管理者如何处理风险和昂贵的决策提供了一个创新的、基于证据的观点。它提供了对UOC, RSC和CRP的作用的初步理解,即与操作策略和个人特征相关的特定认知偏差,在这些工作图形的DMC中。该研究提出了对机敏的企业家和系统管理者进行审查的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Quick-witted entrepreneurs versus systematic managers: a comparative analysis of decision-making competence
PurposeDecision-making competence (DMC) of entrepreneurs and managers is a longstanding topic in this increasingly globalized world. These figures operate in conditions not within their own control, and good levels of DMC are often considered to be desirable for the flourishing of business and society. This paper reports an empirical investigation on the DMC of entrepreneurs and managers, in an attempt to inform about their tendencies to incur in risky and costly choices.Design/methodology/approachThree cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics of entrepreneurs and managers, namely under/overconfidence (UOC, i.e. self-confidence in taking decisions), resistance to sunk costs (RSC, i.e. propensity to take cost investments) and consistency in risk perception (CRP, i.e. how well individuals understand probability rules) were considered . Cognitive biases measures were used in a cross-sectional study on a sample of n = 639 entrepreneurs and n = 512 managers. Data collected via online survey were analyzed using descriptive statistics and inferential statistics to determine differences among entrepreneurs and managers DMC.FindingsAnalyses reveal that entrepreneurs exhibit higher levels of UOC compared to managers with a marked presence of UOC among entrepreneurs at younger ages. Conversely, performance regarding RSC improves with higher education levels while age and RSC are positively correlated only for managers, regardless of education. Lastly, entrepreneurs and managers resulted as not being affected by CRP. This study discusses these results to provide initial insights for further avenues of research and practice.Originality/valueThe study offers an innovative, evidence-based viewpoint on how entrepreneurs and managers deal with risky and costly decisions. It offers an initial understanding of the role of UOC, RSC and CRP, that is specific cognitive biases associated with operational strategies and individual characteristics, in the DMC of these working figures. The study forwards avenues of scrutiny of quick-witted entrepreneurs and systematic managers.
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
2.70
自引率
6.20%
发文量
39
期刊最新文献
Do employees involved in career accidents experience greater work engagement? The moderating role of job resources Healthy employees are assets: a structural model based on individual and organizational characteristics for hotel employee well-being The moderating effects of positive thinking on the relationship between job stress and turnover intention Extending training predictors link with training transfer through mediation of motivation Impacts of knowledge-based HRM, knowledge sharing and perceived organizational supports on innovation performance: a moderated-mediation analysis
×
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