Strategies for leader cognition: Viewing the glass “half full” and “half empty”

Antes, Alison L.; Mumford, Michael D.

doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.10.001

Cited by 24 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 90 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly, Antes and Mumford (2012) manipulated whether participants were asked to think about positive outcomes, a balanced strategy (positive and negative outcomes), or negative outcomes. Results indicated that thinking about positive outcomes led to lower quality solutions than using a more balanced strategy.…”

Section: Literature Review Leader Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many empirical studies have shown that nepotism in family business succession tends to lead to decline or even bankruptcy (Bennedsen, Nielsen, Pérez-González, & Wolfenzon, 2007;Cucculelli & Micucci, 2008;Gomez-Mejia, Cruz, Berrone, & De Castro, 2011;Padgett & Morris, 2005;Riggio & Riggio, 2013;Smith & Amoako-Adu, 1999). This calls for a closer investigation of the decision processes of leaders (Antes & Mumford, 2012; Eubanks & WEAKNESS OF STRONG TIES 3 Mumford, 2010;Mumford et al, 2007;Mumford et al, 2000) and why their succession decisions often appear to be biased, and can ultimately destroy their businesses.While many decision biases have been reported in the literature (Bazerman, 2006;Kahneman, Slovic, & Tversky, 1982), there are some that are particularly relevant in the context of leader cognition and succession decisions. Many studies focus on individual level, non-social biases.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The weakness of strong ties: Sampling bias, social ties, and nepotism in family business succession

Eubanks

Chater

2015

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decision-making is a complex cognitive activity filled with bias. Leader decision-making is unique because it occurs in a social context. We examine how biases resulting from social network dynamics complicate leaders' decision-making. In particular, we focus on a specific case of leader cognition: nepotism in the succession decisions in the context of family businesses. Succession often leads to a decline in performance because leaders frequently choose family members as their successor, a form of nepotism. We show that even when a leader can overcome individual decision biases, a bias in sampling resulting from families' strong ties can still allow a leader to wrongly conclude that family members are better qualified than external candidates when the opposite is true. We demonstrate this phenomenon using simulation modeling and explore solutions to family business succession planning. One of the most important activities of a leader is decision-making. Leader decisionmaking is unique from decision making more generally because it occurs in a social context.Due to the nature of their roles, leaders have to deal with multiple complex social problems that have great importance on the success and survival of organizations (March & Weil, 2009;Mumford, Friedrich, Caughron, & Byrne, 2007). The ability of leaders to solve these social problems is a crucial aspect of leader performance (Eubanks & Mumford, 2010;Mumford, Zaccaro, Harding, Jacobs, & Fleishman, 2000).The primary goal of this paper is to examine how decision biases resulting from social network dynamics complicate leaders' decision-making. In particular, we focus on a specific case of leader cognition -nepotism in the succession decisions in the context of family businesses.Succession is one of the most important decisions a leader will make to ensure sustainable business performance (Giambatista, Rowe, & Riaz, 2005). These decisions are particularly challenging for family businesses as evidenced by the more than seventy per cent of them that fail after the first generation (Family Buisness Institute, 2007) primarily due to poor succession decisions (Cucculelli & Micucci, 2008;Royer, Simons, Boyd, & Rafferty, 2008;Wasserman, 2003). One common characteristic of leaders' succession decisions in family businesses is that they tend to assign offspring as their heir, a form of nepotism. Many empirical studies have shown that nepotism in family business succession tends to lead to decline or even bankruptcy (Bennedsen, Nielsen, Pérez-González, & Wolfenzon, 2007;Cucculelli & Micucci, 2008;Gomez-Mejia, Cruz, Berrone, & De Castro, 2011;Padgett & Morris, 2005;Riggio & Riggio, 2013;Smith & Amoako-Adu, 1999). This calls for a closer investigation of the decision processes of leaders (Antes & Mumford, 2012; Eubanks & WEAKNESS OF STRONG TIES 3 Mumford, 2010;Mumford et al., 2007;Mumford et al., 2000) and why their succession decisions often appear to be biased, and can ultimately destroy their businesses.While many decision biases have been reported in the ...

show abstract

Section: Literature Review Leader Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The weakness of strong ties: Sampling bias, social ties, and nepotism in family business succession

Eubanks

Chater

2015

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the leadership literature, research has highlighted the importance of context specific cognition, which underpins sensemaking and leaders' behavior as well as its influence on outcomes such as performance (Antes & Mumford, 2012;Barrett, Vessey, & Mumford, 2011;Lord & Hall, 2005;Mumford, Connelly, & Gaddis, 2003;Mumford et al, 2007). Leaders are critically important in the context of sensemaking under crises.…”

Section: Leaders' Sensemaking Under Crisesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leaders' sensemaking under crises: Emerging cognitive consensus over time within management teams

Combe

Carrington

2015

The Leadership Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When facing a crisis, leaders' sensemaking can take a considerable amount of time due to the need to develop consensus in how to deal with it so that vision formation and sensegiving can take place. However, research into emerging cognitive consensus when leaders deal with a crisis over time is lacking. This is limiting a detailed understanding of how organizations respond to crises. The findings, based on a longitudinal analysis of cognitive maps within three management teams at a single organization, highlight considerable individual differences in cognitive content when starting to make sense of a crisis. Evidence for an emerging viable prescriptive mental model for the future was found, but not so much in the management as a whole. Instead, the findings highlight increasing cognitive consensus based on similarities in objectives and cause-effect beliefs within well-defined management teams over time.

show abstract

“…In other words, in forecasting, is it desirable for leaders to focus on positive outcomes or negative outcomes? An initial answer to this question has been provided in a recent study by Antes and Mumford (2012). They asked undergraduates to assume the role of CEO in a high technology firm and formulate a vision statement as leader of this company.…”

Section: Forecastingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When the findings obtained by Shipman and Mumford (2011) are considered in light of the conclusions emerging from the Antes and Mumford (2012) it suggests that stronger vision statements will be obtained when leaders forecast negative outcomes as opposed to forecasting positive outcomes. The value of forecasting negative outcomes, although not necessarily articulating potential outcomes to followers, is that it allows leaders to eliminate non-viable courses of action, formulate viable backup plans, and identify events to be "managed" as they attempt to implement their vision (Mumford, Schultz, & Osburn, 2002).…”

Section: Forecastingmentioning

confidence: 99%