IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v25y2014i4p1009-1025.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trade-offs in a Tempest: Stakeholder Influence on Hurricane Evacuation Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Karen Chinander Dye

    (Information Technology and Operations Management Department, Florida Atlantic University, Boca Raton, Florida 33431)

  • J. P. Eggers

    (Department of Management and Organizations, Stern School of Business, New York University, New York, New York 10012)

  • Zur Shapira

    (Department of Management and Organizations, Stern School of Business, New York University, New York, New York 10012)

Abstract

Stakeholders often control vital resources for decision makers, and this can lead decision makers to take stakeholder opinions into account when making important decisions. This process can be complicated by a number of factors. First, many important decisions involve risk and uncertainty. When the outcome is uncertain, how does a decision maker take the views of stakeholders into account? Second, many decision makers are accountable to multiple different stakeholder groups with different preferences. How do these heterogeneous stakeholder groups affect the process of decision making? More generally, do these stakeholder considerations lead to decisions that are not socially optimal?We explore these and related questions by focusing on a specific type of high-stakes decision making in a context featuring significant risk and heterogeneous stakeholders—the decision to evacuate a community during the threat of a hurricane hitting land. There is research on weather forecasting techniques and individual evacuation behavior; however, there is no research on the behavior of local officials in making hurricane evacuation decisions. These decisions provide an excellent context for an exploration into the specific processes by which stakeholder considerations may affect the process of decision making.This study offers a simple model of the process underlying evacuation decision making. The model focuses on how the evacuation threshold is set based on the anticipated costs of Type I versus Type II errors. We then use the model—supplemented with rich qualitative and quantitative data—to offer a series of propositions about the conditions under which nonsocially optimal evacuation decisions may be made. This paper contributes to the literature on decision making by offering a simple model that integrates decision making and stakeholder considerations and by offering specific and novel propositions about this integration.

Suggested Citation

  • Karen Chinander Dye & J. P. Eggers & Zur Shapira, 2014. "Trade-offs in a Tempest: Stakeholder Influence on Hurricane Evacuation Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1009-1025, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:25:y:2014:i:4:p:1009-1025
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2013.0890
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2013.0890
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2013.0890?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1986. "The Architecture of Economic Systems: Hierarchies and Polyarchies," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(4), pages 716-727, September.
    2. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel Levinthal & William Ocasio, 2007. "Perspective---Neo-Carnegie: The Carnegie School’s Past, Present, and Reconstructing for the Future," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 523-536, June.
    3. Felipe A. Csaszar & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2010. "How Much to Copy? Determinants of Effective Imitation Breadth," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(3), pages 661-676, June.
    4. Scott D. Julian & Joseph C. Ofori‐Dankwa & Robert T. Justis, 2008. "Understanding strategic responses to interest group pressures," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(9), pages 963-984, September.
    5. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    6. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1996. "What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(5), pages 502-518, October.
    7. Linda Argote & Henrich R. Greve, 2007. "A Behavioral Theory of the Firm ---40 Years and Counting: Introduction and Impact," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 337-349, June.
    8. David Deephouse & Pursey Heugens, 2009. "Linking Social Issues to Organizational Impact: The Role of Infomediaries and the Infomediary Process," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 86(4), pages 541-553, June.
    9. Michael Lindell & Carla Prater, 2007. "A hurricane evacuation management decision support system (EMDSS)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 40(3), pages 627-634, March.
    10. Joseph Lampel & Zur Shapira, 2001. "Judgmental Errors, Interactive Norms, and the Difficulty of Detecting Strategic Surprises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 599-611, October.
    11. James G. March & Zur Shapira, 1987. "Managerial Perspectives on Risk and Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(11), pages 1404-1418, November.
    12. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2012. "Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 611-632, June.
    13. Mark J. Garmaise & Tobias J. Moskowitz, 2009. "Catastrophic Risk and Credit Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(2), pages 657-707, April.
    14. Kunreuther, Howard C. & Michel-Kerjan, Erwann O., 2011. "At War with the Weather: Managing Large-Scale Risks in a New Era of Catastrophes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262516543, April.
    15. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    16. Alfred A. Marcus & Mary L. Nichols, 1999. "On the Edge: Heeding the Warnings of Unusual Events," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(4), pages 482-499, August.
    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. Shih-Kai Huang & Hao-Che Wu & Michael K. Lindell & Hung-Lung Wei & Charles D. Samuelson, 2017. "Perceptions, behavioral expectations, and implementation timing for response actions in a hurricane emergency," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 88(1), pages 533-558, August.
    2. Stephen J. Smulowitz & Horacio E. Rousseau & Philip Bromiley, 2020. "The behavioral theory of the (community‐oriented) firm: The differing response of community‐oriented firms to performance relative to aspirations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 1023-1053, June.
    3. Ronald Klingebiel & John Joseph & Valerie Machoba, 2022. "Sequencing innovation rollout: Learning opportunity versus entry speed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(9), pages 1763-1792, September.
    4. Gwendolyn K. Lee & Joseph Lampel & Zur Shapira, 2020. "After the Storm Has Passed: Translating Crisis Experience into Useful Knowledge," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(4), pages 1037-1051, July.
    5. David Maslach & Oana Branzei & Claus Rerup & Mark J. Zbaracki, 2018. "Noise as Signal in Learning from Rare Events," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 225-246, April.
    6. Evan DeFilippis & Stephen Michael Impink & Madison Singell & Jeffrey T. Polzer & Raffaella Sadun, 2022. "The impact of COVID-19 on digital communication patterns," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.

