IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jorgde/v11y2022i2d10.1007_s41469-022-00112-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the strategic value of equifinal choice

Author

Listed:
  • Jose P. Arrieta

    (University of Amsterdam)

  • Yash R. Shrestha

    (ETH Zürich)

Abstract

Managers are often faced with the need to choose among multiple satisficing options. We call this situation equifinal choice and argue how it opens an opportunity for managers to choose a new trajectory for their firm—an opportunity for strategic action. Although equifinal choice can exist in any environment, it becomes most consequential when uncertainty is high. Uncertainty weakens the adherence of organizational members to a superordinate goal and the plurality of goals leads political processes to guide the firm’s strategy. Extant view has identified random choice as an unbiased, fair, simple, and swift solution to the problem of equifinal choice. Random choice is also commonly used in machine learning and artificial intelligence systems. As organizations augment their decision making with these systems, there is a threat that they forego these strategic opportunities and randomly choose actions that fail to harness commitment and trust. In this Point of View article, we highlight the problem of equifinal choice, explain different ways it can be approached, and motivate why strategic choice can be valuable for organizations over and above defaulting to random choice.

Suggested Citation

  • Jose P. Arrieta & Yash R. Shrestha, 2022. "On the strategic value of equifinal choice," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 37-45, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jorgde:v:11:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s41469-022-00112-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s41469-022-00112-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41469-022-00112-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s41469-022-00112-y?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Phanish Puranam & Murali Swamy, 2016. "How Initial Representations Shape Coupled Learning Processes," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 323-335, April.
    2. Jan W. Rivkin & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2003. "Balancing Search and Stability: Interdependencies Among Elements of Organizational Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 290-311, March.
    3. Eliaz, Kfir & Rubinstein, Ariel, 2014. "On the fairness of random procedures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 168-170.
    4. Jack A. Nickerson & Todd R. Zenger, 2002. "Being Efficiently Fickle: A Dynamic Theory of Organizational Choice," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(5), pages 547-566, October.
    5. Joseph Persky, 1995. "The Ethology of Homo Economicus," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 221-231, Spring.
    6. Luigi Marengo, 2015. "Representation, search, and the evolution of routines in problem solving," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(5), pages 951-980.
    7. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2013. "An Efficient Frontier in Organization Design: Organizational Structure as a Determinant of Exploration and Exploitation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1083-1101, August.
    8. Nicolaj Siggelkow & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Speed and Search: Designing Organizations for Turbulence and Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 101-122, April.
    9. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    10. Richard R. Nelson, 1991. "Why do firms differ, and how does it matter?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(S2), pages 61-74, December.
    11. Arnaldo Camuffo & Alessandro Cordova & Alfonso Gambardella & Chiara Spina, 2020. "A Scientific Approach to Entrepreneurial Decision Making: Evidence from a Randomized Control Trial," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 564-586, February.
    12. Nadine Ketel & Edwin Leuven & Hessel Oosterbeek & Bas van der Klaauw, 2016. "The Returns to Medical School: Evidence from Admission Lotteries," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 225-254, April.
    13. Richard M. Burton & Dorthe Døjbak Håkonsson & Jackson Nickerson & Phanish Puranam & Maciej Workiewicz & Todd Zenger, 2017. "GitHub: exploring the space between boss-less and hierarchical forms of organizing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 6(1), pages 1-19, December.
    14. G. Tyge Payne, 2006. "Examining Configurations and Firm Performance in a Suboptimal Equifinality Context," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(6), pages 756-770, December.
    15. Sah, Raaj Kumar & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1988. "Committees, Hierarchies and Polyarchies," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 98(391), pages 451-470, June.
    16. Chengwei Liu, 2021. "In luck we trust: Capturing the diversity bonus through random selection," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 10(2), pages 85-91, June.
    17. William R. Kerr & Ramana Nanda & Matthew Rhodes-Kropf, 2014. "Entrepreneurship as Experimentation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 28(3), pages 25-48, Summer.
    18. Ron Adner & Felipe A. Csaszar & Peter B. Zemsky, 2014. "Positioning on a Multiattribute Landscape," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(11), pages 2794-2815, November.
    19. Joshua S. Gans & Scott Stern & Jane Wu, 2019. "Foundations of entrepreneurial strategy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(5), pages 736-756, May.
    20. Giovanni Gavetti & Anoop Menon, 2016. "Evolution Cum Agency: Toward a Model of Strategic Foresight," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 1(3), pages 207-233, September.
    21. Michael Christensen & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2010. "Design of Decision-Making Organizations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 71-89, January.
