Downloadable - About University

372 Decision framing and cognitive inertia
Level of
perceived
environmental
threat?
–confirmation
bias
–overconfidence
high
perceived
level of
threat
low
perceived
level of
threat
increased
stress
low
stress
level
coping behavior
–bolstering
–procrastination
–buck passing
–escalation
–groupthink
inertia
–conservatism
–anchoring
–unconflicted
adherence
Figure 14.5 – The relationship between the perceived business environment and the
strategic decision process
adherence to the currently followed strategy characterize this resting
state. Nevertheless, the environment is monitored for environmental
threats but this monitoring is attenuated due to confirmation bias and
overconfidence. If the environmental threat is so severe it is perceived
as threatening unconflicted adherence to the current strategy, then
the stress level rises and, soon afterwards, coping patterns such as
bolstering, procrastination and buck passing are evidenced. Bolstering
is characterized by escalation of commitment to the current strategy
and, in general, groupthink processes lead to perceived invulnerability
and the suppression of critical ideas. Such coping patterns lower the
perceived level of environmental threat which results in a lowered stress
level and so to inertia in strategic decision making. Overall, our model
proposes that we are, generally, routine thinkers rather than creative
thinkers. The systemic processes in the model encourage the replication
of previously successful ways of making decisions.
Summary
In conclusion, we feel that creativity in decision option generation is,
in general, likely to be rare. Mechanization of thought processes or
frame-blindness seem, intuitively, widespread. Our model of inertia in
strategic decision making suggests that, especially, in stressful, high
consequence situations, the degree of adherence to a previously successful
strategy will increase rather than decrease. Russo and Schoemaker’s