IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/mrrpps/mrr-03-2016-0054.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reducing biases of decision-making processes in complex organizations

Author

Listed:
  • Matteo Cristofaro

Abstract

Purpose - This paper aims to study how biases in decision-making processes could be reduced. In this vein, over the past 30 years, scholars interested in decision-making have been raising their interest in the development of quality control tools to mitigate the effects of cognitive distortions. However, they have often neglected the use of psychological instruments for understanding the role of decision-makers’ personality in the quality of the decision-making processes. Design/methodology/approach - This is an intrinsic case study about an Italian complex organization (i.e. Consorzio ELIS) which tries to shed light on the identified research question. Three decision-makers responsible for the decision processes of three new business initiatives were interviewed using a recent quality control tool (i.e. checklist) and their personality types were tracked by performing MBTI® tests. The thematic analysis, approached by using NVivo software, and after six months of direct observations inside the organization, allowed an understanding of the decision processes and their distortions. Findings - The results of this study show how initiatives with frequent quality control mechanisms and different stakeholders are more able to pass the decision phase than initiatives with no controls, few participants and little difference between personalities. Originality/value - The results of this work show how reducing biases of decision-making processes in complex organizations can benefit from the simultaneous use of the checklist and MBTI® test. As demonstrated, when used together, they can make more effective use of and provide better results for both, as well as providing a better quality control of the decision-making processes. From that, an approach is proposed that both takes into account the two perspectives and can work together with other cognitive problem structuring methods.

Suggested Citation

  • Matteo Cristofaro, 2017. "Reducing biases of decision-making processes in complex organizations," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(3), pages 270-291, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:mrrpps:mrr-03-2016-0054
    DOI: 10.1108/MRR-03-2016-0054
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MRR-03-2016-0054/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MRR-03-2016-0054/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/MRR-03-2016-0054?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. İsa Yıldırım, 2022. "What Is the Role of Organizational Cynicism in School Effectiveness?," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(3), pages 21582440221, July.
    2. Arno Nuijten & Nick Benschop & Antoinette Rijsenbilt & Kristinka Wilmink, 2020. "Cognitive Biases in Critical Decisions Facing SME Entrepreneurs: An External Accountants’ Perspective," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, November.
    3. Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior & Vanessa B. Schramm, 2022. "Problem Structuring Methods: A Review of Advances Over the Last Decade," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 55-88, February.
    4. Riccardo Camilli & Alessandro Mechelli & Alessandra Stefanoni & Fabrizio Rossi, 2023. "Addressing Managerial Loss Aversion for the Corporate Value Creation Process: A Critical Analysis of the Literature and Preliminary Approaches," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, December.
    5. Yetunde Anibaba & Godbless Akaighe, 2018. "Dynamics of Decision Making in Cross-Functional Teams," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 12(4), December.
    6. Matteo Cristofaro & Pier Luigi Giardino, 2020. "Core Self-Evaluations, Self-Leadership, and the Self-Serving Bias in Managerial Decision Making: A Laboratory Experiment," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-23, September.
    7. Irene Schettini & Gabriele Palozzi & Antonio Chirico, 2020. "Enhancing Healthcare Decision-Making Process: Findings from Orthopaedic Field," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Gianpaolo Abatecola & Matteo Cristofaro, 2019. "Ingredients of Sustainable CEO Behaviour: Theory and Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-15, April.
    9. Gianpaolo Abatecola & Alberto Surace, 2020. "Discussing the Use of Complexity Theory in Engineering Management: Implications for Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-24, December.

    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:eme:mrrpps:mrr-03-2016-0054. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.