Conceptual note: Exploring the cognitive significance of organizational strategizing: A dual-process framework and research agenda

Abstract

The considerable volume of theory and research that has sought to illuminate the nature and significance of cognitive processes in strategy formulation and implementation represents but an important first step in the re-humanization of strategy research. In order to achieve the sorts of fine-grained analyses that will ultimately advance understanding of cognition in action, strategy researchers need to move beyond the static analysis of actors’ cognitive maps to a deeper understanding of what lies behind the actions of strategists as they engage with particular strategy practices in their praxis. To accomplish this key goal, strategy researchers need to become more reflective in their own practices, augmenting the observational and interview techniques advocated by various leading contributors to the strategy-as-practice (s-as-p) perspective with a profiling of the cognitive characteristics of strategists, based on psychometrically robust procedures. To this end, drawing on dual-process theories from cognitive psychology and social cognition, we outline a basic two-dimensional framework to inform the investigation of the impact of individual differences in cognitive style (analytical and intuitive approaches to the processing of information) on the observed behaviours of strategy workers in strategy-making episodes and consider its implications for the advancement of theory, research and practice.

Aesthetics of stock investments

“…This is in accordance with the aforementioned aesthetic meta-logic (Root-Bernstein 2002). It is also consistent with the view, established in organizational/managerial psychology, that analytic and intuitive approaches to information processing operate parallel to one another, being served by independent cognitive systems (Dane and Pratt 2007;Epstein et al 1996;Hodgkinson and Clarke 2007;Sinclair and Ashkanasy 2005).…”

Corporate foresight: An emerging field with a rich tradition

“…• Managerial cognition, which emphasizes the role of the individual and group cognition in shaping perception and influencing decision-making [119]. There is a growing body of knowledge that links participation in corporate foresight exercises to changes in decision-making.…”

Different paths to consensus? The impact of need for closure on model-supported group conflict management

“…Another extension for future research would be to examine the effects of other cognitive factors on model-supported group decision-making, for example, need for cognition (Cacioppo and Petty, 1982) and faith in intuition (Dane and Pratt, 2007). The study of these constructs is increasingly being proposed to advance our understanding of the interplay between structured group decision processes (such as model-supported processes) and those who use it in interaction (Hodgkinson and Clarke, 2007). A third extension would be to replicate the research in a different task context, for example a problem structuring task (e.g.…”