IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/socarx/exj6h_v1.html

Modes, Models, and Momentum (M3) Decision-Making: Entrepreneurs collaborating on Complex Problems

Author

Listed:
  • Roelofse, Emmalinde

    (University of Northern Iowa)

Abstract

M3 theory introduces a descriptive framework for entrepreneurial innovation through collaboration in pursuit of solutions to more complex market problems. Through a Social Realism epistemological lens, M3 coding presents complex strategic positions as essentialist (via modes), relative (via models), and dynamic (via momentum) to plot the dynamic trajectory of innovation transmuting over time. At a fundamental level, the M3 theory identifies a consistent set of rules that decision-makers intentionally or unintentionally engage with or ignore to take strategic positions based on four integrated yet polarized pairs of modes: +S, +R, and +C, +D. Systematic (+S) vs. responsive (+R) strategies juxtaposed the tension of processes dedicated to increasingly sophisticated +S bounded rational cognitive processes; planning, compartmentalizing, regulating emotions, against increasingly +R sensitized intuiting; reflectivity, associating, emotionally expressive action. The second pair, conforming (+C), vs. differentiating (+D) strategies. intersects but expresses the tension between +C’s converging; through adapting or conveying socially perceived superior norms, or exploiting existing resources and power, against +D’s departure from traditional norms; with exploration, novelty-seeking, sabotage, risk-taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery. Finally, dynamism (momentum) informs how strategic modes and models of decision-making improve and adjust in sophistication under the pressure and demands of the four drives (+L). The M3 theory is informed by three distinct but interrelated and simultaneous empirical streams of data: (i) field data from five ethnographic case studies, with research participant feedback loops; (ii) the mapping of 200+ peer-reviewed decision-making models; and (iii) prototyping the principles in the construction of the emergent M3 theory. [This research is part of a larger doctoral project originally submitted in 2017. This paper was originally presented at the Academy of Management, August 2022, Seattle, WA. Version of Record: https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.13578abstract Open access is issued in 2025 under a CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.]

Suggested Citation

  • Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2022. "Modes, Models, and Momentum (M3) Decision-Making: Entrepreneurs collaborating on Complex Problems," SocArXiv exj6h_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:socarx:exj6h_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/exj6h_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/69503f312757a9c981be29d2/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/exj6h_v1?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. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2017. "M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, & Momentum," SocArXiv uafvr_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Henry Mintzberg, 1978. "Patterns in Strategy Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(9), pages 934-948, May.
    4. Brennan, Michael J & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 1977. "The Valuation of American Put Options," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 32(2), pages 449-462, May.
    5. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2017. "M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, and Momentum," Thesis Commons dwt3a_v1, Center for Open Science.
    6. Garud, Raghu & Karnoe, Peter, 2003. "Bricolage versus breakthrough: distributed and embedded agency in technology entrepreneurship," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 277-300, February.
    7. Baker, Ted & Miner, Anne S. & Eesley, Dale T., 2003. "Improvising firms: bricolage, account giving and improvisational competencies in the founding process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 255-276, February.
    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. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2017. "M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, & Momentum," SocArXiv uafvr_v1, Center for Open Science.
    2. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2017. "M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, and Momentum," Thesis Commons dwt3a_v1, Center for Open Science.
    3. Vinciane Servantie & Martine Hlady-Rispal, 2022. "Born globals’ decision-making logics during their entrepreneurial process," Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 255-281, June.
    4. Bradley, Steven W. & Wiklund, Johan & Shepherd, Dean A., 2011. "Swinging a double-edged sword: The effect of slack on entrepreneurial management and growth," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 26(5), pages 537-554, September.
    5. Greg Fisher, 2012. "Effectuation, Causation, and Bricolage: A Behavioral Comparison of Emerging Theories in Entrepreneurship Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 36(5), pages 1019-1051, September.
    6. Fultz, Andrew E.F. & Hmieleski, Keith M., 2021. "The art of discovering and exploiting unexpected opportunities: The roles of organizational improvisation and serendipity in new venture performance," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 36(4).
    7. Arman Avadikyan & Gilles Lambert & Christophe Lerch, 2016. "A Multi-Level Perspective on Ambidexterity: The Case of a Synchrotron Research Facility," Working Papers of BETA 2016-44, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    8. Jonathan H. Reed, 2022. "Operational and strategic change during temporary turbulence: evidence from the COVID-19 pandemic," Operations Management Research, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 589-608, June.
    9. Bruneel, Johan & Clarysse, Bart & Bobelyn, Annelies & Wright, Mike, 2020. "Liquidity events and VC-backed academic spin-offs: The role of search alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(10).
    10. Robert P. Garrett Jr. & Jeffrey G. Covin, 2015. "Internal Corporate Venture Operations Independence and Performance: A Knowledge–Based Perspective," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 39(4), pages 763-790, July.
    11. Mario Pansera & Fabien Martinez, 2017. "Innovation for development and poverty reduction: an integrative literature review," Post-Print hal-02887777, HAL.
    12. Linda Edelman & Helena Yli–Renko, 2010. "The Impact of Environment and Entrepreneurial Perceptions on Venture-Creation Efforts: Bridging the Discovery and Creation Views of Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 34(5), pages 833-856, September.
    13. Spencer H. Harrison & Kevin G. Corley, 2011. "Clean Climbing, Carabiners, and Cultural Cultivation: Developing an Open-Systems Perspective of Culture," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(2), pages 391-412, April.
    14. Mehmet Ali Köseoglu & John A. Parnell & Melissa Yan Yee Yick, 2021. "Identifying influential studies and maturity level in intellectual structure of fields: evidence from strategic management," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1271-1309, February.
    15. Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy & Peter Karnøe, 2010. "Path Dependence or Path Creation?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(4), pages 760-774, June.
    16. Cosh, A. & Zhang, J., 2012. "Variety of Search and Innovation: A Comparative Study of US Manufacturing and Knowledge Intensive Business Services Sectors," Working Papers wp431, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge.
    17. Foglia, Emanuela & Ferrario, Lucrezia & Lettieri, Emanuele & Porazzi, Emanuele & Gastaldi, Luca, 2019. "What drives hospital wards’ ambidexterity: Insights on the determinants of exploration and exploitation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(12), pages 1298-1307.
    18. Miguel Pina e Cunha, 2005. "Bricolage in organizations," Nova SBE Working Paper Series wp474, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Nova School of Business and Economics.
    19. Mohamad, Amri & Zainuddin, Yuserrie & Alam, Nafis & Kendall, Graham, 2017. "Does decentralized decision making increase company performance through its Information Technology infrastructure investment?," International Journal of Accounting Information Systems, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 1-15.
    20. Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Fredrich, Viktor & Pesch, Robin, 2016. "Configurational answer to the ongoing riddle of formal and/or emergent planning practices," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(9), pages 3609-3615.

    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:osf:socarx:exj6h_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arabixiv.org .

    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.