The Sequence Effect in Panel Decisions: Evidence from the Evaluation of Research and Development Projects

References

• Aadland E , Cattani G , Ferriani S (2019) Friends, favours and cliques: Relational mechanisms of recognition in peer-based tournament rituals. Acad. Management J. 62(3):883–917.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Abbott A (1988) The System of Professions: An Essay on the Division of Labor (University of Chicago Press, Chicago).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study. Admin. Sci. Quart. 45(3):425–455.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Aldrovandi S , Poirier M , Kusev P , Ayton P (2015) Retrospective evaluations of sequences. Experiment. Psych. 62(5):320–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L , Greve HR (2007) A behavioral theory of the firm—40 years and counting: Introduction and impact. Organ. Sci. 18(3):337–349.Link, Google Scholar
• Astebro T (2004) Key success factors for technological entrepreneurs’ R&D projects. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 51(3):314–321.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barron G , Leider S (2010) The role of experience in the gambler’s fallacy. J. Behav. Decision Making 23(1):117–129.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF (2002) Ego depletion and self-control failure: An energy model of the self’s executive function. Self Identity 1(2):129–136.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Heatherton TF, Tice DM (1994) Losing Control: How and Why People Fail at Self-Regulation (Academic Press, San Diego).Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF, Vohs KD, Tice DM (2007) The strength model of self-control. Current Directions Psych. Sci. 16(6):351–355.Google Scholar
• Baumeister RF , Bratslavsky E , Muraven M , Tice DM (1998) Ego depletion: Is the active self a limited resource? J. Personality Soc. Psych. 74(5):1252–1265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Becker J , Brackbill D , Centola D (2017) Network dynamics of social influence in the wisdom of crowds. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114(26):E5070–E5076.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Berg JM (2016) Balancing on the creative highwire: Forecasting the success of novel ideas in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 61(3):433–468.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bhargava S , Fisman R (2014) Contrast effects in sequential decisions: Evidence from speed dating. Rev. Econom. Statist. 96(3):444–457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bindler A , Hjalmarsson R (2019) Path dependency in jury decision-making. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 17(6):1971–2017.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bonaccio S , Dahal RS (2006) Advice taking and decision-making: An integrative literature review, and implications for organizational sciences. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 101(2):127–151.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ , Guinan E , Lakhani K , Riedl C (2016) Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance and resource allocation in science. Management Sci. 62(10):2765–2783.Link, Google Scholar
• Brasil VC , Eggers JP (2019) Product and innovation portfolio management. Aldag RJ , ed. Oxford Research Encyclopedia: Business and Management (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brodbeck FC , Kerschreiter R , Mojzisch A , Schulz-Hardt S (2007) Group decision making under conditions of distributed knowledge: The information asymmetries model. Acad. Management Rev. 32(2):459–479.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brooks AW , Huang L , Kearney SW , Murray FE (2014) Investors prefer entrepreneurial ventures pitched by attractive men. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 111(12):4427–4431.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ (2008) Gender, race, and meritocracy in organizational careers. Amer. J. Sociol. 113(6):1479–1526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Castilla EJ , Benard S (2010) The paradox of meritocracy in organizations. Admin. Sci. Quart. 55(4):543–576.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chakrabarti A , Mitchell W (2013) The persistent effect of geographic distance in acquisition target selection. Organ. Sci. 24(6):1805–1826.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen DL , Moskowitz TJ , Shue K (2016) Decision making under the gambler’s fallacy: Evidence from asylum judges, loan officers, and baseball umpires. Quart. J. Econom. 131(3):1181–1242.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Clotfelter CT , Cook PJ (1993) The “gambler’s fallacy” in lottery play. Management Sci. 39(12):1521–1525.Link, Google Scholar
• Cohen MD , Levinthal DA (1990) Absorptive capacity: A new perspective of learning and innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):128–152.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen MD , March JG (1974) Leadership and Ambiguity: The American College President (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Cooper RG (1990) Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products. Bus. Horizons 33(3):44–54.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cooper RG (1998) Product Leadership: Creating and Launching Superior New Products (Perseus Books, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Criscuolo P , Dahlander L , Grohsjean T , Salter A (2017) Evaluating novelty: The role of panels in the selection of R&D projects. Acad. Management J. 60(2):433–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA (2012) Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds. Strategic Management J. 33(6):611–632.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Csaszar FA , Eggers JP (2013) Organizational decision making: An information aggregation view. Management Sci. 59(10):2257–2277.Link, Google Scholar
• Cyert R , March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Damisch L , Mussweiler T , Plessner H (2006) Olympic medals as fruits of comparison? Assimilation and contrast in sequential performance judgments. J. Experiment. Psych. Appl. 12(3):166–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Danziger S, Levav J, Avnaim-Pesso L (2011) Extraneous factors in judicial decisions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci 108(17):6889–6892.Google Scholar
