Decision Centralization and Learning from Experience in Groups: Separating Context from Aggregation Effects

References

• Aggarwal VA, Posen HE, Workiewicz M (2017) Adaptive capacity to technological change: A microfoundational approach. Strategic Management J. 38(6):1212–1231.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aghion P, Tirole J (1997) Formal and real authority in organizations. J. Political Economy 105(1):1–29.Google Scholar
• Ahn Y, Greve, HR (2024) Cultural spawning: Founders bringing organizational cultures to their startup. Organization Sci., epub ahead of print August 2, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2023.17771.Google Scholar
• Anderson C, Brown CE (2010) The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Res. Organ. Behav. 30:55–89.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L (2013) Organizational Learning (Springer, Boston).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L, Lee S, Park J (2021) Organizational learning processes and outcomes: Major findings and future research directions. Management Sci. 67(9):5399–5429.Link, Google Scholar
• Barney J, Felin T (2013) What are microfoundations? Acad. Management Perspective 27(2):138–155.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barron G, Erev I (2003) Small feedback‐based decisions and their limited correspondence to description‐based decisions. J. Behav. Decision Making 16(3):215–233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Betts KR, Hinsz VB (2010) Collaborative group memory: Processes, performance, and techniques for improvement. Soc. Personality Psych. Compass 4(2):119–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Billinger S, Stieglitz N, Schumacher TR (2014) Search on rugged landscapes: An experimental study. Organ. Sci. 25(1):93–108.Link, Google Scholar
• Billinger S, Srikanth K, Stieglitz N, Schumacher TR (2021) Exploration and exploitation in complex search tasks: How feedback influences whether and where human agents search. Strategic Management J. 42(2):361–385.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boulu-Reshef B, Holt CA, Rodgers MS, Thomas-Hunt MC (2020) The impact of leader communication on free-riding: An incentivized experiment with empowering and directive styles. Leadership Quart. 31(3):101351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradley KJ, Aguinis H (2023) Team performance: nature and antecedents of nonnormal distributions. Organization Sci. 34(3):1266–1286.Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Ho TH (1999) Experience‐weighted attraction learning in normal form games. Econometrica 67(4):827–874.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chandler AD (1962) Strategy and Structure (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Charness G, Sutter M (2012) Groups make better self-interested decisions. J. Econom. Perspective 26(3):157–176.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Choi J, Levinthal D (2023) Wisdom in the wild: Generalization and adaptive dynamics. Organization Sci. 34(3):1073–1089.Google Scholar
• Christensen M, Knudsen T (2010) Design of decision-making organizations. Management Sci. 56(1):71–89.Link, Google Scholar
• Christensen M, Dahl CM, Knudsen T, Warglien M (2023) Context and aggregation: An experimental study of bias and discrimination in organizational decisions. Organization Sci. 34(6):2163–2181.Google Scholar
• Cohen TR, Thompson LL (2011) When are teams an asset in negotiations and when are they a liability? Mannix E, Neale M, Overbeck J, eds. Research on Managing Groups and Teams: Negotiation in Groups, vol. 14 (Emerald, Bingley, UK), 3–34.Google Scholar
• Cohen AL, Sanborn AN, Shiffrin RM (2008) Model evaluation using grouped or individual data. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 15(4):692–712.Google Scholar
• Coleman JS (1986) Social theory, social research, and a theory of action. Amer. J. Sociol. 91(6):1309–1335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper DJ, Kagel JH (2005) Are two heads better than one? Team vs. individual play in signaling games. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(3):477–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper R, DeJong D, Forsythe R, Ross T (1989) Communication in the battle of the sexes game: Some experimental results. RAND J. Economics 20:568–587.Google Scholar
• Corning PA (2002) The re‐emergence of “emergence”: A venerable concept in search of a theory. Complexity 7(6):18–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA (2013) An efficient frontier in organization design: Organizational structure as a determinant of exploration and exploitation. Organ. Sci. 24(4):1083–1101.Link, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA, Eggers JP (2013) Organizational decision making: An information aggregation view. Management Sci. 59(10):2257–2277.Link, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA, Laureiro-Martínez D (2018) Individual and organizational antecedents of strategic foresight: A representational approach. Strategy Sci. 3(3):513–532.Link, Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm, 2nd ed. (Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Davis JP, Eisenhardt KM (2011) Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation: Recombination processes in symbiotic relationships. Admin. Sci. Quart. 56(2):159–201.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Denrell J, March JG (2001) Adaptation as information restriction: The hot stove effect. Organ. Sci. 12(5):523–538.Link, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC (1999) Psychological safety and learning behavior in work teams. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(2):350–383.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, Bohmer RM, Pisano GP (2001) Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology implementation in hospitals. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(4):685–716.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Edmondson AC, Dillon JR, Roloff KS (2007) Three perspectives on team learning: Outcome improvement, task Mastery, and group process. Acad. Management Ann. 1(1):269–314.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erev I, Barron G (2005) On adaptation, maximization, and reinforcement learning among cognitive strategies. Psych. Rev. 112(4):912.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erev I, Roth AE (1998) Predicting how people play games: Reinforcement learning in experimental games with unique, mixed strategy equilibria. Amer. Econom. Rev. 88(4):848–881.Google Scholar
