Articles scientifiques

Before You Make That Big Decision


Harvard Business Review

2011, vol. June 2011

Départements : Stratégie et Politique d’Entreprise

When an executive makes a big bet, he or she typically relies on the judgment of a team that has put together a proposal for a strategic course of action. After all, the team will have delved into the pros and cons much more deeply than the executive has time to do. The problem is, biases invariably creep into any team’s reasoning—and often dangerously distort its thinking. A team that has fallen in love with its recommendation, for instance, may subconsciously dismiss evidence that contradicts its theories, give far too much weight to one piece of data, or make faulty comparisons to another business case.That’s why, with important decisions, executives need to conduct a careful review not only of the content of recommendations but of the recommendation process. To that end, the authors—Kahneman, who won a Nobel Prize in economics for his work on cognitive biases; Lovallo of the University of Sydney; and Sibony of McKinsey—have put together a 12-question checklist intended to unearth and neutralize defects in teams’ thinking. These questions help leaders examine whether a team has explored alternatives appropriately, gathered all the right information, and used well-grounded numbers to support its case. They also highlight considerations such as whether the team might be unduly influenced by self-interest, overconfidence, or attachment to past decisions.By using this practical tool, executives will build decision processes over time that reduce the effects of biases and upgrade the quality of decisions their organizations make. The payoffs can be significant: A recent McKinsey study of more than 1,000 business investments, for instance, showed that when companies worked to reduce the effects of bias, they raised their returns on investment by seven percentage points.Executives need to realize that the judgment of even highly experienced, superbly competent managers can be fallible. A disciplined decision-making process, not individual genius, is the key to good strategy

Better Vision for the Poor

B. GARRETTE, A. Karnani, J. Kassalow, M. Lee

Stanford Social Innovation Review

printemps 2011, pp.66-71

Départements : Stratégie et Politique d’Entreprise, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Several social enterprises are attempting to provide eyeglasses to the 500 million to 1 billion poor people in the world who need them. Some enterprises see the provision of trained optometrists as the key to solving the problem; others are focused on cost reduction; others still are focused on technological innovations. Why haven't any of these approaches succeeded on a large scale?

Cooperation among competitors as status-seeking behavior: Network ties and status differentiation

V. Perrone, M. TORTORIELLO, B. McEvily

European Management Journal

octobre 2011, vol. 29, pp.335-346

Départements : Stratégie et Politique d’Entreprise

Entrepreneurial Initiative Selling within Organizations: Towards a More Comprehensive Motivational Framework


Journal of Management Studies

septembre 2011, vol. 48, n°6, pp.1269-1290

Départements : Stratégie et Politique d’Entreprise

We develop and test a motivational framework to explain the intensity with which individuals sell entrepreneurial initiatives within their organizations. Initiative selling efforts may be driven by several factors that hitherto have not been given full consideration: initiative characteristics, individuals' anticipation of rewards, and their level of dissatisfaction. On the basis of a survey in a mail service firm of 192 managers who proposed an entrepreneurial initiative, we find that individuals' reported intensity of their selling efforts with respect to that initiative is greater when they (1) believe that the organizational benefits of the initiative are high, (2) perceive that the initiative is consistent with current organizational practices (although this effect is weak), (3) believe that their immediate organizational environment provides extrinsic rewards for initiatives, and (4) are satisfied with the current organizational situation. These findings extend previous expectancy theory-based explanations of initiative selling (by considering the roles of initiative characteristics and that of initiative valence for the proponent) and show the role of satisfaction as an important motivational driver for initiative selling.

Heterogeneous Motives and the Collective Creation of Value

F. Bridoux, R. Coeurderoy, R. DURAND

Academy of Management Review

octobre 2011, vol. 36, n°4, pp.711-730

Départements : Stratégie et Politique d’Entreprise, GREGHEC (CNRS)

Mots clés : Value, Motivation (Psychology), Behavior economics, Social psychology, Monetary incentives, Cooperation

The collective creation of value has remained underexplored in management research. Drawing on social psychology and behavioral economics, we analyze the impact of the mix of employee motives to cooperate and compare the collective value generated by three motivational systems: individual monetary incentives, benevolent cooperation, and disciplined cooperation. Aligning the motivational system with the mix of motives in the workforce allows firms to foster cooperation and realize the value creation potential of their resources