ORCID Profile
0000-0001-6650-5640
Current Organisations
UNSW Sydney
,
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
,
London Business School
Does something not look right? The information on this page has been harvested from data sources that may not be up to date. We continue to work with information providers to improve coverage and quality. To report an issue, use the Feedback Form.
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Date: 06-2017
Abstract: Many academics, consultants, and managers advocate stretch goals to attain superior organizational performance. However, existing theory speculates that, although stretch goals may benefit some organizations, they are not a “rule for riches” for all organizations. To address this speculation, we use two experimental studies to explore the effects on the mean, median, variance, and skewness of performance of stretch compared with moderate goals. Participants were assigned moderate or stretch goals to manage a widely used business simulation. Compared with moderate goals, stretch goals improve performance for a few participants, but many abandon the stretch goals in favor of lower self-set goals, or adopt a survival goal when faced with the threat of bankruptcy. Consequently, stretch goals generate higher performance variance across organizations and a right-skewed performance distribution. Contrary to conventional wisdom, we find no positive stretch goal main effect on performance. Instead, stretch goals compared with moderate goals generate large attainment discrepancies that increase willingness to take risks, undermine goal commitment, and generate lower risk-adjusted performance. The results provide a richer theoretical and empirical appreciation of how stretch goals influence performance. The e-companion is available at 0.1287/orsc.2017.1131 .
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2023
Publisher: Academy of Management
Date: 09-2014
Publisher: Oxford University Press
Date: 02-09-2009
DOI: 10.1093/OXFORDHB/9780199290468.003.0002
Abstract: This article examines the underlying cognitive and behavioral factors responsible for strategic decisions driving B& B dynamics, discusses the reasons firms do not learn to avoid boom and bust, and identifies tentative strategies for mitigating B& B (Boom and Bust) behavior. At the same time, it conjecturally concludes, there might be a positive collective side to B& B behavior fostering accumulation of knowledge and physical infrastructure, especially regarding new technological paradigms. The next section discusses a number of real world cases of B& B dynamics. The ex les illustrate quite common dynamic behaviors and highlight the crucial role of capacity investment decisions in B& B outcomes. Subsequent sections review the findings from prior experimental research on B& B dynamics and discuss some key decision biases and heuristics that play important roles in B& B decision making. The final section outlines some tentative strategies for moderating B& B decision making. The conclusion highlights some of the collectively positive aspects of booms and busts.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 04-2016
DOI: 10.1002/SDR.1560
Publisher: American Accounting Association
Date: 12-2015
DOI: 10.2308/ACCR-51364
Abstract: This study examines the effects that two balanced scorecard framework (BSF) elements, causal linkages between strategic objectives (“causal linkages”) and time delay information (“delays”) in a strategy map, have on long-term profit performance in a dynamic decision-making environment. Using a computer-based simulation task, we conduct a 3 × (4) experiment (control group causal linkages without delays causal linkages with delays four simulation rounds) and find that managers presented with causal linkages without delays generate greater long-term profit compared to a control group. For managers presented with causal linkages with delays, long-term profit generation is higher than the control group, but is not significantly different from the causal linkages without delays treatment. Those managers presented with causal linkages with delays, however, demonstrate learning across the four simulation rounds. In contrast, learning is found to plateau for the causal linkages without delays treatment and is not present for the control group. We also examine the cognitive mechanism through which these two BSF elements impact performance, by measuring the accuracy of two components of managers' mental models. Data Availability: Experimental materials are available upon request from the authors.
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 05-2021
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 09-2002
DOI: 10.1002/SDR.257
Publisher: Palgrave Macmillan UK
Date: 2016
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 12-2002
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 24-11-2010
DOI: 10.1002/SMJ.899
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 11-09-2022
DOI: 10.1002/SDR.1718
Abstract: Table functions, also referred to as graphical functions, provide a powerful and user‐friendly way to represent nonlinear relationships between variables in system dynamics (SD) models. However, in many cases modelers may benefit from using analytical equations to represent nonlinear relationships for model sensitivity testing and also for communicating with researchers in other fields and disciplines. We propose six analytical equations that can be used to represent many of the nonlinear relationships commonly formulated using table functions in SD models. Specifically, this article provides guidance on using the generalized logistic function, the exponential function, the modified exponential function, the quadratic function, the logarithmic function and the power function to replace existing table functions. Importantly, we also present a version of each equation that includes an interior reference point. We demonstrate how to apply these analytical equations in SD models by replacing the table functions in the original World Dynamics model. We also provide a Python script to help implement our recommended procedure for incorporating the six analytical equations into models and a Vensim macro for each analytical equation. © 2022 The Authors. System Dynamics Review published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of System Dynamics Society.
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 2005
DOI: 10.1002/SMJ.468
Publisher: Elsevier BV
Date: 10-2000
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 07-2016
DOI: 10.1002/SDR.1559
Publisher: Wiley
Date: 16-04-2012
DOI: 10.1002/SMJ.1979
Publisher: SAGE Publications
Date: 22-05-2023
DOI: 10.1177/03128962231173300
Abstract: This article examines research performance of management academics in the Group of Eight (Go8) Australian universities using SCOPUS publication data. Normative research profiles for journal publications, book publications, citations, and h-index are provided for each academic level. The number of journal publications are reported for seven different journal ranking lists. The average Go8 management scholar increases the number of total journal publications per year by 56% over their entire publishing career, but does not increase the number of top international journal publications per year. Importantly, the top quartile of Go8 management scholars – who account for 70% of top journal publications and 79% of journal citations – already achieve world class productivity in the top international journals. We hope Go8 Deans and Heads of School use the research performance benchmarks to inform faculty recruitment, tenure and promotion decisions. JEL Classification: I23, M1, M19
Publisher: Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences (INFORMS)
Date: 15-12-2020
Abstract: With so many possible choices, why do managers adopt the strategies they do? We identify delays between adopting a strategy and observing the full implications of that choice as a critical factor influencing strategic choices. Using a simulation of a service firm, we conduct two behavioral experiments to investigate how delays interact with outcome uncertainty to shape learning, strategy adaptation, and performance outcomes. Two mechanisms emerge from how different subject groups perceive, react to, and learn in the presence of delayed feedback and uncertainty. First, when multiple viable strategies exist, longer delays lead both general participants and experienced managers toward alternatives that have rapid returns. When those alternatives are suboptimal, delays may strengthen convergence to inefficient strategies. Second, delays and uncertainty may also induce learners to persist with their a priori strategies. Managers show larger confidence in their priors and thus underperform general participants when the underlying task structure erges from those priors. Both mechanisms can undermine performance. Moreover, delays and uncertainty may reduce heterogeneity in strategies and performance in more dynamic, uncertain environments, leading to convergence as tasks grow more complex and where decision makers possess similar priors.
Location: United States of America
Location: United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
No related grants have been discovered for Michael Shayne Gary.