Achieving adaptive ends through equivocality: A study of organizational antecedents and consequences

Abstract

Confronting complex situations is the hallmark of strategic decision-making. While these situations may be perceived as equivocal, organizations must cope, act, and thrive within such ambiguities. This study explores the manifestation and regulation of equivocality during strategic marketing decision-making. The results indicate that organizations that tolerate ambiguity perceive greater equivocality in problem situations and exhibit greater adaptive behavior; however, the findings come with a caveat: while experienced firms may enjoy these benefits, the situation is more complex for firms with limited product-market knowledge.Keywords: Marketing decisions; Equivocality; Innovation; Performance; Knowledge In dynamic environments, understanding is transitory. Given the novel, complex, and indefinite nature of strategic decisions (Mintzberg et al., 1976), organizations may benefit from an open and broad interpretive capability in order to effectively model and adapt to external forces. Formulaic thinking is better suited to closed-systems where maintenance and stability are present and learning is not necessary. The challenge is in managing and remaining attuned to the equivocal inputs that manifest during strategic decision-making in information intensive environ ments while not succumbing to equivocality's befuddling effect. While prior studies (e.g., Day, 1994;Sinkula et al., 1997) suggest that the organization should broaden its perception and be open-minded, unresolved is the mechanism that allows for the emergence of equivocality without succumbing to its disorient ing nature, which might dampen performance.This study examines the relationship between organizational interpretation and action by capturing both the emergence and effect of equivocality during strategic marketing decisionmaking. The paper directly examines equivocality and its ante cedents and consequences. Equivocality is defined as a problem situation with multiple, possibly contradictory, interpretations that manifest during decision-making (Daft and Lengel, 1986). When viewed as interpretation systems (Daft and Weick, 1984), organizations may be challenged when confronted with equivo cality. Thus, several questions guide this research: 1) what are the organizational levers to equivocality and strategic change? 2) how do organizations regulate equivocality during strategic marketing decision-making? and 3) what are the consequences of equivocality? To examine these questions, we first present a conceptual framework and develop hypotheses, then describe the study method. After reporting the analyses and results, we discuss the study's findings, limitations, and implications.

Re‐examining Strategic Flexibility: A Meta‐Analysis of its Antecedents, Consequences and Contingencies

“…Rubera and Kirca, 2012), we thus explore the potential chain of effects, from strategic flexibility to financial outcomes, via innovation and market outcomes. On the one hand, SF enables firms to anticipate market demands and to develop innovative products and services (Neill and Rose, 2007), thereby increasing performance in terms of innovation outcomes (Kortmann et al ., 2014). On the other hand, SF enables firms to respond and adapt to changing market demands (Johnson et al ., 2003), thereby increasing performance in terms of market outcomes (Segaro, Larimo and Jones, 2014).…”

Identifying the tacit entrepreneurial opportunity of latent customer needs in an emerging economy: The effects of experiential market learning versus vicarious market learning

“…Because these vicarious experiences are rooted in idiosyncratic contexts and are extrinsic to a focal firm, the variance of market experiences engenders causal ambiguity towards the means-ends relations in other companies' marketing experiences (Barkema & Schijven, 2008;Simonin, 1999). Firms benefit from ambiguity in that it stimulates multiple and even contradictory interpretations of a problem situation (Neill & Rose, 2007). The equivocality of organizational interpretation, referred to as "the existence of multiple and conflicting interpretations about an organizational situation" (Daft & Lengel, 1986, p. 556), has been demonstrated to promote flexible adaptation to market changes because the competing interpretations challenge current thinking and weaken firms' adherence to past understanding of market dynamics (Neill & Rose, 2007).…”

When rational decision-making becomes irrational: a critical assessment and re-conceptualization of intuition effectiveness

“…Embracing equivocality seems to be especially important for task-driven equivocality. Obviously, when equivocality is constitutive for a decision problem, it cannot be reduced, but has to be embraced (Neill and Rose 2007). Nevertheless, embracing equivocality also seems a reasonable strategy when coping with people-driven equivocality, so these relationships should be further investigated.…”