Broadening the Frame: How Behavioral Strategy Redefines Strategic Decisions

References

• Agrawal A, Nottebohm O, West A (2010) Five ways CFOs can make cost cuts stick. McKinsey & Company: Strategy and Corporate Finance. Accessed July 1, 2018, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/five-ways-cfos-can-make-cost-cuts-stick.Google Scholar
• Akinci C, Sadler-Smith E (2012) Intuition in management research: A historical review. Internat. J. Management Rev. 14(1):104–122.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Andersen TJ, Nielsen BB (2009) Adaptive strategy making: The effects of emergent and intended strategy modes. Eur. Management Rev. 6(2):94–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Appelbaum SH, Keller S, Alvarez H, Bédard C (2012) Organizational crisis: Lessons from Lehman Brothers and Paulson and Company. Internat. J. Commerce Management 22(4):286–305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beshears J, Gino F (2015) Leaders as decision architects. Harvard Bus. Rev. 93(5):51–62.Google Scholar
• Brynjolfsson E, Milgrom P (2013) Complementarity in organizations. Gibbons R, Roberts J, eds. Handbook of Organizational Economics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ), 11–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Burke LA, Miller MK (1999) Taking the mystery out of intuitive decision making. Acad. Management Executive 13(4):91–99.Google Scholar
• Camerer C, Lovallo D (1999) Overconfidence and excess entry : An experimental approach. Amer. Econom. Rev. 89(1):306–318.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Courtney H (2001) 20/20 Foresight: Crafting Strategy in an Uncertain World (Harvard Business Publishing, Brighton, MA).Google Scholar
• Duhaime IM, Schwenk CR (1985) Conjectures on cognitive simplification in acquisition and divestment decision making. Acad. Management Rev. 10(2):287–295.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg B (2008) Curbing optimism bias and strategic misrepresentation in planning: Reference class forecasting in practice. Eur. Planning Stud. 16(1):3–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall S, Lovallo D, Musters R (2012) How to put your money where your strategy is. McKinsey Quart. 2:27–38.Google Scholar
• Healey MP, Hodgkinson GP, Whittington R, Johnson G (2015) Off to plan or out to lunch? Relationships between design characteristics and outcomes of strategy workshops. British J. Management 26(3):507–528.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Heath C, Heath D (2013) Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work, 1st ed. (Crown Business, New York).Google Scholar
• Hodgkinson GP, Sadler-Smith E, Burke LA, Claxton G, Sparrow PR (2009) Intuition in organizations: Implications for strategic management. Long Range Planning 42(3):277–297.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hodgkinson GP, Whittington R, Johnson G, Schwarz M (2006) The role of strategy workshops in strategy development processes: Formality, communication, co-ordination and inclusion. Long Range Planning 39(5):479–496.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jarvenpaa SL (1990) Graphic displays in decision making—the visual salience effect. J. Behav. Decision Making 3(4):247–262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jett QR, George JM (2005) Emergent strategies and their consequences: A process study of competition and complex decision making. Szulanski G, Porac J, Doz Y, eds. Advances in Strategic Management, vol. 22 (Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, UK), 387–411.Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2003) Maps of bounded rationality: Psychology for behavioral economics. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(5):1449–1475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow, 1st ed. (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York).Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Klein G (2009) Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree. Amer. Psych. 64(6):515–526.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Lovallo D (1993) Timid choices and bold forecasts: A cognitive perspective on risk taking. Management Sci. 39(1):393–413.Link, Google Scholar
• Keller PA, Block LG (1997) Vividness effects: A resource‐matching perspective. Source J. Consumer Res. 24(3):295–304.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Keren G, Wagenaar WA (1987) Violation of utility theory in unique and repeated gambles. J. Experiment. Psych. Learn. Memory Cognition 13(3):387–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kim HM (2006) The effect of salience on mental accounting: How integration vs. segregation of payment influences purchase decisions. J. Behav. Decision Making 19(4):381–391.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Klein G (2007) Performing a project premortem. Harvard Bus. Rev. 85(9):18–19.Google Scholar
• Klein GA (1998) Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Klein GA, Orasanu JE, Calderwood RE, Zsambok CE (1993) Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods (Ablex, Norwood, NJ).Google Scholar
