| Authors: |
Paul C. Nutt
|
| Tags: |
DECISION
abilityEXECUTIVESINDUSTRIAL
business
in
makingEXECUTIVE
managementLEADERSHIPSUCCESS
|
| Abstract: |
Leaders are surprised to hear that strategic decisions often failed and ask how to improve matters. Improvement calls for insight into what brings about failure and ways to avoid it. The article shows that failed decisions stem from decision-maker actions in which blunders create traps and traps bring about failure. Blunders arise when decision-makers rush to judgment, use failure-prone practices, and allocate time and money unwisely. Here we consider how these blunders set a trap that limits the search for remedies. Three approaches are offered for expanding the search for alternatives and avoiding the limited-search trap. First, decision-makers should expand the arena of action by identifying key stakeholders, their concerns and claims. The second approach is to increase the clarity of objectives and select one that defines an arena of action with the broadest possible scope. The third is to use multiple perspectives to uncover options that would otherwise be undiscovered. Successful decision-makers add innovative options to the mix of remedies to be considered. Shell's attempts to dispose of an obsolete oilrig, Quaker's purchase of Snapple, and Columbus, Ohio's seeking of tax support for a sports arena illustrate how the three blunders can limit the alternatives search and discourage innovation. The article recommends search tactics that can help decision-makers be sure that they are exploring a full range of decision options. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Academy of Management Executive is the property of Academy of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
Leaders are surprised to hear that strategic decisions often failed and ask how to improve matters. Improvement calls for insight into what brings about failure and ways to avoid it. The article shows that failed decisions stem from decision-maker actions in which blunders create traps and traps bring about failure. Blunders arise when decision-makers rush to judgment, use failure-prone practices, and allocate time and money unwisely. Here we consider how these blunders set a trap that limits the search for remedies. Three approaches are offered for expanding the search for alternatives and avoiding the limited-search trap. First, decision-makers should expand the arena of action by identifying key stakeholders, their concerns and claims. The second approach is to increase the clarity of objectives and select one that defines an arena of action with the broadest possible scope. The third is to use multiple perspectives to uncover options that would otherwise be undiscovered. Successful decision-makers add innovative options to the mix of remedies to be considered. Shell's attempts to dispose of an obsolete oilrig, Quaker's purchase of Snapple, and Columbus, Ohio's seeking of tax support for a sports arena illustrate how the three blunders can limit the alternatives search and discourage innovation. The article recommends search tactics that can help decision-makers be sure that they are exploring a full range of decision options. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Academy of Management Executive is the property of Academy of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts) |
@article{Nutt.2004,
title = {Expanding the search for alternatives during strategic decision-making},
author = {Paul C. Nutt},
journal = {Academy of Management Executive},
number = {4},
pages = {13-28},
volume = {18},
year = {2004},
abstract = {Leaders are surprised to hear that strategic decisions often failed and ask how to improve matters. Improvement calls for insight into what brings about failure and ways to avoid it. The article shows that failed decisions stem from decision-maker actions in which blunders create traps and traps bring about failure. Blunders arise when decision-makers rush to judgment, use failure-prone practices, and allocate time and money unwisely. Here we consider how these blunders set a trap that limits the search for remedies. Three approaches are offered for expanding the search for alternatives and avoiding the limited-search trap. First, decision-makers should expand the arena of action by identifying key stakeholders, their concerns and claims. The second approach is to increase the clarity of objectives and select one that defines an arena of action with the broadest possible scope. The third is to use multiple perspectives to uncover options that would otherwise be undiscovered. Successful decision-makers add innovative options to the mix of remedies to be considered. Shell's attempts to dispose of an obsolete oilrig, Quaker's purchase of Snapple, and Columbus, Ohio's seeking of tax support for a sports arena illustrate how the three blunders can limit the alternatives search and discourage innovation. The article recommends search tactics that can help decision-makers be sure that they are exploring a full range of decision options. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Academy of Management Executive is the property of Academy of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)
Leaders are surprised to hear that strategic decisions often failed and ask how to improve matters. Improvement calls for insight into what brings about failure and ways to avoid it. The article shows that failed decisions stem from decision-maker actions in which blunders create traps and traps bring about failure. Blunders arise when decision-makers rush to judgment, use failure-prone practices, and allocate time and money unwisely. Here we consider how these blunders set a trap that limits the search for remedies. Three approaches are offered for expanding the search for alternatives and avoiding the limited-search trap. First, decision-makers should expand the arena of action by identifying key stakeholders, their concerns and claims. The second approach is to increase the clarity of objectives and select one that defines an arena of action with the broadest possible scope. The third is to use multiple perspectives to uncover options that would otherwise be undiscovered. Successful decision-makers add innovative options to the mix of remedies to be considered. Shell's attempts to dispose of an obsolete oilrig, Quaker's purchase of Snapple, and Columbus, Ohio's seeking of tax support for a sports arena illustrate how the three blunders can limit the alternatives search and discourage innovation. The article recommends search tactics that can help decision-makers be sure that they are exploring a full range of decision options. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Academy of Management Executive is the property of Academy of Management and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)},
keywords = {DECISION abilityEXECUTIVESINDUSTRIAL business in makingEXECUTIVE managementLEADERSHIPSUCCESS }
}
::