The availability of some processing spare capacity in offshore facilities, during its operational life, is an expected event. At some point in time, it is also expected that some fields may share their assets, in order to enhance its economic value. Asset Sharing Agreements are efficient tools for those purposes. However, taxation and fiscal regime in Brazil does not promote a friendly framework for this initiative. This article aims to discuss some key issues that regulatory agents shall address for adequating Brazilian legal framework to international oil industry standards.
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to identify under what circumstances advisor gender and advice justification influence advice taking by managers. Design/methodology/approach The authors designed a quasirational managerial decision experiment with both analytic and intuitive cues. The design was a 2 × 2 between-subjects factorial, in which gender (male/female) and advice justification (intuitive/analytic) were crossed. The experiment involved two independent samples, taken from Amazon Mechanical Turk workers and Brazilian professionals. Findings Results suggest that, in general, analytic justification is more valued than intuitive justification. The findings also infer that depending on the advisees’ sample and providing that advice justification is analytic, quasirational scenarios seem to favor male advisors (MTurk sample) or both male and female advisors with “male values” (professional sample), as analysis is traditionally considered a “male value.” Practical implications Analytic justification will likely lead to more advice utilization in quasirational managerial situations, as it may act as a safeguard for the accuracy of the offered advice. Social implications The results might signal an ongoing, but slow, process leading to the mitigation of gender stereotypes, considering that the male gender stereotype was active in the MTurk sample, but not in the professional one. Originality/value This study contributes to the advice-taking research field by showing the interplay between advisor gender and advice justification in a quasirational managerial decision setting with both analytic and intuitive cues. In advice-taking literature, observations are usually collected from students. However, as this study focused on managerial decisions, the authors collected independent samples from MTurk workers and Brazilian professionals.
O objetivo deste artigo foi analisar como a racionalidade limitada impacta o processo decisório de executivos e negociadores. Foi feita revisão de literatura sobre o tema, considerando as heurísticas e vieses do processo decisório, a racionalidade limitada em grupos e nas negociações. Também foram abordadas como e por que acontecem as decisões rápidas e se estas podem ser feitas com qualidade. Para tal discussão foi pesquisada a literatura sobre intuição de peritos. Como resultado, este artigo evidenciou a importância de se conhecer como o processo decisório funciona para que os erros e problemas decorrentes da racionalidade limitada sejam evitados e melhor administrados. Por fim, foram sugeridas algumas maneiras para melhorar a qualidade da tomada de decisão dos executivos e negociadores.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.