Author
Listed:
- Christian Muntwiler
- Martin J. Eppler
- Matthias Unfried
- Fabian Buder
Abstract
Purpose - This paper aims to managerial decision styles, following the General Decision-Making Style Inventory, as potential predictors of individual bias awareness and bias blind spots, with a focus on the rational decision style. Design/methodology/approach - The research is based on a survey of 500 C-1 level managers within Forbes 2000 companies. It explores their decision styles and their assessments of their own and others’ decision behavior. Findings - The results show that the awareness of one’s own susceptibility to biases and bias blind spots is highly dependent on an individual’s (self-declared) decision style and type of cognitive bias; decision-makers with a strong tendency toward a rational or spontaneous decision style see themselves as less vulnerable to cognitive biases but also show a much stronger bias blind spot than those with a tendency toward other decision styles. Meanwhile, decision-makers with a strong tendency toward an intuitive decision style tend to recognize their own vulnerability to cognitive biases and even show a negative blind spot, thus seeing themselves as more affected by cognitive biases than others. Originality/value - To date, decision styles have not been used as a lens through which to view susceptibility to cognitive biases and bias blind spots in managerial decision-making. As demonstrated in this article, decision styles can serve as predictors of individual awareness and susceptibility to cognitive biases and bias blind spots for managers.
Suggested Citation
Christian Muntwiler & Martin J. Eppler & Matthias Unfried & Fabian Buder, 2024.
"Individual decision styles as predictors for bias susceptibility and bias blind spots in managerial decisions,"
Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 48(2), pages 322-337, October.
Handle:
RePEc:eme:mrrpps:mrr-11-2022-0793
DOI: 10.1108/MRR-11-2022-0793
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
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:eme:mrrpps:mrr-11-2022-0793. 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: Emerald Support (email available below). General contact details of provider: .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.