IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbrese/v67y2014i8p1717-1724.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fast and frugal crisis management: An analysis of rule-based judgment and choice during water contamination events

Author

Listed:
  • MacGillivray, Brian H.

Abstract

Drawing on the fast and frugal research programme, this paper describes a retrospective field study of decision making during water contamination events. It characterises three heuristics employed in real-world decision making. The credibility heuristic discriminates between signals from targets and noise from distracters on the basis of the perceived trustworthiness of the message conveyor. With the precedent heuristic, the response to an unfolding event is determined by searching for past analogues (i.e. precedents) and, if found, treating the current event in the same fashion. By contrast, the facts-trump-speculation heuristic discriminates between conflicting explanations or claims according to how they rank on pre-determined hierarchies of evidence (orders of cue validities), neglecting utilities and avoiding the aggregation of competing lines of evidence. Rather than cataloguing the biases that these heuristics lead to, this paper focuses on the structural factors which shape each heuristic's ecological rationality. In doing so, the study develops ideas about how particular infrastructure systems and forms of social organisation structure the validity of cues, the accessibility of information, and the application of particular heuristics. The study also introduces the concept of safeguards to rule-based reasoning, and the idea that heuristics can be used to rationalize decisions, and deployed strategically to persuade other social actors. The over-arching claim is that the fast and frugal programme provides a powerful framework for analysing judgment and choice in organisations, and offers a bridge between psychological and political models of organisational behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • MacGillivray, Brian H., 2014. "Fast and frugal crisis management: An analysis of rule-based judgment and choice during water contamination events," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1717-1724.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbrese:v:67:y:2014:i:8:p:1717-1724
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.02.018
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0148296314000939
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.02.018?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isabelle Huault & V. Perret & S. Charreire-Petit, 2007. "Management," Post-Print halshs-00337676, HAL.
    2. Brian H. MacGillivray & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2011. "Humility needed in decision-making," Nature, Nature, vol. 475(7357), pages 455-455, July.
    3. Andrew G. Haldane & Vasileios Madouros, 2012. "The dog and the frisbee," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 109-159.
    4. Nick Pidgeon, 2011. "In retrospect: Normal Accidents," Nature, Nature, vol. 477(7365), pages 404-405, September.
    5. Busenitz, Lowell W. & Barney, Jay B., 1997. "Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 9-30, January.
    6. Simon, Herbert A, 1979. "Rational Decision Making in Business Organizations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(4), pages 493-513, September.
    7. Krabuanrat, K. & Phelps, R., 1998. "Heuristics and rationality in strategic decision making: An exploratory study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 83-93, January.
    8. Andrew G. Haldane & Robert M. May, 2011. "Systemic risk in banking ecosystems," Nature, Nature, vol. 469(7330), pages 351-355, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Reza Kheirandish & Shabnam Mousavi, 2018. "Herbert Simon, innovation, and heuristics," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 17(1), pages 97-109, November.
    2. Gerson Francis Tuazon & Rachel Wolfgramm & Kyle Powys Whyte, 2021. "Can You Drink Money? Integrating Organizational Perspective-Taking and Organizational Resilience in a Multi-level Systems Framework for Sustainability Leadership," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 168(3), pages 469-490, January.
    3. Loock, Moritz & Hinnen, Gieri, 2015. "Heuristics in organizations: A review and a research agenda," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(9), pages 2027-2036.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Thierry Burger-Helmchen & Patrick Llerena, 2008. "A case study of a creative start-up: governance, communities and knowledge management," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 125-146.
    2. Daniel R Clark & Dan Li & Dean A Shepherd, 2018. "Country familiarity in the initial stage of foreign market selection," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 49(4), pages 442-472, May.
    3. Lilit Popoyan, 2020. "Macroprudential Policy: a Blessing or a Curse?," Review of Economics and Institutions, Università di Perugia, vol. 11(1-2).
    4. Mohammadi, Ali & Shafi, Kourosh, 2015. "The contribution patterns of equity-crowdfunding investors: Gender, Risk aversion and Observational learning," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 419, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    5. Spiros Bougheas & Alan Kirman, 2015. "Complex Financial Networks and Systemic Risk: A Review," Dynamic Modeling and Econometrics in Economics and Finance, in: Pasquale Commendatore & Saime Kayam & Ingrid Kubin (ed.), Complexity and Geographical Economics, edition 127, pages 115-139, Springer.
    6. Chantal Hartog & Brigitte Hoogendoorn & Sophie Bacq & Jan Lepoutre, 2011. "Social and commercial entrepreneurship: Exploring individual and organizational characteristics," Scales Research Reports H201110, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    7. Gilbert-Saad, Antoine & Siedlok, Frank & McNaughton, Rod B., 2018. "Decision and design heuristics in the context of entrepreneurial uncertainties," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 75-80.
    8. Tariq Mahadeen & Kostas Galanakis & Elpida Samara & Pavlos Kilintzis, 2021. "Heuristics and Evidences Decision (HeED) Making: a Case Study in a Systemic Model for Transforming Decision Making from Heuristics-Based to Evidenced-Based," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1668-1693, December.
    9. Saras D. Sarasvathy, 2004. "Making It Happen: Beyond Theories of the Firm to Theories of Firm Design," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 28(6), pages 519-531, November.
    10. Ali Mohammadi & Kourosh Shafi, 2018. "Gender differences in the contribution patterns of equity-crowdfunding investors," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 275-287, February.
    11. Levy-Carciente, Sary & Kenett, Dror Y. & Avakian, Adam & Stanley, H. Eugene & Havlin, Shlomo, 2015. "Dynamical macroprudential stress testing using network theory," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 164-181.
    12. Curt B. Moore & Nancy H. McIntyre & Stephen E. Lanivich, 2021. "ADHD-Related Neurodiversity and the Entrepreneurial Mindset," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(1), pages 64-91, January.
    13. Alaegbu Anastecia Nkeiru & Barisua Fortune Nwinee, 2019. "The Impact of Management Styles on Business Decision Making: Exploring the Different Models of Decision Making," International Journal of Science and Business, IJSAB International, vol. 3(3), pages 210-229.
    14. James Breen & Darragh Clancy & Mary Ryan & M. Wallace, 2010. "Can’t See the Wood for the Trees: The Returns to Farm Forestry in Ireland," Working Papers 1003, Rural Economy and Development Programme,Teagasc.
    15. Popoyan, Lilit & Napoletano, Mauro & Roventini, Andrea, 2017. "Taming macroeconomic instability: Monetary and macro-prudential policy interactions in an agent-based model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 117-140.
    16. Francisco B. Galarza & Gabriella Wong, 2017. "The Impact of Price Information on Consumer Behavior: An Experiment," Working Papers 106, Peruvian Economic Association.
    17. Alan Gregory, 2011. "The Expected Cost of Equity and the Expected Risk Premium in the UK," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 3(1), pages 1-26, April.
    18. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    19. Ana-Maria BERCU, 2014. "Performance Appraisal Of Civil Servants. Sustainability And Development," Proceedings of Administration and Public Management International Conference, Research Centre in Public Administration and Public Services, Bucharest, Romania, vol. 10(1), pages 35-43, June.
    20. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).

    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:jbrese:v:67:y:2014:i:8:p:1717-1724. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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/locate/jbusres .

    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.