Leadership and decision-making under uncertainty

Ameln, Falko von

doi:10.1007/s11612-021-00607-4

Cited by 8 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A first analysis suggests that leaderless groups (i.e., groups in which leader-/followership did not emerge) performed worse in terms of decision quality. This is in line with findings that the emergence of leadership can have an advantageous effect in group movement and group decision making (Boos et al, 2014;Ioannou et al, 2015;Strandburg-Peshkin et al, 2015;Sridhar et al, 2021;von Ameln, 2021). However, as most groups in our study spontaneously exhibited leader-/followership, this result can be only preliminary in nature.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

In no uncertain terms: Group cohesion did not affect exploration and group decision making under low uncertainty

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Group decision making under uncertainty often requires groups to balance exploration of their environment with exploitation of the seemingly best option. In order to succeed at this collective induction, groups need to merge the knowledge of all group members and combine goal-oriented and social motivations (i.e., group cohesion). This paper presents three studies that investigate whether more cohesive groups perform worse at collective induction tasks as they spend less time exploring possible options. Study 1 simulates group decision making with the ε-greedy algorithm in order to identify suitable manipulations of group cohesion and investigate how differing exploration lengths can affect outcomes of group decisions. Study 2 (N = 108, 18 groups á 6 participants) used an experimental manipulation of group cohesion in a simple card choice task to investigate how group cohesion might affect group decision making when only limited social information is available. Study 3 (N = 96, 16 groups á 6 participants) experimentally manipulated group cohesion and used the HoneyComb paradigm, a movement-based group experiment platform, to investigate which group processes would emerge during decision making and how these processes would affect the relationships between group cohesion, exploration length, and group decision making. Study 1 found that multiplicative cohesion rewards have detrimental effects on group decision making, while additive group rewards could ameliorate negative effects of the cohesion reward, especially when reported separately from task rewards. Additionally, exploration length was found to profoundly affect decision quality. Studies 2 and 3 showed that groups could identify the best reward option successfully, regardless of group cohesion manipulation. This effect is interpreted as a ceiling effect as the decision task was likely too easy to solve. Study 3 identified that spatial group cohesion on the playing field correlated with self-reported entitativity and leader-/followership emerged spontaneously in most groups and correlated with self-reported perceptions of leader-/followership in the game. We discuss advantages of simulation studies, possible adaptations to the ε-greedy algorithm, and methodological aspects of measuring behavioral group cohesion and leadership to inform empirical studies investigating group decision making under uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

In no uncertain terms: Group cohesion did not affect exploration and group decision making under low uncertainty

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Firstly, we observed that organizations focused on acquiring Organizational Environment capabilities, such as advanced technologies and applications, are more adept at navigating all stages of Decision-Making. This aligns with prior studies by [40,65], showcasing how the integration of Organizational Environment and Decision Making can enhance potential contributions to Market Performance. Thus, our results partially support Hypotheses H1, H2, and H3, indicating that Organizational Environment resources significantly influence all stages of Decision-Making, ultimately impacting Market Performance.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 87%

The Link between Environment and Organizational Architecture for Decision-Making in Educational Institutions: A Systemic Approach

Serra,

Gonçalves,

Bortoluzzi

et al. 2024

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous organizations employ decision-making processes to support operational activities; however, decisions and mistakes can significantly impact Market Performance (MP) due to the oversight of organizational architecture and the environment. This becomes particularly critical in the realm of strategic management, where improper practices and a lack of management understanding can lead to substantial losses. Hence, a systemic investigation was undertaken to explore the repercussions of not adopting such an approach concerning organizational architecture and the environment. Employing a quantitative analysis via hierarchical regression involving Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Ordinary Least Squares, using data gathered from a survey encompassing 134 collaborators from Brazilian Federal Universities. The findings show that the organizational environment positively impacts decision-making, leading to better MP. Additionally, organizational architecture partially mediates the link between the organizational environment and decision-making. Remarkably, national literature lacked research combining Student Assistance Program (PNAES) actions with MP improvement to assess Brazilian Federal Universities’ effectiveness.

show abstract

“…With increasing global change (i.e., climate change, social change, geopolitical change), fundamental uncertainties grow; systems elude linear controllability as complexity increases [48]. This reflects that the decision makers we interviewed usually cannot align themselves with only one goal, but often have to meet conflicting expectations and rationalities.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, system trust is also identified as being particularly significant, i.e., trust in the functioning of institutions and rule-and procedure-based decision making, in an integrity of input independent of personal interests and judgments. In acceptance research [48], the management of decisions is also mentioned as an important aspect of making decisions while being uncertain. Von Ameln [48] takes the example of the COVID-19 pandemic to explain the challenges of decision-making processes in uncertain times.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In acceptance research [48], the management of decisions is also mentioned as an important aspect of making decisions while being uncertain. Von Ameln [48] takes the example of the COVID-19 pandemic to explain the challenges of decision-making processes in uncertain times. He highlights the state of not knowing, the multiplicity of variables, politely, and paradox in complex systems as reasons that make macroscopic political decisions particularly difficult under uncertainty.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Taking the Lead into Sustainability: Decision Makers’ Competencies for a Greener Future

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many research articles describe competencies that people need in order to think, develop, and enact a sustainable future. Based on findings from the political economy, this paper argues that it is the macroscopic decisions in the public sphere that have an impact on society and the environment. Therefore, decision makers in the economy, politics, and civil society are important actors to enable a societal transformation towards sustainability by making macroscopic decisions. Based on these assumptions, this empirical research article analyzes the competencies decision makers such as ministers, CEOs, or union leaders need to contribute to a sustainable future in their professional life. We conducted interviews with 14 high-level decision makers and analyzed their competencies based on Wiek et al.’s framework on sustainability competencies. The findings show how they enact and organize the competencies needed for steering the sustainable transition. Linking all competencies is particularly important, especially at the intersection of different systems, to develop a macroscale, system-oriented decision. The authors suggest to consider systems and interpersonal thinking as extremely interdisciplinary competencies and to put a focus on public-sphere actions when educating future leaders. Moreover, the results indicate that dealing with uncertainty, following one’s own values, and building up resilience play a major role for decision makers.

show abstract

Leadership and decision-making under uncertainty

Cited by 8 publications

References 24 publications

In no uncertain terms: Group cohesion did not affect exploration and group decision making under low uncertainty

In no uncertain terms: Group cohesion did not affect exploration and group decision making under low uncertainty

The Link between Environment and Organizational Architecture for Decision-Making in Educational Institutions: A Systemic Approach

Taking the Lead into Sustainability: Decision Makers’ Competencies for a Greener Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About