IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04547009.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How much information to consider when choosing action to change? The impact of managers’ promotion versus prevention focus

Author

Listed:
  • Melvyn R.W. Hamstra

    (LEM - Lille économie management - UMR 9221 - UA - Université d'Artois - UCL - Université catholique de Lille - Université de Lille - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

This research sought to understand better how readily managers choose action to change the status quo. Specifically, in experimentally manipulated ambiguous situations, I examined the effect of managers' promotion and prevention focus on how much information they wish to review to help them choose. Design/methodology/approach I developed a novel experimental paradigm and applied it in a sample of 157 managers. Managers faced choosing action (change the status quo) versus non-action (keep the status quo), and I test under which circumstances they want to review more information that they believe will help them choose effectively. Findings The experiment showed evidence that (1) managers with a prevention focus want to review more information when they are trying to assure that they do not choose action erroneously; (2) managers with a promotion focus want to review more information when they are trying to assure that they do not choose non-action erroneously. Originality/value This research provides an original perspective on a managerial decision-making phenomenon. It goes beyond managers' choice preferences to examine a practically relevant outcome of the process of deliberating about taking action to change the status quo.

Suggested Citation

  • Melvyn R.W. Hamstra, 2024. "How much information to consider when choosing action to change? The impact of managers’ promotion versus prevention focus," Post-Print hal-04547009, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04547009
    DOI: 10.1108/JMP-08-2023-0430
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04547009. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.