The Influence of Core Self-Evaluations on Group Decision Making Processes: A Laboratory Experiment

Abstract

The personal trait called Core Self-Evaluations (CSE) has been receiving increasing attention from behavioral strategy scholars due to its ability to predict job performance and to explain some facets of decision-making processes. However, despite previous studies hypothesizing that managers with high values of CSE are intuitive thinkers, beyond any doubt of their capacities and that they significantly lead to positive results for their organization, no one has empirically investigated these assumptions. This gap can be substantiated by the following research question: “How do high Core Self-Evaluations influence team decision-making processes?”. Answering it provides insights on how the evaluations that decision makers make about situations (and the consequent actions that are implemented) highly depend on decision makers’ inner traits and their effect on cognition. To fill this gap, 120 graduate students—divided into groups of four—took part in a simulation game and were asked to make decisions acting the role of General Manager of a small-sized manufacturing firm. Tests aimed at identifying the CSE and intuitive/reflecting thinking approach of participants were administered; moreover, the performance resulting from their decision-making processes and their estimation of reached results were collected. Results show that an average level of CSE is preferable to balance intuitive and reflective thinking, as well as avoiding overconfidence bias and reaching the best performance possible. This work suggests that there is a huge misattribution in considering a high level of CSE as being beneficial for decision-making processes and consequent performance.

Core Self-Evaluations, Self-Leadership, and the Self-Serving Bias in Managerial Decision Making: A Laboratory Experiment

“…In line with other similar works (Cristofaro et al 2020) in research fields at a stage of development far from the nascent one (Edmondson and McManus 2007), the laboratory experiment followed by quantitative analysis has been considered as the most suitable research design. Emerging from reviews on self-leadership, such as Neck and Houghton (2006), these intermediate or mature fields of research-like the role of personal traits in self-leadership-are challenged by "focused questions and/or hypothesis relating existing constructs" (Edmondson andMcManus 2007, p. 1260).…”

“…Moreover, stemming from the fact that it has been proved that high self-efficacy leads to cognitive biases in managerial decision making (Stevenson et al 2019;Cristofaro et al 2020), we suggest whether high levels of self-leadership can lead to the occurrence of cognitive errors when making decisions. In particular, due to the already discovered relationship between self-efficacy and Self-Serving Bias (SSB)-also called Self-attribution bias (used interchangeably within the text)-which involves the internal attribution of successes and external attribution of failures (Watt and Martin 1994), a second research questions emerges as follows: "How does self-leadership influence the attribution of successes/failures?…”

“…The maximum and minimum values that can be reached by completing the CSE are, respectively, +24 and −24, with a neutral point at 0. Similar to Cristofaro et al (2020), thanks to the STATA function called 'egen' 1 , it was possible to derive three main clusters according to the average CSE value of managers: (i) low CSE managers (whose averages range from −24 to −9), (ii) average CSE managers (whose averages range from −8 to +8), and (iii) high CSE managers (whose averages range from +9 to +24). Thanks to the implementation of this STATA function, the initial sample of 93 managers was reallocated in the afore-mentioned three clusters, equating to 31 individuals each.…”

“…Few studies, however, have inspected the link between CSE and decision-making process variables. One of these is the contribution of Cristofaro et al (2020) through the test of a sample population of 120 Master's degree students who were involved in a business game and were challenged in making strategic choices (in teams) playing the role of executives of a small-sized corporation. The authors found that a huge level of CSE is positively related to an intuitive decision-making process and a high degree of performance in the workplace.…”

“…In fact, this contribution advances that individuals with high levels of self-leadership can be more prone to cognitive errors (Cristofaro et al 2020). Stemming from these results, practitioners should not only train themselves and others towards the adoption of self-leadership strategies, but also engage in mental processes aimed at enhancing reflection on the correctness of these self-leadership strategies and quality of related decisions (see the checklist of (Kahneman et al 2011)).…”