Condicionantes de diferenças individuais na justificativa de decisão coletiva: interpretações da alta gestão com base em suas representações cognitivas

Matheus Maia Diniz; André Magalhães Gomes; Raoni Barros Bagno; Jonathan Simões Freitas

doi:10.5585/riae.v20i1.18832

Autores

Matheus Maia Diniz Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4979-5567
André Magalhães Gomes Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2087-2071
Raoni Barros Bagno Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3580-1866
Jonathan Simões Freitas Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5681-4327

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5585/riae.v20i1.18832

Palavras-chave:

Cognição, Racionalização, Decisão, Mapa cognitivo, Alta gestão.

Resumo

Objetivo do estudo: Investigar as diferenças nas justificativas oferecidas por membros da alta gestão para uma decisão de diversificação por eles tomada em conjunto.

Metodologia/abordagem: A pesquisa se configura como um estudo indutivo a partir de análise aprofundada das características de uma unidade de observação, focado na extração e análise de aspectos de modelos mentais de gestores, inserido na tradição de mapeamento causal ideográfico, sendo a principal técnica para a coleta de dados a realização de entrevistas semiestruturadas em profundidade.

Originalidade/Relevância: Este trabalho mostra evidências que complementam aquelas tradicionalmente apresentadas pelas metodologias quantitativas que prevalecem no estudo da cognição estratégica.

Principais Resultados: Os resultados destacam que o perfil profissional de cada gestor, especialmente em termos de sua trajetória, é particularmente relevante tanto na interpretação das próprias racionalizações quanto na dos demais. Fica claro como as funções que cada entrevistado ocupa na empresa evidenciam uma tentativa de cada gestor justificar a diversificação sob o ponto de vista de suas próprias atribuições, indicando que a racionalização individual já é feita de forma relativa às ênfases esperadas nas racionalizações dos outros membros da equipe.

Contribuições teóricas/metodológicas: Contribui-se com o entendimento sobre a racionalização de tomada de decisão, ao mostrar as percepções de cada um gestor sobre uma mesma decisão coletiva passada e ao propiciar a interpretação dos possíveis condicionantes das diferenças individuais.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.

Biografia do Autor

Matheus Maia Diniz, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Bacharel em Engenharia de Produção
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

André Magalhães Gomes, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Mestre em administração
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Raoni Barros Bagno, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Doutor em engenharia de produção
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Jonathan Simões Freitas, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Doutor em administração
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Referências

Aguinis, H., & Solarino, A. M. (2019). Transparency and replicability in qualitative research: The case of interviews with elite informants. Strategic Management Journal, smj.3015. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.3015

Amason, A. C. (1996). DISTINGUISHING THE EFFECTS OF FUNCTIONAL AND DYSFUNCTIONAL CONFLICT ON STRATEGIC DECISION MAKING: RESOLVING A PARADOX FOR TOP MANAGEMENT TEAMS. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 123–148. https://doi.org/10.2307/256633

Ashmos, D. P., Duchon, D., & McDaniel, R. R. (1998). Participation in Strategic Decision Making: The Role of Organizational Predisposition and Issue Interpretation. Decision Sciences, 29(1), 25–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5915.1998.tb01343.x

Bacharach, S., Bamberger, P., & Mundell, B. (1995). Strategic and tactical logics of decision justification: Power and decision criteria in organizations. Human Relations, 48, 467–488.

Bansal, P. (Tima), & Corley, K. (2012). Publishing in AMJ —Part 7: What’s Different about Qualitative Research? Academy of Management Journal, 55(3), 509–513. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2012.4003

Bansal, P. (Tima), Smith, W. K., & Vaara, E. (2018). New Ways of Seeing through Qualitative Research. Academy of Management Journal, 61(4), 1189–1195. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2018.4004

Bromiley, P., & Rau, D. (2016). Social, Behavioral, and Cognitive Influences on Upper Echelons During Strategy Process: A Literature Review. Journal of Management, 42(1), 174–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206315617240

Brouthers, K., Andriessen, F., & Nicolaes, I. (1998). Leadership Driving blind: Strategic decision-making in small companies. Long Range Planning, 31, 130–138.

Buyl, T., Boone, C., & Matthyssens, P. (2011). Upper echelons research and managerial cognition. Strategic Organization, 9(3), 240–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476127011417345

Clarke, I., & Mackaness, W. (2001). Management ‘Intuition’: An Interpretative Account of Structure and Content of Decision Schemas Using Cognitive Maps. Journal of Management Studies, 38(2), 147–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00232

Corner, P. D., Kinicki, A. J., & Keats, B. W. (1994). Integrating Organizational and Individual Information Processing Perspectives on Choice. Organization Science, 5(3), 294–308.

Csaszar, F. A. (2018). What Makes a Decision Strategic? Strategic Representations. Strategy Science, 3(4), 606–619. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2018.0067

Csaszar, F. A., & Levinthal, D. A. (2016, October 1). Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies. Strategic Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2440

Daniels, K., Johnson, G., & de Chernatony, L. (2002). Task and Institutional Influences on Managers’ Mental Models of Competition. 32.

Dieste, O., & Juristo, N. (2011). Systematic review and aggregation of empirical studies on elicitation techniques. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, 37(2), 283–304. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSE.2010.33

Eden, C. (1992). ON THE NATURE OF COGNITIVE MAPS. Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 261–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1992.tb00664.x

Eden, C. (2004). Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 159(3), 673–686. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00431-4

Eden, C., & Ackermann, F. (1998). Analysing and comparing idiographic causal maps. In C. Eden, & J.-C. Spender, Managerial and organizational cognition: Theory, methods and research. London: Sage Publications, 192–209.