• Fang C, Levinthal D (2009) Near-term liability of exploitation: Exploration and exploitation in multistage problems. Organ. Sci. 20(3):538–551.Link, Google Scholar
• Farrell S, Ludwig CJ (2008) Bayesian and maximum likelihood estimation of hierarchical response time models. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 15(6):1209–1217.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Felin T, Foss NJ, Ployhart RE (2015) The microfoundations movement in strategy and organization theory. Acad. Management Ann. 9(1):575–632.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Friedkin NE, Proskurnikov AV, Mei W, Bullo F (2019) Mathematical structures in group decision-making on resource allocation distributions. Sci. Rep. 9(1):1–9.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Galinsky AD, Magee JC, Inesi ME, Gruenfeld DH (2006) Power and perspectives not taken. Psych. Sci. 17(12):1068–1074.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gonzalez C, Dutt V (2011) Instance-based learning: Integrating sampling and repeated decisions from experience. Psych. Rev. 118(4):523.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gonzalez C, Dutt V (2016) Exploration and exploitation during information search and experimential choice. J. Dynamic Decision Making 2:2–2.Google Scholar
• Gonzalez C, Lerch JF, Lebiere C (2003) Instance‐based learning in dynamic decision making. Cognitive Sci. 27(4):591–635.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gonzalez C, Ben‐Asher N, Martin JM, Dutt V (2015) A cognitive model of dynamic cooperation with varied interdependency information. Cognitive Sci. 39(3):457–495.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Greve HR (1998) Performance, aspirations, and risky organizational change. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43:58–86.Google Scholar
• Gulati R, Lavie D, Singh H (2009) The nature of partnering experience and the gains from alliances. Strategic Management J. 30(11):1213–1233.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haleblian J, Finkelstein S (1999) The influence of organizational acquisition experience on acquisition performance: A behavioral learning perspective. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):29–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hart E, Marciano D, Winter E (2017) Groups, group members and individuals: Choices and impulses in repeated risky decisions. Discussion Paper No. 17.07, Maurice Falk Institute for Economic Research, Jerusalem.Google Scholar
• Hayward ML (2002) When do firms learn from their acquisition experience? Evidence from 1990 to 1995. Strategic Management J. 23(1):21–39.Crossref, Google Scholar
• He T, Minervini MS, Puranam P (2024) How groups differ from individuals in learning from experience: Evidence from a contest platform. Organ. Sci. 35(4):1512–1534.Link, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE, Peteraf MA (2015) Managerial cognitive capabilities and the microfoundations of dynamic capabilities. Strategic Management J. 36(6):831–850.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Henderson J, Cool K (2003) Learning to time capacity expansions: An empirical analysis of the worldwide petrochemical industry, 1975–95. Strategic Management J. 24(5):393–413.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hertwig R, Barron G, Weber EU, Erev I (2004) Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psych. Sci. 15(8):534–539.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Herriott SR, Levinthal D, March JG (1985) Learning from experience in organizations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 75(2):298–302.Google Scholar
• Hinsz VB (1990) Cognitive and consensus processes in group recognition memory performance. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 59(4):705.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hinsz VB, Tindale RS, Vollrath DA (1997) The emerging conceptualization of groups as information processors. Psych. Bull. 121(1):43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Inkpen AC (1996) Creating knowledge through collaboration. California Management Rev. 39(1):123–140.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Janis IL (1972) Victims of Groupthink (Houghton Mifflin, Boston).Google Scholar
• Karau SJ, Williams KD (1993) Social loafing: A meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 65(4):681.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaustia M, Knüpfer S (2008) Do investors overweight personal experience? Evidence from IPO subscriptions. J. Finance 63(6):2679–2702.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knudsen T, Srikanth K (2014) Coordinated exploration: Organizing joint search by multiple specialists to overcome mutual confusion and joint myopia. Admin. Sci. Quart. 59(3):409–441.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koçak Ö, Levinthal DA, Puranam P (2023) The dual challenge of search and coordination for organizational adaptation: How structures of influence matter. Organization Sci. 34(2):851–869.Google Scholar
