Toward a theory of intraorganizational attention based on desirability and feasibility factors

Abstract

Why would managers in the same firm differ in their attention to opportunity versus threat aspects of the same exogenous shock? Drawing on the attention‐based view, strategic issue diagnosis theory, and construal level theory, we propose and test a theoretical model of differentiated attention among managers within a firm driven by desirability (shock distance) and feasibility (capability perception) considerations. Managers more distant from the locus of the shock and managers with stronger ex ante perceptions regarding organizational capabilities to address the shock paid more attention to opportunity aspects and less attention to threat aspects. We also found subordination effects between shock distance and capability perception, and a moderating role of domain‐specific experience on the effects of capability perception.Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Corporate Philanthropic Responses to Emergent Human Needs: The Role of Organizational Attention Focus

“…In addition, the attention-based view holds that organizational action is determined by patterns of attention directed both inside and outside the organization, and that the effects of one attention structure may be contingent upon the effects of other attention structures (Barreto and Patient 2013;Bouquet and Birkinshaw 2008;Ocasio 1997). Building on these arguments, we propose that internally directed attention (i.e., employee attention focus) interacts with externally directed attention (i.e., geographic attention focus) to predict corporate philanthropy.…”

“…For instance, Kaplan (2008) reveals the amplifying role of experience in a particular domain on the relationship between management's attention for that domain and subsequent investments in that domain. Similarly, Barreto and Patient (2013) show that domainspecific experience moderates the relationship between management's interpretations of an emergent issue and the perceived capability to address that issue. Building on the previous hypothesis, we argue that considering the role of attention for domain-specific practices will contribute to a better understanding of the interactions between practices and attention in driving resource allocation decisions (Chattopadhyay et al 2001;Dane 2013;Maula et al 2013).…”

“…1) to explain how established management attention for people, places, and practices, respectively, interact to predict the likelihood of future charitable action. The attention-based view departs from the premise that decision makers have limited capacities to attend to the full range of stimuli they face, and that organizations harbor structural features that shape the relative distribution of attention (Barreto and Patient 2013;Dutton et al 2001;Ocasio 1997). If patterns of attention allocation determine when organizations allocate resources to address a given issue, then our framework is aimed at explaining how attention allocation activates some decisions and not others (Dutton et al 2001).…”

“…If patterns of attention allocation determine when organizations allocate resources to address a given issue, then our framework is aimed at explaining how attention allocation activates some decisions and not others (Dutton et al 2001). We explain this variance in decision activation in terms of organizations' systematic variation in their attention focus (Barreto and Patient 2013;Nadkarni and Barr 2008); i.e., which elements of the organization and its environment figure most prominently in the organizational attention hierarchy (Davenport and Beck 2001). Because attention focus is rooted in organizational identity, attention focus varies systematically across organizations, and is relatively stable over time (Hoffman and Ocasio 2001).…”

“…With respect to practices, in light of research showing that organizational routines are not always activated in the face of emergent issues (Bansal 2003;Kaplan 2008), we argue that attention for the practice of corporate philanthropy in general is an important but understudied mechanism driving charitable responses to specific emergent human needs. Finally, based on the notion that resource allocation decisions are driven in part by interactions among attention structures (Barreto and Patient 2013), we propose that attention for people interacts with attention for places and practices to affect the likelihood of corporate philanthropy.…”