Eden, C., Ackermann, F., & Cropper, S. (1992). THE ANALYSIS OF CAUSE MAPS. Journal of Management Studies, 29(3), 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.1992.tb00667.x

Eisenhardt, K. M., Graebner, M. E., & Sonenshein, S. (2016). Grand Challenges and Inductive Methods: Rigor without Rigor Mortis. Academy of Management Journal, 59(4), 1113–1123. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2016.4004

Felin, T., & Zenger, T. R. (2017). The Theory-Based View: Economic Actors as Theorists. Strategy Science, 2(4), 258–271. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2017.0048

Gavetti, G. (2012). PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy. Organization Science, 23(1), 267–285. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1110.0644

Gavetti, G., & Rivkin, J. W. (2007). On the origin of strategy: Action and cognition over time. Organization Science, 18(3), 420–439. https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1070.0282

Gavetti, Giovanni, & Porac, J. (2018). On the Origin of Great Strategies. Strategy Science, 3(1), 352–365. https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2018.0054

Gavetti, Giovanni, & Rivkin, J. W. (2005). How Strategists Really Think. Harvard Business Review, 13.

Gephart, R. P. (2004). Qualitative Research and the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of Management Journal, 47(4), 454–462. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2004.14438580

Golden, B. R., & Zajac, E. J. (2001). When will boards influence strategy? Inclination × power = strategic change: When Will Boards Influence Strategy? Strategic Management Journal, 22(12), 1087–1111. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.202

Goodwin, V. L., & Ziegler, L. (1998). A test of relationships in a model of organizational cognitive complexity. 16.

Healey, M. P., & Hodgkinson, G. P. (2015). Psychological Foundations of Strategic Management. In C. L. Cooper (Ed.), Wiley Encyclopedia of Management (pp. 1–3). John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118785317.weom120037

Hodgkinson, G. P., & Healey, M. P. (2008). Cognition in Organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 387–417. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093612

Hodgkinson, G. P., Maule, A. J., & Bown, N. J. (2004). Causal Cognitive Mapping in the Organizational Strategy Field: A Comparison of Alternative Elicitation Procedures. Organizational Research Methods, 7(1), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428103259556

Hodgkinson, G. P., Sund, K. J., & Galavan, R. J. (2017). Chapter 1: Exploring Methods in Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Advances, Controversies, and Contributions. In R. J. Galavan, K. J. Sund, & G. P. Hodgkinson (Eds.), New Horizons in Managerial and Organizational Cognition (Vol. 2, pp. 1–22). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2397-52102017002

Hodgkinson, G., & Sparrow, P. (2002). The competent organization: A psychological analysis of the strategic management process. Open University Press.

Hutzschenreuter, T., & Kleindienst, I. (2006). Strategy-Process Research: What Have We Learned and What Is Still to Be Explored. Journal of Management, 32(5), 673–720. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206306291485

Isabella, L. A. (1990). EVOLVING INTERPRETATIONS AS A CHANGE UNFOLDS: HOW MANAGERS CONSTRUE KEY ORGANIZATIONAL EVENTS. Academy of Management Journal, 33(1), 7–41. https://doi.org/10.2307/256350

Isabella, L. A., & Waddock, S. (1994). Top Management Team Certainty: Environmental Assessments, Teamwork, and Performance Implications. Journal of Management, 20(4), 835–858.

Itami, H., & Numagami, T. (1992). Dynamic interaction between strategy and technology. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130909

Johnson, D. R., & Hoopes, D. G. (2003). Managerial cognition, sunk costs, and the evolution of industry structure. Strategic Management Journal, 24(10), 1057–1068. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.320

Kaplan, S. (2011). Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future. Journal of Management Studies, 48(3), 665–695. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6486.2010.00983.x

Lant, T. K., Milliken, F. J., & Batra, B. (1992). The role of managerial learning and interpretation in strategic persistence and reorientation: An empirical exploration. Strategic Management Journal, 13(8), 585–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250130803

Mintzberg, H. (1993). Structure in Fives: Designing Effective Organizations. In Strategic Management Journal (No. 6). PRENTICE-HALL.

Narayanan, V. K., Zane, L. J., & Kemmerer, B. (2011). The Cognitive Perspective in Strategy: An Integrative Review. Journal of Management, 37(1), 305–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206310383986

Porac, J. F., & Thomas, H. (2002). Managing cognition and strategy: Issues, trends and future directions. Handbook of Strategy and Management, 165–181.

Powell, T. C., Lovallo, D., & Fox, C. R. (2011). Behavioral strategy. Strategic Management Journal, 32(13), 1369–1386. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.968

Sarasvathy, S. D. (2001). Causation and Effectuation: Toward a Theoretical Shift from Economic Inevitability to Entrepreneurial Contingency. The Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 243. https://doi.org/10.2307/259121

Sutton, R. I., & Staw, B. M. (1995). What Theory is Not. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40(3), 371. https://doi.org/10.2307/2393788

Wrona, T., Ladwig, T., & Gunnesch, M. (2013). Socio-cognitive processes in strategy formation – A conceptual framework. European Management Journal, 31(6), 697–705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2013.07.005