IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijeima/v20y2016i3-4p214-234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trying to make rational decisions while employing intuitive reasoning: a look at the due-diligence process using the dual-system reasoning model

Author

Listed:
  • Galit Klein

Abstract

The main goal of this study is to analyse the utilisation of dual-system reasoning when assessing new ventures. Particularly, the study examined whether investors activate only 'system 2' and apply rational rules during their due-diligence, or if they employ 'system 1' as well, and also use intuitive reasoning during this assessment. Interviews with venture capital managers reveal that during due-diligence investors apply both systems, simultaneously. Investors make abundant efforts to acquire data about the ventures' capabilities and its managers. They then apply actuarial models to decide whether to invest in the company or withdraw. Nonetheless, during these inspections investors also assess the company in regard to its ability to gain symbolic capabilities, which are representative signals, indicating the application of intuitive reasoning to evaluate the company. The results also indicate when there is a discrepancy between the two systems investors find it hard to ignore 'system 1'.

Suggested Citation

  • Galit Klein, 2016. "Trying to make rational decisions while employing intuitive reasoning: a look at the due-diligence process using the dual-system reasoning model," International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 20(3/4), pages 214-234.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijeima:v:20:y:2016:i:3/4:p:214-234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=77962
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Shtudiner, Zeev & Klein, Galit, 2020. "Gender, attractiveness, and judgment of impropriety: The case of accountants," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    2. Galit Klein & Zeev Shtudiner & Moti Zwilling, 2023. "Why do peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platforms fail? The gap between P2P lenders' preferences and the platforms’ intentions," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 709-738, June.

    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:ids:ijeima:v:20:y:2016:i:3/4:p:214-234. 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: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=7 .

    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.