• Klibanoff P, Lamont O, Wizman TA (1998) Investor reaction to salient news in closed-end country funds. J. Finance 53(2):673–699.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Koller T, McGinn J (2018) How to know when better profit margins aren’t better for your company. McKinsey & Company: Strategy and Corporate Finance. Accessed July 1, 2018, https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/how-to-know-when-better-profit-margins-arent-better-for-your-company.Google Scholar
• Ledwidge J (2007) British Airways: The case for a human makeover: New approach would leave the airline less prone to disruptions and PR blunders. Human Resources Management Internat. Digest 15(5):7–10.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lerner JS, Tetlock PE (1999) Accounting for the effects of accountability. Psych. Bull. 125(2):255–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levinthal DA (1997) Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Sci. 43(7):934–950.Link, Google Scholar
• Lindblom CE (1959) The science of muddling through. Public Admin. Rev. 19(2):79–88.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H (1990) The design school: Reconsidering the basic premises of strategic management. Strategic Management J. 11(3):171–195.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, Raisinghani D, Theoret A (1976) The structure of “unstructured” decision processes. Admin. Sci. Quart. 21(2):246–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mintzberg H, Waters JA (1985) Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strategic Management J. 6(3):257–272.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Moore DA, Oesch JM, Zietsma C (2007) What competition? Myopic self-focus in market-entry decisions. Organ. Sci. 18(3):440–454.Link, Google Scholar
• Nelson R, Winter S (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Belknap Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Parker JR (2004) Hard tale of a soft drink: Dealing with a corporate crisis—it’s the real thing. ABA Bus. Law Sect. 13(6):10–14.Google Scholar
• Picone P, Dagnino GB, Minà A (2014) The origin of failure: A multidisciplinary appraisal of the hubris hypothesis and proposed research agenda. Acad. Management Perspect. 28(4):447–468.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell TC, Lovallo D, Fox CR (2011) Behavioral strategy. Strategic Management J. 32(13):1369–1386.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pryor JB, Kriss M (1977) The cognitive dynamics of salience in the attribution process. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 35(1):49–55.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Quinn JB (1982) Managing strategies incrementally. Omega 10(6):613–627.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabin M, Thaler RH (2001) Anomalies: Risk aversion. J. Econom. Perspect. 15(1):219–232.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reichers AE, Wanous JP, Austin JT (1997) Understanding and managing cynicism about organizational change. Acad. Management Perspect. 11(1):48–59.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rigby D, Bilodeau B (2015) Management tools & trends 2015. Survey, Bain & Company, London.Google Scholar
• Rigby D, Bilodeau B (2018) Management tools & trends 2018. Survey, Bain & Company, London.Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW (2000) Imitation of complex strategies. Management Sci. 46(6):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Roll R (1986) The hubris hypothesis of corporate takeovers. J. Bus. 59(2):197–216.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rosenzweig P (2013) What makes strategic decisions different. Harvard Bus. Rev. (November):88–93.Google Scholar
• Rumelt RP (2012) Good Strategy/Bad Strategy: The Difference and Why It Matters (Crown Business, New York).Google Scholar
• Sibony O, Lovallo D, Powell TC (2017) Behavioral strategy and the strategic decision architecture of the firm. Calif. Management Rev. 59(3):5–21.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Soll JB, Milkman KL, Payne JW (2015) A user’s guide to debiasing. Keren G, Wu G, eds. The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making (John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, UK), 924–951.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sull DN (1999) Why good companies go bad. Harvard Bus. Rev. 77(4):42–48.Google Scholar
• Tetlock PE, Boettger R (1994) Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. J. Behav. Decision Making 7(1):1–23.Google Scholar
• Thaler RH (2015) Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics, 1st ed. (W.W. Norton & Company, New York).Google Scholar
• Thaler RH, Sunstein CR (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, New Haven, CT).Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–458.Google Scholar
• Van Schie ECM, Van Der Pligt J (1995) Influencing risk preference in decision making: The effects of framing and salience. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 63(3):264–275.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Worley CG, Williams T, Lawler EEI (2016) Creating management processes built for change. MIT Sloan Management Rev. 58(1):77–82.Google Scholar