IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v21y1993i4p411-423.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Diagnostics for strategic decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Nutt, P. C.

Abstract

Decisions were analyzed to identify how diagnostics and types of direction influence the success of decision making. Diagnostics compare performance to norms, creating quantitative or qualitative performance gaps, or make impressionistic observations. Directions were set as an idea, problem, target or reframing. Decision adoption rates, decision value, and timeliness were used to determine the success of these diagnostics and direction setting types. Reframing was found to be the most successful type of direction but was seldom used by decision makers. Targets were also quite successful. Directions based on problems and ideas were the least successful but these tactics were used far more often than targets or reframing. The diagnostics applied by decision makers also influenced decision success, with quantitative performance gaps producing the best results. Decision makers using an idea direction prefer qualitative diagnostics, although quantitative diagnostics were more successful. Problem directions were somewhat more successful with qualitative diagnostics, but were very inefficient. Target directions were successful only with quantitative diagnostics. Unlike the other types of directions, reframing was very successful when used with each diagnostic.

Suggested Citation

  • Nutt, P. C., 1993. "Diagnostics for strategic decisions," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 411-423, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:21:y:1993:i:4:p:411-423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0305-0483(93)90074-U
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. BüyükdamgacI, Güldal, 2003. "Process of organizational problem definition: how to evaluate and how to improve," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 327-338, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    decision making/process strategy;

    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:eee:jomega:v:21:y:1993:i:4:p:411-423. 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/375/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.