IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eurman/v40y2022i4p606-617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How managers’ risk perceptions affect their willingness to blame advisors as scapegoats

Author

Listed:
  • Aschauer, Florian
  • Sohn, Matthias
  • Hirsch, Bernhard

Abstract

Managers spend considerable amounts of corporate money to hire consultants. The research proposes two potential benefits of consultants' advice: increasing decision accuracy and sharing responsibility with the advisor. In contrast to previous research, which has predominantly focused on factors influencing decisional accuracy, this paper evaluates the sharing of responsibility in the form of using an advisor as a scapegoat. We conduct an online experiment with 175 managers from German-speaking countries in an investment setting. We find that the presence of a potential scapegoat positively affects advice utilization in an economic boom but negatively affects such utilization in an economic crisis due to managers' varying risk perceptions. Managers' risk perceptions are the main drivers of scapegoating as a form of managerial blame avoiding decision-making. We contribute to management research and highlight managers’ opportunistic motives behind consulting (costly) advice.

Suggested Citation

  • Aschauer, Florian & Sohn, Matthias & Hirsch, Bernhard, 2022. "How managers’ risk perceptions affect their willingness to blame advisors as scapegoats," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 606-617.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:eurman:v:40:y:2022:i:4:p:606-617
    DOI: 10.1016/j.emj.2021.09.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0263237321001201
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.emj.2021.09.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:eee:eurman:v:40:y:2022:i:4:p:606-617. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/115/description#description .

    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.