IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v33y2022i6p2322-2345.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Abstract Versus Concrete: How Managers’ Construal Influences Organizational Control Systems and Problem Solving

Author

Listed:
  • Bijuan Zhong

    (Department of Management and Human Resources, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210)

  • Mona V. Makhija

    (Department of Management and Human Resources, Fisher College of Business, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 43210)

  • Shad Morris

    (Department of Management, Marriott School, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah 84602)

Abstract

This research considers how frontline managers’ construal affects their conceptualization of organizational problems, which in turn influences how they incentivize employees to search out appropriate solutions. Depending on whether they conceptualize problems in more abstract or more concrete ways, frontline managers will vary in organizational control mechanisms they use to incentivize their employees to engage in exploration and exploitation. Based on these relationships, we expect the solutions achieved by employees to vary in terms of efficiency and effectiveness. Using a database of 267 projects in a single firm, we find that, after holding project attributes constant, concrete-oriented managers tend to utilize more process controls that lead employees to solve organizational problems more efficiently, whereas abstract-oriented managers tend toward use of more outcome controls that lead to more effective problem solving. When employees engage in ambidextrous learning, both effectiveness and efficiency of outcomes are enhanced. This research sheds light on important microfoundational influences on organizational outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Bijuan Zhong & Mona V. Makhija & Shad Morris, 2022. "Abstract Versus Concrete: How Managers’ Construal Influences Organizational Control Systems and Problem Solving," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(6), pages 2322-2345, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:6:p:2322-2345
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.2021.1529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2021.1529
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.2021.1529?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
    ---><---

    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:inm:ororsc:v:33:y:2022:i:6:p:2322-2345. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.