• Dohmen T , Falk A , Huffman D , Marklein F , Sunde U (2009) Biased probability judgment: Evidence of incidence and relationship to economic outcomes from a representative sample. J. Econom. Behav. Organ. 72(3):903–915.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elsbach KD , Kramer RM (2003) Assessing creativity in Hollywood pitch meetings: Evidence for a dual-process model of creativity judgments. Acad. Management J. 46(3):283–301.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Falchetti D , Cattani G , Ferriani S (2018) Overcoming the liability of novelty: The power of framing. Acad. Management Proc. 2018(1):11077–11089.Google Scholar
• Frakes MD , Wasserman MF (2017) Is the time allocated to review patent applications inducing examiners to grant invalid patents? Evidence from microlevel application data. Rev. Econom. Statist. 99(3):550–563.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Freeman C , Soete L (1997) The Economics of Industrial Revolution (Pinter, London).Google Scholar
• Gann D , Salter A (2000) Innovation in project-based, service-enhanced firms: The construction of complex products and systems. Res. Policy 29(7-8):955–972.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gawande A (2011) The Checklist Manifesto: How to Get Things Right (Profile Books, London).Google Scholar
• Greer LL , de Jong BA , Schouten ME , Dannals JE (2018) Why and when hierarchy impacts team effectiveness: A meta-analytic integration. J. Appl. Psych. 103(6):591–613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guler I (2007) Throwing good money after bad? Political and institutional influences on sequential decision making in the venture capital industry. Admin. Sci. Quart 52(2):248–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haas MR , Criscuolo P , George G (2015) Which problems to solve? Online knowledge sharing and attention allocation in organizations. Acad. Management J. 58(3):680–711.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hansen MT , Haas MR (2001) Competing for attention in knowledge markets: Electronic document dissemination in a management consulting company. Admin. Sci. Quart. 46(1):1–28.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hartzmark SM , Shue K (2018) A tough act to follow: Contrast effects in financial markets. J. Finance 73(4):1567–1613.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harvey S , Kou C-Y (2013) Collective engagement in creative tasks: The role of evaluation in the creative process in groups. Admin. Sci. Quart. 58(3):346–386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heath C , Gonzalez R (1995) Interaction with others increases decision confidence but not decision quality: Evidence against information collection views of interactive decision making. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 61(3):305–326.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE (1994) Evolutionary trajectories in petroleum firm R&D. Management Sci. 40(12):1720–1747.Link, Google Scholar
• Hertog PD (2000) Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innovation. Internat. J. Innov. Management 4(4):491–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D , Slovic P , Tversky A (1982) Judgments Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaplan S, Berman MG (2010) Directed attention as a common resource for executive functioning and self-regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science 5(1):43–57.Google Scholar
• Keller J (2018) Posting and slotting: How hiring processes shape the quality of hire and compensation in internal labor markets. Admin. Sci. Quart. 63(4):848–878.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kenrick DT , Gutierres SE (1980) Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 38(1):131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kerr NL , Tindale RS (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annual Rev. Psych. 55(1):623–655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klingebiel R , Rammer C (2014) Resource allocation strategy for innovation portfolio management. Strategic Management J. 35(2):246–268.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Knudsen T , Levinthal DA (2007) Two faces of search: Alternative generation and alternative evaluation. Organ. Sci. 18(1):39–54.Link, Google Scholar
• Kornish LJ , Ulrich KT (2014) The importance of the raw idea in innovation: Testing the sow’s ear hypothesis. J. Marketing Res. 51(1):14–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lamont M (2009) How Professors Think (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Laplace PS (1814) Essai Philosophique sur les Probabilités (Courcier, Paris).Google Scholar
• Loewenstein J , Mueller JS (2016) Implicit theories of creative ideas: How culture guides creativity assessments. Acad. Management Discoveries 2(4):320–348.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lu S , Bartol KM , Venkataramani V , Zheng X , Liu X (2019) Pitching novel ideas to the boss: The interactive effects of employees’ idea enactment and influence tactics on creativity assessment and implementation. Acad. Management J. 62(2):579–606.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Malhotra N , Morris T , Hinings C (2006) Variation in organizational form among professional service organizations. Res. Sociol. Organ. 24(6):171–202.Crossref, Google Scholar
• March JG , Simon HA (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• March JG , Weissinger-Baylon R (1986) Ambiguity and Command: Organizational Perspectives on Military Decision Making (Pitman Publishing, Marshfield, MA).Google Scholar
• Martin JH , Jurafsky D (2009) Speech and Language Processing: An Introduction to Natural Language Processing, Computational Linguistics, and Speech Recognition (Pearson Education, New York).Google Scholar
• McFarlin DB, Sweeney PD (1992) Distributive and procedural justice as predictors of satisfaction with personal and organizational outcomes. Acad. Management J. 35(3):626–637.Google Scholar