    22. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    23. Vivianna Fang He & Phanish Puranam & Yash Raj Shrestha & Georg von Krogh, 2020. "Resolving governance disputes in communities: A study of software license decisions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(10), pages 1837-1868, October.
    24. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2012. "Organizational structure as a determinant of performance: Evidence from mutual funds," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(6), pages 611-632, June.
    25. Peter W Glynn & Henrich R Greve & Hayagreeva Rao, 2020. "Relining the garbage can of organizational decision-making: modeling the arrival of problems and solutions as queues," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(1), pages 125-142.
    26. Daniel A. Levinthal, 1997. "Adaptation on Rugged Landscapes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(7), pages 934-950, July.
    27. Daniel A. Levinthal & Claus Rerup, 2021. "The Plural of Goal: Learning in a World of Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(3), pages 527-543, May.
    28. Faruk Gul & Paulo Natenzon & Wolfgang Pesendorfer, 2014. "Random Choice as Behavioral Optimization," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82, pages 1873-1912, September.
    29. Timothy B. Folta & Jonathan P. O'Brien, 2004. "Entry in the presence of dueling options," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(2), pages 121-138, February.
    30. Jerker Denrell & Chengwei Liu & Gaël Mens, 2017. "When More Selection Is Worse," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 39-63, March.
    31. Michael Christensen & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2020. "Division of roles and endogenous specialization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(1), pages 105-124.
    32. Jerker Denrell & Christina Fang & Chengwei Liu, 2015. "Perspective—Chance Explanations in the Management Sciences," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 923-940, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Todd A. Hall & Sharique Hasan, 2022. "Organizational decision-making and the returns to experimentation," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(4), pages 129-144, December.
    2. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2018. "What Makes a Decision Strategic? Strategic Representations," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(4), pages 606-619, December.
    3. Oliver Baumann, 2015. "Models of complex adaptive systems in strategy and organization research," Mind & Society: Cognitive Studies in Economics and Social Sciences, Springer;Fondazione Rosselli, vol. 14(2), pages 169-183, November.
    4. Michael Christensen & Thorbjørn Knudsen, 2020. "Division of roles and endogenous specialization," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(1), pages 105-124.
    5. Timo Ehrig & Jens Schmidt, 2022. "Theory‐based learning and experimentation: How strategists can systematically generate knowledge at the edge between the known and the unknown," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1287-1318, July.
    6. Felipe A. Csaszar & J. P. Eggers, 2013. "Organizational Decision Making: An Information Aggregation View," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(10), pages 2257-2277, October.
    7. Felipe A. Csaszar, 2013. "An Efficient Frontier in Organization Design: Organizational Structure as a Determinant of Exploration and Exploitation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(4), pages 1083-1101, August.
    8. Friederike Wall, 2016. "Agent-based modeling in managerial science: an illustrative survey and study," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 135-193, January.
    9. Julien Clement & Phanish Puranam, 2018. "Searching for Structure: Formal Organization Design as a Guide to Network Evolution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(8), pages 3879-3895, August.
    10. Harsh Ketkar & Maciej Workiewicz, 2022. "Power to the people: The benefits and limits of employee self‐selection in organizations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 935-963, May.
    11. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    12. John Joseph & Ronald Klingebiel & Alex James Wilson, 2016. "Organizational Structure and Performance Feedback: Centralization, Aspirations, and Termination Decisions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(5), pages 1065-1083, October.
    13. Dongil D. Keum & Kelly E. See, 2017. "The Influence of Hierarchy on Idea Generation and Selection in the Innovation Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 653-669, August.
    14. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2016. "Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2031-2049, October.
    15. Daniel A. Levinthal & Maciej Workiewicz, 2018. "When Two Bosses Are Better Than One: Nearly Decomposable Systems and Organizational Adaptation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(2), pages 207-224, April.
    16. John C. Butler & Jovan Grahovac, 2012. "Learning, Imitation, and the Use of Knowledge: A Comparison of Markets, Hierarchies, and Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1249-1263, October.
    17. Vikas A. Aggarwal & Brian Wu, 2015. "Organizational Constraints to Adaptation: Intrafirm Asymmetry in the Locus of Coordination," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 218-238, February.
    18. Cha Li & Felipe A. Csaszar, 2019. "Government as Landscape Designer: A Behavioral View of Industrial Policy," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 175-192, September.
    19. Magdalena Dobrajska & Stephan Billinger & Samina Karim, 2015. "Delegation Within Hierarchies: How Information Processing and Knowledge Characteristics Influence the Allocation of Formal and Real Decision Authority," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 687-704, June.
    20. Nektarios Oraiopoulos & Stylianos Kavadias, 2020. "Is Diversity (Un-)Biased? Project Selection Decisions in Executive Committees," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 906-924, September.

    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:spr:jorgde:v:11:y:2022:i:2:d:10.1007_s41469-022-00112-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.