• Kollock P (1994) The emergence of exchange structures: An experimental study of uncertainty, commitment, and trust. Amer. J. Sociol. 100(2):313–345.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Konstantinidis E, Harman JL, Gonzalez C (2022) Patterns of choice adaptation in dynamic risky environments. Memory Cognition 50(4):864–881.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krefeld-Schwalb A, Pachur T, Scheibehenne B (2022) Structural parameter interdependencies in computational models of cognition. Psych. Rev. 129(2):313.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kruglanski AW, Freund T (1983) The freezing and unfreezing of lay-inferences: Effects on impressional primacy, ethnic stereotyping, and numerical anchoring. J. Experiment. Soc. Psych. 19(5):448–468.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lansing JS, Thurner S, Chung NN, Coudurier-Curveur A, Karakaş Ç, Fesenmyer KA, Chew LY (2017) Adaptive self-organization of Bali’s ancient rice terraces. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(25):6504–6509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Latané B, Williams K, Harkins S (1979) Many hands make light the work: The causes and consequences of social loafing. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 37(6):822.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lee E, Puranam P (2016) The implementation imperative: Why one should implement even imperfect strategies perfectly. Strategic Management J. 37(8):1529–1546.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lejarraga T, Hertwig R, Gonzalez C (2012) How choice ecology influences search in decisions from experience. Cognition 124(3):334–342.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lejarraga T, Lejarraga J, Gonzalez C (2014) Decisions from experience: How groups and individuals adapt to change. Memory Cognition 42(8):1384–1397.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner JS, Tetlock PE (1999) Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psych. Bull. 125(2):255.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, Pham DN (2024) Bringing politics back in: The role of power and coalitions in organizational adaptation. Organization Sci., ePub ahead of print March 4, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2022.16995.Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA, Rerup C (2021) The plural of goal: Learning in a world of ambiguity. Organization Sci. 32(3):527–543.Google Scholar
• Levitt B, March JG (1988) Organizational learning. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 14(1):319–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li P, Jia S, Feng T, Liu Q, Suo T, Li H (2010) The influence of the diffusion of responsibility effect on outcome evaluations: Electrophysiological evidence from an ERP study. Neuroimage 52(4):1727–1733.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Luce RD (1959) Individual Choice Behavior: A Theoretical Analysis (Wiley, New York).Google Scholar
• March JG (1976) The technology of foolishness. March JG, Olsen JP, eds. Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations (Universitetsforlaget, Bergen, Norway), 69–81.Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Mason W, Watts DJ (2012) Collaborative learning in networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109(3):764–769.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mehlhorn K, Newell BR, Todd PM, Lee MD, Morgan K, Braithwaite VA, Hausmann D, Fiedler K, Gonzalez C (2015) Unpacking the exploration–exploitation tradeoff: A synthesis of human and animal literatures. Decision (Washington DC) 2(3):191.Google Scholar
• Meudell PR, Hitch GJ, Boyle MM (1995) Collaboration in recall: Do pairs of people cross-cue each other to produce new memories? Quart. J. Experiment. Psych. 48(1):141–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meudell PR, Hitch GJ, Kirby P (1992) Are two heads better than one? Experimental investigations of the social facilitation of memory. Appl. Cognitive Psych. 6(6):525–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meyer JW, Rowan B (1977) Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. Amer. J. Sociol. 83(2):340–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Murphy RO, ten Brincke RH (2018) Hierarchical maximum likelihood parameter estimation for cumulative prospect theory: Improving the reliability of individual risk parameter estimates. Management Sci. 64(1):308–326.Link, Google Scholar
• Nadolska A, Barkema HG (2014) Good learners: How top management teams affect the success and frequency of acquisitions. Strategic Management J. 35(10):1483–1507.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nickerson RS (1998) Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev. General Psych. 2(2):175–220.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nilsson H, Rieskamp J, Wagenmakers EJ (2011) Hierarchical Bayesian parameter estimation for cumulative prospect theory. J. Math. Psych. 55(1):84–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Obloj T, Sengul M (2012) Incentive life-cycles: Learning and the division of value in firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 57(2):305–347.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S, Puranam P (2021) Self-confirming biased beliefs in organizational “learning by doing”. Complexity 2021(1):8865872.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Park S, Puranam P (2024) Vicarious learning without knowledge differentials. Management Sci. 70(5):2999–3019.Google Scholar
• Park S, Piezunka H, Dahlander L (2024) Coevolutionary lock-in in external search. Acad. Management J. 67(1):262–288.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piezunka H, Schilke O (2023) The dual function of organizational structure: Aggregating and shaping individuals’ votes. Organ. Sci. 34(5):1914–1937.Link, Google Scholar
• Piezunka H, Aggarwal VA, Posen HE (2022) The aggregation–learning trade-off. Organ. Sci. 33(3):1094–1115.Link, Google Scholar
