Cognitive flexibility and adaptive decision‐making: Evidence from a laboratory study of expert decision makers

Abstract

Research Summary: How can strategic decision makers overcome inertia when dealing with change? In this article we argue that cognitive flexibility (i.e., the ability to match the type of cognitive processing with the type of problem at hand) enables decision makers to achieve significantly higher decision‐making performance. We show that superior decision‐making performance is associated with using semiautomatic Type 1 cognitive processes when faced with well‐structured problems, and more deliberative Type 2 processes when faced with ill‐structured problems. Our findings shed light on the individual‐level mechanism behind organizational adaptation and complement recent work on strategic inertia. In addition, our findings extend management studies that have stressed the relevance of cognitive flexibility for responding to the demands of increasingly open, flexible, and rapidly changing organizations. Managerial Summary: Humans are creatures of habits. We tend to prefer known courses of action over new ones. In many cases, habits are good. However, when things change in unpredictable ways, the past may not be good guidance for the future. We argue that “cognitive flexibility”—the ability of understanding when to rely on habits vs. when to explore new courses of action—enables managers to switch from a “fast” decision mode, based on habits, to a “slow,” more deliberate decision mode that facilitates the exploration of new courses of action. Managers high in cognitive flexibility reflect on the situation at hand, recognize and value diversity in viewpoints, and integrate such diversity in their own decision processes. By valuing diversity, they are more likely to overcome inertia.

Categorical cognition and outcome efficiency in impact investing decisions

“…More generally, our study extends a growing literature in strategy that seeks to understand how behavioral limitations (Laureiro-Martínez & Brusoni, 2018;Powell, Lovallo, & Fox, 2011), particularly in the stakeholder environment (Bridoux & Stoelhorst, 2014), may prevent organizations realizing their intended outcomes (Artinger & Powell, 2016;Bridoux & Stoelhorst, 2014;Camuffo, Cordova, & Gambardella, 2017). Our findings build on prior work demonstrating that social categorization powerfully guides stakeholder perceptions of, and responses to, firm strategies (Vergne & Wry, 2014;Zuckerman, 1999).…”

The performance effects of creative imitation on original products: Evidence from lab and field experiments

“…Joining the growing body of strategy research focusing on individual-level analyses (e.g., Laureiro-Martínez, 2014;Laureiro-Martínez and Brusoni, 2018;Shapira and Shaver, 2014), our selection of research methodology aligns with the recognized need for interdisciplinary studies that can push the strategy field forward (Burbano, 2016;Elfenbein, Knott, and Croson, 2017;Harmon, Kim, and Mayer, 2015).…”

Exploring Idea Convergence and Conceptual Combination in Open Innovative Crowdsourcing from a Cognitive Load Perspective

“…Categorization facilitates the organization of information that leads to lower extraneous cognitive load [10]. In addition, intrinsic cognitive load caused by task complexity sometimes leads to cognitive inertia such that participants are unwilling to make the effort to generate ideas [37]. Other types of interventions focus on stimuli to improve ideation quality.…”