Experiential Effects of Dialectical Inquiry, Devil's Advocacy and Consensus Approaches to Strategic Decision Making.

Knowledge management in technology-focused firms in emerging economies: Caveats on capabilities, networks, and real options

“…However, these scholars contend that organizations that are undergoing renewal must often make difficult, comprehensive decisions in which divergent perspectives are critical in ensuring the discovery and appropriate evaluation of multiple alternatives. Thus, from a general or "context free" perspective (Meyer, 2006), conflict inducing decision making processes such as dialectical inquiry and devil's advocacy (e.g., Finkelstein & Mooney, 2003;Schweiger, Sandberg, & Rechner, 1989) would be consistent with normative theory. However, the adoption of such techniques would likely be counter to strong cultural norms in emergent economies such as China.…”

Fostering Creativity and Innovation without Encouraging Unethical Behavior

“…Prescriptive frameworks for programmed conflict exist for enhancing decision-quality and avoiding groupthink. Examples include devil's advocacy, in which group members (often peer selected) are assigned to probe for flawed assumptions, incomplete or inaccurate data, inconsistencies, illogical conclusions or similar deficiencies (Boulding, 1964), or dialectic inquiry, in which group members are partitioned into subgroups with the charge to evaluate and improve upon solutions proposed by other subgroups (Schweiger et al, 1989). However, we are aware of no studies that report the frequency of use or number of firms that employ these efficacious group decision-making techniques.…”

Top management team conflict and entrepreneurial strategy making in China

“…Studies indicate that team members experiencing cognitive conflicts are more committed to the decision and its implementation (Amason, 1996). Team members who disagree on key issues are more likely to evaluate additional viable strategic alternatives (Schweiger, Sandberg, & Rechner, 1989) and are more open to multiple perspectives, thereby promoting innovative thinking (Cosier & Dalton, 1990). This is especially important for new ventures because having more strategic alternatives helps new ventures make better decisions (Eisenhardt, 1989).…”