• Mueller JS , Melwani S , Goncalo JA (2011) The bias against creativity: Why people desire but reject creative ideas. Psych. Sci. 21(1):13–17.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mueller JS , Melwani S , Loewenstein J , Deal JJ (2018) Reframing the decision-makers’ dilemma: Toward a social context model of creative idea recognition. Acad. Management J. 61(1):94–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Newham M , Midjord R (2019) Do expert panelists herd? Evidence from FDA committees. DIW Berlin Discussion Papers (Berlin), 1–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Norman DA, Shallice T (1986) Attention to action. Davidson RJ, Schwartz GE, Shapiro D, eds. Consciousness and Self-Regulation (Springer, Boston), 1–18.Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (2011) Attention to attention. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1286–1296.Link, Google Scholar
• Olsen JP (1976) Reorganization as a garbage can. March JG, Olsen JP, eds. Ambiguity and Choice in Organizations (Universitetsforlaget, Bergen, Norway), 314–317.Google Scholar
• Pepitone A , DiNubile M (1976) Contrast effects in judgments of crime severity and the punishment of criminal violators. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 33(4):448–459.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Piezunka H , Dahlander L (2015) Distant search, narrow attention: How crowding alters organizations’ filtering of suggestions in crowdsourcing. Acad. Management J. 58(3):856–880.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Plous S (1993) The Psychology of Judgment and Decision-Making (Mcgraw-Hill Book Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Poirier M , Saint-Aubin J (1995) Memory for related and unrelated words: Further evidence on the influence of semantic factors in immediate serial recall. Quart. J. Experiment. Psych. Section A 48(2):384–404.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabin M (2002) Inference by believers in the law of small numbers. Quart. J. Econom. 117(3):775–816.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabin M , Vayanos D (2010) The gambler’s and hot-hand fallacies: Theory and applications. Rev. Econom. Stud. 77(2):730–778.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rapoport A , Budescu DV (1992) Generation of random series in two-person strictly competitive games. J. Experiment. Psych. General 121(3):352–363.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Raza SM , Carpenter BN (1987) A model of hiring decisions in real employment interviews. J. Appl. Psych. 72(4):596–603.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
• Reitzig M , Sorenson O (2013) Biases in the selection stage of bottom‐up strategy formulation. Strategic Management J. 34(7):782–799.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rotemberg JJ , Saloner G (2000) Visionaries, managers, and strategic direction. RAND J. Econom. 31(4):693–716.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sah RK , Stiglitz JE (1986) The architecture of economic systems: Hierarchies and polyarchies. Amer. Econom. Rev. 76(4):716–727.Google Scholar
• Siler K , Lee K , Bero L (2015) Measuring the effectiveness of scientific gatekeeping. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 112(2):360–365.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1947) Administrative Behavior (The Free Press, New York).Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1957) Models of Man (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Simonsohn U , Loewenstein G (2006) Mistake #3: The effect of previously encountered prices on current housing demand. Econom. J. (London) 116(508):175–199.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Smither JW , Reilly RR , Buda R (1988) Effect of prior performance information on ratings of present performance: Contrast vs. assimilation revisited. J. Appl. Psych. 73(3):487–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stasser G , Titus W (1985) Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 48(6):1467–1478.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Suetens S , Galbo-Jørgensen CB , Tyran J-R (2016) Predicting lotto numbers: A natural experiment on the gambler’s fallacy and the hot-hand fallacy. J. Eur. Econom. Assoc. 14(3):584–607.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tarakci M , Greer LL , Groenen PJ (2016) When does power disparity help or hurt group performance? J. Appl. Psych. 101(3):415–429.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Terrell D (1994) A test of the gambler’s fallacy: Evidence from pari-mutuel games. J. Risk Uncertainty 8(3):309–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Teece DJ (2003) Expert talent and the design of (professional services) firms. Indust. Corporate Change 12(4):895–916.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tindale RS (1993) Decision errors made by individuals and groups. Castellan NJ, ed. Individual and Group Decision Making: Current Issues (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ), 109–124.Google Scholar
• Tindale RS , Kameda T , Hinsz VB (2003) Group decision making. Hogg MA, Cooper J, eds. The SAGE Handbook of Social Psychology (Sage, London), 381–406.Google Scholar
• Tsay CJ (2013) Sight over sound in the judgment of music performance. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110(36):14580–14585.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A , Kahneman D (1971) Belief in the law of small numbers. Psych. Bull. 76(2):105–110.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tversky A , Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):1124–1131.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van de Ven AH (2007) Engaged Scholarship: A Guide for Organizational and Social Research (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vermeulen F , Barkema H (2001) Learning through acquisitions. Acad. Management J. 44(3):457–476.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Vohs KD , Baumeister RF , Schmeichel BJ , Twenge JM , Nelson NM , Tice DM (2008) Making choices impairs subsequent self-control: a limited-resource account of decision making, self-regulation, and active initiative. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 94(5):883–898.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Von Nordenflycht A (2010) What is a professional service firm? Toward a theory and taxonomy of knowledge-intensive firms. Acad. Management Rev. 35(1):155–174.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wooten JO , Ulrich KT (2017) Idea generation and the role of feedback: Evidence from field experiments with innovation tournaments. Production Oper. Management 26(1):80–99.Crossref, Google Scholar