IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jocore/v38y1994i1p3-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrative Complexity and British Decisions during the Munich and Polish Crises

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen G. Walker
  • George L. Watson

    (Arizona State University)

Abstract

This study addresses the impact of crisis management strategies, stress, and groupthink conditions on the integrative complexity of British decision makers in 10 decision-making episodes during two Anglo-German crises in 1938 and 1939. A systematic random sample of Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain's statements during British cabinet deliberations in the intragovernmental arena and British messages to Germany in the intergovernmental arena during the acute phase of each crisis was scored for integrative complexity. An ANOVA of integrative complexity for crisis, arena, and episode demonstrated a significant independent relationship between strategy and integrative complexity plus a significant interaction effect between strategy and arena on integrative complexity. There were also significant differences in Chamberlain's integrative complexity between early and later episodes of the Polish conflict in the intragovernmental arena; no significant differences occurred between episodes in either arena during the Munich conflict. These results support the hypotheses that associate low integrative complexity with the implementation of a competitive strategy in the intergovernmental arena and with high stress in the intragovernmental arena.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen G. Walker & George L. Watson, 1994. "Integrative Complexity and British Decisions during the Munich and Polish Crises," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 38(1), pages 3-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jocore:v:38:y:1994:i:1:p:3-23
    DOI: 10.1177/0022002794038001001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0022002794038001001
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0022002794038001001?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. George, Alexander L., 1972. "The Case for Multiple Advocacy in Making Foreign Policy," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(3), pages 751-785, September.
    2. Walker, Stephen G. & Bohlin, Daniel & Boos, Robert & Cownie, David & Nakajima, Hiroshi & Willson, Timothy, 1984. "Evidence of Learning and Risk Orientation During International Crises: The Munich and Polish Cases," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 33-51, January.
    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. Hart, Paul t, 1998. "Preventing Groupthink Revisited: Evaluating and Reforming Groups in Government," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 306-326, February.
    2. Joshua S. Goldstein, 1992. "A Conflict-Cooperation Scale for WEIS Events Data," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 36(2), pages 369-385, June.
    3. Bonvecchi, Alejandro & Scartascini, Carlos, 2011. "The Presidency and the Executive Branch in Latin America: What We Know and What We Need to Know," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 3959, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Willy McCourt, 2018. "Towards “cognitively complex” problem‐solving: Six models of public service reform," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 36(S2), pages 748-768, September.
    5. Shawn W. Rosenberg & Gary Wolfsfeld, 1977. "International Conflict and the Problem of Attribution," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(1), pages 75-103, March.
    6. Michael G. Jacobides, 2007. "The Inherent Limits of Organizational Structure and the Unfulfilled Role of Hierarchy: Lessons from a Near-War," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(3), pages 455-477, June.
    7. Peterson, Randall S. & Owens, Pamela D. & Tetlock, Philip E. & Fan, Elliott T. & Martorana, Paul, 1998. "Group Dynamics in Top Management Teams: Groupthink, Vigilance, and Alternative Models of Organizational Failure and Success," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 272-305, February.
    8. Luigi Marengo & Corrado Pasquali, 2012. "How to Get What You Want When You Do Not Know What You Want: A Model of Incentives, Organizational Structure, and Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(5), pages 1298-1310, October.
    9. S. K. Srivastava & Sweta Agrawal, 2003. "The Role of Power, Politics and Management in Organisational Effectiveness," Management and Labour Studies, XLRI Jamshedpur, School of Business Management & Human Resources, vol. 28(2), pages 153-157, May.
    10. Lazer, David & Friedman, Allan, 2005. "The Parable of the Hare and the Tortoise: Small Worlds, Diversity, and System Performance," Working Paper Series rwp05-058, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    11. Turner, Marlene E. & Pratkanis, Anthony R., 1998. "A Social Identity Maintenance Model of Groupthink," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 73(2-3), pages 210-235, February.
    12. Stephen G. Walker, 1977. "The Interface Between Beliefs and Behavior," Journal of Conflict Resolution, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 21(1), pages 129-168, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:sae:jocore:v:38:y:1994:i:1:p:3-23. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://pss.la.psu.edu/ .

    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.