IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v5y1994i3p322-343.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative Cause Mapping of Organizational Cognitions

Author

Listed:
  • Mauri Laukkanen

    (Department of Management and Organization, University of Vaasa, PB 297 SF-65101, Vaasa, Finland)

Abstract

Increasingly, thoughtful managers recognize the role of knowledge and learning in corporate action and performance. Concurrently, a new field, management and organization cognition (MOC), has emerged producing useful insights and findings. Thus far, empirical studies have largely focused on single cases or actors, using often archival data and sometimes ambiguous methods. To advance the field will require pragmatic tools for eliciting data on thinking in real organizations and for conducting rigorous and more comparative studies of management and organization cognitions.This paper describes a method for comparatively studying real-life managerial thinking, defined here as the respective manager's beliefs about key phenomena and their efficacy links in their strategic and operative situation. The applicability of such a definition will depend on the requirements of research at hand. The payoff is that, thus defined, key elements in managerial and organizational cognitions can be usefully captured by cognitive mapping, an established approach in MOC research.The approach contains, first, a method for eliciting comparison-enabling interview data of several subjects. Then, using researcher-based, interpretive standardization of the individual natural discourses, databases of standard concepts and causal links, constituting the cause map elements, are distilled. This facilitates a text-oriented description of the thinking patterns of single actors like managers or organizational groups, which can be used in traditional-type mapping studies, which typically assume unitary or quasi-unitary actors. However, the method is intended for comparative analyses, e.g., for pinpointing the cognitive differences or similarities across organizational actors or for constructing and comparing groups, assumed cognitively homogenous. Also, it is applicable for longitudinal studies or aggregated, e.g., industry-level, descriptions of MOC. A PC application is available for the technique, although many of the processing tasks are amenable to general-purpose relational database software.The paper presents a study case comparing the cognitive structures of managers in two interrelated industries in terms of their concept bases and causal beliefs. The objective was to understand the substance of management thinking, as well as the formative logic behind how managers come to think in the shared ways. It is shown that patterns of industry-typical core causal thinking, manifestations of a dominant logic or recipe, can be located, operationalized and comparatively analyzed with this method. Substantively, the contents of management thinking are typically products of complex long-term mechanisms. These consist, first, of organizational problem-solving, recurrently facing a specific, adequately stable constellation of strategic tasks and environment elements, similar within industries and systematically different across them, and, second, of various social processes, which directly transfer and influence management thinking. The paper concludes with discussing the cause mapping method and suggests some options for further studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Mauri Laukkanen, 1994. "Comparative Cause Mapping of Organizational Cognitions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 322-343, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:5:y:1994:i:3:p:322-343
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.5.3.322
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.5.3.322
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.5.3.322?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Gary F. Templeton & Mark B. Schmidt & G. Stephen Taylor, 2009. "Managing the diffusion of organizational learning behavior," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 189-200, April.
    2. Huang, Fuqun & Smidts, Carol, 2017. "Causal Mechanism Graph ─ A new notation for capturing cause-effect knowledge in software dependability," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 196-212.
    3. David P. Tegarden & Linda F. Tegarden & Steven D. Sheetz, 2009. "Cognitive Factions in a Top Management Team: Surfacing and Analyzing Cognitive Diversity using Causal Maps," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 18(6), pages 537-566, November.
    4. Arnaud Eve & Pierre-Antoine Sprimont, 2013. "Etude exploratoire sur la perception de la Etude exploratoire sur la perception de la norme de management de la qualité par les opérationnels, et son impact sur leur attitude au travail : le cas de l'," Post-Print hal-01574344, HAL.
    5. Schaffernicht, Martin FG. & Groesser, Stefan N., 2024. "Mental models of dynamic systems are different: Adjusting for heterogeneous granularity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 312(2), pages 653-667.
    6. R Volkema, 2009. "Natural language and the art and science of problem/opportunity formulation: a transportation planning case analysis," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(10), pages 1360-1372, October.
    7. Schaffernicht, Martin F.G. & Groesser, Stefan N., 2014. "The SEXTANT software: A tool for automating the comparative analysis of mental models of dynamic systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 238(2), pages 566-578.
    8. Florence Allard-Poesi, 1998. "Representations And Influence Processes In Groups: Towards A Socio-Cognitive Perspective On Cognition In Organization," Post-Print hal-01490579, HAL.
    9. Chaney, Damien & Marshall, Roger, 2013. "Social legitimacy versus distinctiveness: Mapping the place of consumers in the mental representations of managers in an institutionalized environment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(9), pages 1550-1558.
    10. Mary Ann Glynn & Lee Watkiss, 2020. "Of Organizing and Sensemaking: From Action to Meaning and Back Again in a Half‐Century of Weick’s Theorizing," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(7), pages 1331-1354, November.
    11. Marco Castellani & Linda Alengoz & Niccolò Casnici & Flaminio Squazzoni, 2022. "A role-game laboratory experiment on the influence of country prospects reports on investment decisions in two artificial organizational settings," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 21(1), pages 121-149, June.
    12. Spanellis, Agnessa & MacBryde, Jillian & Dӧrfler, Viktor, 2021. "A dynamic model of knowledge management in innovative technology companies: A case from the energy sector," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 292(2), pages 784-797.

    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:5:y:1994:i:3:p:322-343. 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: 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.