Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment

This study aims to examine whether there are differences between set roles when reviewing strategy execution in two new regions, especially when the initial period performance achievement is below target. This judgment differences will be explained through attribution theory and negativity bias theo...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Jesica Handoko, I Made Narsa, Basuki Basuki
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Taylor & Francis Group 2021
Materias:	role performance achievement strategy review balanced scorecard attribution theory negativity bias theory Business HF5001-6182 Management. Industrial management HD28-70
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/02228b7cebe241ebbfcf4675f0b69a20
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:02228b7cebe241ebbfcf4675f0b69a20
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:02228b7cebe241ebbfcf4675f0b69a202021-12-02T16:07:36ZRole difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment2331-197510.1080/23311975.2021.1938928https://doaj.org/article/02228b7cebe241ebbfcf4675f0b69a202021-01-01T00:00:00Zhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2021.1938928https://doaj.org/toc/2331-1975This study aims to examine whether there are differences between set roles when reviewing strategy execution in two new regions, especially when the initial period performance achievement is below target. This judgment differences will be explained through attribution theory and negativity bias theory. The 2 x 2 x 2 mixed-subject experimental research design was held during the Covid 19 pandemic involving the assigned roles (as an evaluator or evaluatee), Balanced Scorecard performance achievement (corporate performance indicators below target or above target), and regional managers. The sample consisted of graduate students from the universities in Surabaya who had passed their academic requirement courses and voluntarily participated through web-based media. The research data obtained was analyzed using repeated-measure ANOVA. One hundred and thirty-two participants passed the manipulation check questions and were processed in order to answer the question posed. The results show that there are differences between the structural roles and also when the corporate performance indicators are below target. The evaluator’s negative bias is also higher than that of the evaluatee. These findings confirm the relevance of attribution theory and negative bias theory, but the correlation test shows that evaluators also consider external attributes when making strategy reviews. Overall, there is a misalignment between the decision-makers, especially when the performance is in a state of fluctuation.Jesica HandokoI Made NarsaBasuki BasukiTaylor & Francis Grouparticleroleperformance achievementstrategy reviewbalanced scorecardattribution theorynegativity bias theoryBusinessHF5001-6182Management. Industrial managementHD28-70ENCogent Business & Management, Vol 8, Iss 1 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	role performance achievement strategy review balanced scorecard attribution theory negativity bias theory Business HF5001-6182 Management. Industrial management HD28-70
spellingShingle	role performance achievement strategy review balanced scorecard attribution theory negativity bias theory Business HF5001-6182 Management. Industrial management HD28-70 Jesica Handoko I Made Narsa Basuki Basuki Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
description	This study aims to examine whether there are differences between set roles when reviewing strategy execution in two new regions, especially when the initial period performance achievement is below target. This judgment differences will be explained through attribution theory and negativity bias theory. The 2 x 2 x 2 mixed-subject experimental research design was held during the Covid 19 pandemic involving the assigned roles (as an evaluator or evaluatee), Balanced Scorecard performance achievement (corporate performance indicators below target or above target), and regional managers. The sample consisted of graduate students from the universities in Surabaya who had passed their academic requirement courses and voluntarily participated through web-based media. The research data obtained was analyzed using repeated-measure ANOVA. One hundred and thirty-two participants passed the manipulation check questions and were processed in order to answer the question posed. The results show that there are differences between the structural roles and also when the corporate performance indicators are below target. The evaluator’s negative bias is also higher than that of the evaluatee. These findings confirm the relevance of attribution theory and negative bias theory, but the correlation test shows that evaluators also consider external attributes when making strategy reviews. Overall, there is a misalignment between the decision-makers, especially when the performance is in a state of fluctuation.
format	article
author	Jesica Handoko I Made Narsa Basuki Basuki
author_facet	Jesica Handoko I Made Narsa Basuki Basuki
author_sort	Jesica Handoko
title	Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
title_short	Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
title_full	Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
title_fullStr	Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
title_full_unstemmed	Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment
title_sort	role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: an experiment
publisher	Taylor & Francis Group
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/02228b7cebe241ebbfcf4675f0b69a20
work_keys_str_mv	AT jesicahandoko roledifferenceandnegativitybiasrelevanceinstrategyreviewanexperiment AT imadenarsa roledifferenceandnegativitybiasrelevanceinstrategyreviewanexperiment AT basukibasuki roledifferenceandnegativitybiasrelevanceinstrategyreviewanexperiment
_version_	1718384696791924736

Role difference and negativity bias relevance in strategy review: An experiment

Ejemplares similares