    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. Giovanni Gavetti, 2012. "PERSPECTIVE—Toward a Behavioral Theory of Strategy," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(1), pages 267-285, February.
    2. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.
    3. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniella Laureiro-Martínez, 2018. "Individual and Organizational Antecedents of Strategic Foresight: A Representational Approach," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 513-532, September.
    4. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    5. Elizabeth Boyle & Zur Shapira, 2012. "The Liability of Leading: Battling Aspiration and Survival Goals in the Jeopardy! Tournament of Champions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1100-1113, August.
    6. Francois Collet & Déborah Philippe, 2014. "From Hot Cakes to Cold Feet: A Contingent Perspective on the Relationship between Market Uncertainty and Status Homophily in the Formation of Alliances," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 406-432, May.
    7. Claus Rerup, 2009. "Attentional Triangulation: Learning from Unexpected Rare Crises," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(5), pages 876-893, October.
    8. Scott C. Ganz, 2018. "Ignorant Decision Making and Educated Inertia: Some Political Pathologies of Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 39-57, February.
    9. Hart E. Posen & Sangyoon Yi & Jeho Lee, 2020. "A contingency perspective on imitation strategies: When is “benchmarking” ineffective?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(2), pages 198-221, February.
    10. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    11. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    12. Fletcher, Margaret & Harris, Simon & Richey, Robert Glenn, 2021. "Retrospective and prospective learning: Accelerating the internationalization process," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(3).
    13. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2016. "Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2031-2049, October.
    14. Phanish Puranam & Harbir Singh & Saikat Chaudhuri, 2009. "Integrating Acquired Capabilities: When Structural Integration Is (Un)necessary," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 313-328, April.
    15. Peng, George Z. & Beamish, Paul W., 2019. "Subnational FDI Legitimacy and Foreign Subsidiary Survival," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 1-1.
    16. Xu, Kai & Hitt, Michael A. & Dai, Li, 2020. "International diversification of family-dominant firms: Integrating socioemotional wealth and behavioral theory of the firm," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 55(3).
    17. Daniel A. Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2021. "The Plural of Goal: Learning in a World of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 527-543, May.
    18. Michael Lounsbury & Christine M. Beckman, 2015. "Celebrating Organization Theory," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(2), pages 288-308, March.
    19. Russo, Angeloantonio & Vurro, Clodia & Nag, Rajiv, 2019. "To have or to be? The interplay between knowledge structure and market identity in knowledge-based alliance formation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 571-583.
    20. Ranjay Gulati & Phanish Puranam, 2009. "Renewal Through Reorganization: The Value of Inconsistencies Between Formal and Informal Organization," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 422-440, April.

    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:inm:ororsc:v:25:y:2014:i:4:p:1009-1025. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.