• Plonsky O, Erev I (2017) Learning in settings with partial feedback and the wavy recency effect of rare events. Cognitive Psych. 93:18–43.Google Scholar
• Posen HE, Levinthal DA (2012) Chasing a moving target: Exploitation and exploration in dynamic environments. Management Sci. 58(3):587–601.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P (2018) The Microstructure of Organizations (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Maciejovsky B (2017) Organizational structure and organizational learning. Argote L, Levine JM, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Group and Organizational Learning (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Swamy M (2016) How initial representations shape coupled learning processes. Organ. Sci. 27(2):323–335.Link, Google Scholar
• Puranam P, Stieglitz N, Osman M, Pillutla MM (2015) Modelling bounded rationality in organizations: Progress and prospects. Acad. Management Ann. 9(1):337–392.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reitzig M, Maciejovsky B (2015) Corporate hierarchy and vertical information flow inside the firm—A behavioral view. Strategic Management J. 36(13):1979–1999.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Richter V, Janjic R, Klapper H, Keck S, Reitzig M (2023) Managing exploration in organizations: The effect of superior monitoring on subordinate search behavior. Strategic Management J. 44(9):2226–2254.Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW, Siggelkow N (2003) Balancing search and stability: Interdependencies among elements of organizational design. Management Sci. 49(3):290–311.Link, Google Scholar
• Scheibehenne B, Pachur T (2015) Using Bayesian hierarchical parameter estimation to assess the generalizability of cognitive models of choice. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 22(2):391–407.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Scholten L, Van Knippenberg D, Nijstad BA, De Dreu CK (2007) Motivated information processing and group decision-making: Effects of process accountability on information processing and decision quality. J. Experimental Soc. Psych. 43(4):539–552.Google Scholar
• Schulze C, Newell BR (2016) More heads choose better than one: Group decision making can eliminate probability matching. Psychonomic Bull. Rev. 23(3):907–914.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Seligman ME (1975) Helplessness (H. Freeman, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Shiffrin RM, Lee MD, Kim W, Wagenmakers EJ (2008) A survey of model evaluation approaches with a tutorial on hierarchical Bayesian methods. Cognitive Sci. 32(8):1248–1284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N, Rivkin JW (2005) Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. Organ. Sci. 16(2):101–122.Link, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behavior (Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Simonson I, Nye P (1992) The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 51(3):416–446.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simonson I, Staw BM (1992) Deescalation strategies: A comparison of techniques for reducing commitment to losing courses of action. J. Appl. Psych. 77(4):419.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Srikanth K, Ungureanu T (2024) Organizational adaptation in dynamic environments: Disentangling the effects of how much to explore versus where to explore. Strategic Management J., ePub ahead of print July 20, https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3646.Google Scholar
• Stieglitz N, Knudsen T, Becker MC (2016) Adaptation and inertia in dynamic environments. Strategic Management J. 37(9):1854–1864.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sullivan NJ, Huettel SA (2021) Healthful choices depend on the latency and rate of information accumulation. Nature Human Behav. 5(12):1698–1706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sutton RS, Barto AG (2018) Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (2007) Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management J. 28(13):1319–1350.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (1983a) Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psych. Quart. 46(4):285–292.Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (1983b) Accountability and complexity of thought. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 45(1):74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE (1985) Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error. Social Psych. Quart. 7:297–332.Google Scholar
• Vanneste BS, Puranam P (2010) Repeated interactions and contractual detail: Identifying the learning effect. Organ. Sci. 21(1):186–201.Link, Google Scholar
• Watson WE, Michaelsen LK, Sharp W (1991) Member competence, group interaction, and group decision making: A longitudinal study. J. Appl. Psych. 76(6):803.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Watts DJ, Strogatz SH (1998) Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks. Nature 393(6684):440–442.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wegner DM (1987) Transactive memory: A contemporary analysis of the group mind. Theories of Group Behavior (Springer, New York), 185–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weizsäcker G (2010) Do we follow others when we should? A simple test of rational expectations. Amer. Econom. Rev. 100(5):2340–2360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weldon MS, Bellinger KD (1997) Collective memory: Collaborative and individual processes in remembering. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 23(5):1160.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wilks SS (1938) The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses. Ann. Math. Statist. 9(1):60–62.Crossref, Google Scholar