IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/thesis/dwt3a_v1.html

M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, and Momentum

Author

Listed:
  • Roelofse, Emmalinde

    (University of Northern Iowa)

Abstract

The M3 theory contributes to new knowledge through original research and advanced scholarship by introducing a descriptive framework for strategic decision-making in uncertain and changing environments. Aided by the introduction of a Social Realism epistemology into management literature, it differentiates in its ability to present complex strategic positions as essentialist (via modes), relative (via models), and dynamic (via momentum) to plot the dynamic trajectory of innovation emergence, change, adaptation, and transformation 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: systematic (+S) vs. responsive (+R) strategies, and conforming (+C), vs. differentiating (+D) strategies. Systematic strategies (+S) are the mode dedicated to increasingly sophisticated rational cognitive processes; these processes plan, purposefully compartmentalize, and regulate emotions. Responsive strategies (+R), conversely, are the mode dedicated to increasingly sensitized intuitive processes; these processes are reflective, associative, action-oriented, and emotionally expressive. The second pair of modes intersects with the two aforementioned modes with conforming strategies (+C) moving towards convergence by adapting or conveying socially perceived superior norms; these processes include the exploitation of existing power. In contrast, differentiating strategies (+D) represents the mode dedicated to diverging from traditional norms with empowerment for exploration. These processes include novelty-seeking, sabotage, risk-taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery, and higher levels of innovation. Finally, the dynamic (momentum) component informs how strategic modes and models under uncertainty 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. In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management Studies for Newcastle University, PhD Doctoral requirements, 2017.

Suggested Citation

  • Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2017. "M3 Strategic Decision-Making Under Uncertainty: Modes, Models, and Momentum," Thesis Commons dwt3a_v1, Center for Open Science.
  • Handle: RePEc:osf:thesis:dwt3a_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/dwt3a_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6946ccf653b5f6f357b3d98f/
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/dwt3a_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. Kuran, Timur, 1988. "The tenacious past: Theories of personal and collective conservatism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 143-171, September.
    2. Sandy Q. Qu & John Dumay, 2011. "The qualitative research interview," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 238-264, August.
    3. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    4. Keith M. Hmieleski & Andrew C. Corbett, 2006. "Proclivity for Improvisation as a Predictor of Entrepreneurial Intentions," Journal of Small Business Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(1), pages 45-63, January.
    5. Sandy Q. Qu & John Dumay, 2011. "The qualitative research interview," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(3), pages 238-264, August.
    6. David J. Teece & Gary Pisano & Amy Shuen, 1997. "Dynamic capabilities and strategic management," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(7), pages 509-533, August.
    7. Richard P. Rumelt, 1982. "Diversification strategy and profitability," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(4), pages 359-369, October.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    9. Henry Mintzberg, 1978. "Patterns in Strategy Formation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(9), pages 934-948, May.
    10. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    11. Peter F. Drucker, 1959. "Long-Range Planning--Challenge to Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 238-249, April.
    12. Walker, James M. & Gardner, Roy & Ostrom, Elinor, 1990. "Rent dissipation in a limited-access common-pool resource: Experimental evidence," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 203-211, November.
    13. Birger Wernerfelt, 1984. "A resource‐based view of the firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 171-180, April.
    14. Glen L. Urban & Theresa Carter & Steven Gaskin & Zofia Mucha, 1986. "Market Share Rewards to Pioneering Brands: An Empirical Analysis and Strategic Implications," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(6), pages 645-659, June.
    15. Robert R. Wiggins & Timothy W. Ruefli, 2002. "Sustained Competitive Advantage: Temporal Dynamics and the Incidence and Persistence of Superior Economic Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(1), pages 81-105, February.
    16. Keller, Kevin Lane, 2003. "Brand Synthesis: The Multidimensionality of Brand Knowledge," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 29(4), pages 595-600, March.
    17. 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.
    18. Rogers, Everett M, 1976. "New Product Adoption and Diffusion," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 2(4), pages 290-301, March.
    19. Waterman, Robert Jr. & Peters, Thomas J. & Phillips, Julien R., 1980. "Structure is not organization," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 14-26, June.
    20. 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.
    21. Alan MacCormack & Roberto Verganti & Marco Iansiti, 2001. "Developing Products on "Internet Time": The Anatomy of a Flexible Development Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 133-150, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2022. "Modes, Models, and Momentum (M3) Decision-Making: Entrepreneurs collaborating on Complex Problems," SocArXiv exj6h_v1, Center for Open Science.

    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. 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.
    3. Magnusson, Thomas & Onufrey, Ksenia & Werner, Viktor & Gillström, Henrik, 2025. "Inter-system linkage formation in multi-system transitions: Incumbents, asymmetries and learning cycles," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(8).
    4. Lin, Hsing-Er & Hsu, I-Chieh & Hsu, Audrey Wenhsin & Chung, Hsi-Mei, 2020. "Creating competitive advantages: Interactions between ambidextrous diversification strategy and contextual factors from a dynamic capability perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Khraisha, Tamer, 2020. "Complex economic problems and fitness landscapes: Assessment and methodological perspectives," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 390-407.
    6. Mansi Singh & Sanjay Dhir & Harsh Mishra, 2024. "Synthesizing research in entrepreneurial bootstrapping and bricolage: a bibliometric mapping and TCCM analysis," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 74(1), pages 487-520, February.
    7. Pascal Le Masson & Armand Hatchuel & Mario Le Glatin & Benoit Weil, 2018. "Designing Decisions In The Unknown: Towards A Generative Decision Model For Management Science," Post-Print hal-01937103, HAL.
    8. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    9. Singh, Shiwangi & Dhir, Sanjay & Das, V. Mukunda & Sharma, Anuj, 2020. "Bibliometric overview of the Technological Forecasting and Social Change journal: Analysis from 1970 to 2018," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    10. Roelofse, Emmalinde, 2022. "Modes, Models, and Momentum (M3) Decision-Making: Entrepreneurs collaborating on Complex Problems," SocArXiv exj6h_v1, Center for Open Science.
    11. Suresh Malodia & Shaphali Gupta & Anand Kumar Jaiswal, 2020. "Reverse innovation: a conceptual framework," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1009-1029, September.
    12. 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.
    13. Centobelli, Piera & Cerchione, Roberto & Maglietta, Amedeo & Oropallo, Eugenio, 2023. "Sailing through a digital and resilient shipbuilding supply chain: An empirical investigation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    14. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. López Zapata, Esteban & García Muiña, Fernando Enrique & García, Susana María, 2019. "Analysing the relationship between diversification strategy and firm performance: the role of the economic cycle," Cuadernos de Gestión, Universidad del País Vasco - Instituto de Economía Aplicada a la Empresa (IEAE).
    18. Zhang-Zhang, YingYing & Rohlfer, Sylvia & Varma, Arup, 2022. "Strategic people management in contemporary highly dynamic VUCA contexts: A knowledge worker perspective," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 587-598.
    19. Leven J. Zheng & Justin Zuopeng Zhang & Huan Wang & Jacky F. L. Hong, 2025. "Exploring the impact of Big Data Analytics Capabilities on the dual nature of innovative activities in MSMEs: A Data-Agility-Innovation Perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 350(2), pages 699-727, July.
    20. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea & Frenz, Marion, 2013. "Economic crisis and innovation: Is destruction prevailing over accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 303-314.

    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:thesis:dwt3a_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://thesiscommons.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.