IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/halshs-00692272.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Les Dirigeants Dans Le Secteur Des Tic Pensent-Ils Différemment ?

Author

Listed:
  • Cécile Fonrouge

    (IRG - Institut de Recherche en Gestion - UPEM - Université Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée - UPEC UP12 - Université Paris-Est Créteil Val-de-Marne - Paris 12)

Abstract

The Communication and Information Techniques sector reveals an unstable environment. The managers of small and medium-size firms respond to this kind of environment by using decision-making biases. In this study, we propose to study two biases (insider bias and self-serving bias) particularly efficient on network performance. The insider bias describes the strong tendency to consider problems as unique, focusing on the case at hand without considering the context. The self-serving bias consists in a tendency to attribute positive incomes to a self. Two case studies are chosen for their emblematic perspective. The qualitative results show strong support for two proposals. First a natural network of clients is embedded thanks to a central firm which analyses the environment with an inside view. Second the self-attribution of the first success has negative impacts on building familial networking

Suggested Citation

  • Cécile Fonrouge, 2002. "Les Dirigeants Dans Le Secteur Des Tic Pensent-Ils Différemment ?," Post-Print halshs-00692272, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:halshs-00692272
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00692272
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00692272/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:dau:papers:123456789/3308 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    3. Palich, Leslie E. & Ray Bagby, D., 1995. "Using cognitive theory to explain entrepreneurial risk-taking: Challenging conventional wisdom," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 425-438, November.
    4. Michel Kalika, 2000. "Le management est mort, vive le e-management," Post-Print hal-00160498, HAL.
    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. Cécile Fonrouge, 2010. "Un mentor pour surmonter les formes du handicap de la nouveauté ? Le point de vue de la dyade mentor-protégé," Post-Print halshs-00681915, HAL.

    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. T. K. Das & Bing-Sheng Teng, 1998. "Time and Entrepreneurial Risk Behavior," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(2), pages 69-88, January.
    2. Forlani, David & Mullins, John W., 2000. "Perceived risks and choices in entrepreneurs' new venture decisions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(4), pages 305-322, July.
    3. Simon, Mark & Houghton, Susan M. & Aquino, Karl, 2000. "Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: How individuals decide to start companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 113-134, March.
    4. Mark Simon & Susan M. Houghton, 2002. "The Relationship among Biases, Misperceptions, and the Introduction of Pioneering Products: Examining Differences in Venture Decision Contexts," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(2), pages 105-124, April.
    5. Najoua Dali & Sana Harbi, 2016. "The Effect of Risk Perception and Cognitive Biases on the Evaluation of Opportunity in Family and Non-Family Entrepreneurs: The Case of Tunisian Entrepreneurs," Journal of Enterprising Culture (JEC), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 24(03), pages 281-312, September.
    6. Yan Li & David Ahlstrom, 2020. "Risk-taking in entrepreneurial decision-making: A dynamic model of venture decision," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 899-933, September.
    7. Simon, Mark & Shrader, Rodney C., 2012. "Entrepreneurial actions and optimistic overconfidence: The role of motivated reasoning in new product introductions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 291-309.
    8. Andreas Hönl & Philip Meissner & Torsten Wulf, 2020. "Betting the farm and playing it safe? Hyper-core self-evaluation in decisions when managers are winning and losing," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1293-1316, November.
    9. Don A. Moore & John M. Oesch & Charlene Zietsma, 2007. "What Competition? Myopic Self-Focus in Market-Entry Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 440-454, June.
    10. Samuel Mongrut & Nidia Juárez, 2018. "Valuation of Start-ups: A Behavioral and Strategic Perspective," Remef - Revista Mexicana de Economía y Finanzas Nueva Época REMEF (The Mexican Journal of Economics and Finance), Instituto Mexicano de Ejecutivos de Finanzas, IMEF, vol. 13(3), pages 419-439, Julio-Sep.
    11. Joseph McManus, 2018. "Hubris and Unethical Decision Making: The Tragedy of the Uncommon," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 149(1), pages 169-185, April.
    12. Ravasi, Davide & Turati, Carlo, 2005. "Exploring entrepreneurial learning: a comparative study of technology development projects," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 137-164, January.
    13. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    14. Hönl, Andreas & Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2017. "Risk attribution theory: An exploratory conceptualization of individual choice under uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 20-27.
    15. Donna Marie De Carolis & Patrick Saparito, 2006. "Social Capital, Cognition, and Entrepreneurial Opportunities: A Theoretical Framework," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 30(1), pages 41-56, January.
    16. Rodgers, Waymond & Al Shammakhi, Badriya N. & Jeaneth, Johansson & Wincent, Joakim & Adams, Kweku, 2020. "DIY Entrepreneurship: a decision-pathway framework for ethical thought structures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Andreas Hack & Frauke Bieberstein & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2016. "Reference point formation and new venture creation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 447-465, March.
    18. Verheul, I. & Carree, M.A., 2008. "Overoptimism among Founders: The Role of Information and Motivation," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-008-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    19. Hernan E. Riquelme & Abdulaziz Alqallaf, 2020. "Anticipated emotions and their effects on risk and opportunity evaluations," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 18(3), pages 312-335, September.
    20. 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.

    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:hal:journl:halshs-00692272. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.