Antecedents of Leader Utilization of Staff Input in Decision-Making Teams

A Noisy Theory of Asking for Help That Explains why Many Feel Underwhelmed With the Help They Receive

Employees often feel that the help they receive at work is inadequate. Whereas previous research explains this empirical finding by referencing stereotypes or poor communication, we suggest an alternative that does not rely on biased agents: disappointment with received help may arise due to self-selection and regression to the mean. Before asking for help, employees assess whether their co-workers have the time and ability to respond. Consistent with regression to the mean, extreme beliefs are often followed by less extreme outcomes. However, employees with inflated beliefs are more likely to ask for help than employees with low or modest beliefs. Therefore, the subset of employees who act will have overly optimistic expectations, expectations that are unlikely to be met once co-workers respond. Apart from challenging conventional wisdom, this article also integrates chance and self-selection perspectives into the ongoing dialogue of help-seeking. Implications for future research, theory, and practice are discussed.

Plain Language Summary

This article presents a theory explaining the following empirical regularity: employees often feel let down with the help they receive at work. Prior research explains this effect by referencing errors in communication or cognition. We propose a simple, alternative mechanism, such that cognitive biases or communication mishaps need not be present for the pattern to emerge. Suppose employees ask for help based on a noisy signal of colleague potential—that is, a perception of whether co-workers have the motivation and ability to resolve the issue. Employees who believe potential is high will be more likely to ask for help than employees who believe potential is low. Due to regression to the mean, extreme beliefs will likely be followed by less extreme received help (in either direction). But not every employee asks for help. Only those with sufficiently high beliefs send a request—and it is those employees who have a greater chance of holding inflated assessments. Among those who ask, then, received help will appear underwhelming. Apart from challenging conventional wisdom, this article also integrates chance and self-selection perspectives into the ongoing dialogue of help-seeking. Implications for future research, theory, and practice are discussed.

Receptiveness to advice, cognitive ability, and technology adoption☆

We construct a model of technology adoption with agents differing on two dimensions: their cognitive ability and their receptiveness to advice. While cognitive ability unambiguously speeds adoption, receptiveness to advice may speed adoption for individuals with low cognitive ability, but slow adoption for individuals with high cognitive ability. We conduct economic experiments measuring US farmers' cognitive ability and receptiveness to advice and examine how these characteristics impact their speed of adoption of genetically modified (GM) corn seeds. The empirical analysis shows that early adopters are those who are both quite able cognitively and not receptive to advice.

Influence of event characteristics on assessing credibility and advice-taking

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to examine how the environment surrounding a decision-making event affects whether decision-makers consider the credibility of their advisors and take their advice.

Design/methodology/approach

In two experiments, the characteristics of the event and credibility of the advisor were manipulated, the extent to which participants considered the information from the advisor was measured, and whether participants took advice was determined.

Findings

Decision-makers are more likely to take advice from advisors when the decision-making event is of low urgency or high criticality because they are more likely to consider information provided by high-credibility advisors.

Practical implications

Within organizations, decision-makers may be making suboptimal decisions when faced with highly urgent decisions or decisions with low criticality. This study suggests that under these conditions, decision-makers are less likely to consider the information provided by high-credibility advisors. Organizations may consider encouraging decision-makers to override their tendency to disregard advice from credible advisors.

Originality/value

This study introduces a contextual factor relevant to managers, event characteristics, which has an effect on whether decision-makers take advice. A unique experimental design was utilized in which credibility was manipulated across two studies with an explicit (Study 1: resume) vs implicit (Study 2: video) method, and advice-taking was measured with a decision that was clearly right or wrong.

Antecedents and Consequences of Procedural Justice Perceptions in Hierarchical Decision-Making Teams

A model is presented that posits positive and independent effects for process control and decision control on procedural justice perceptions in hierarchical decision-making teams with distributed expertise. It is proposed that procedural justice perceptions will be positively related to staff member self-efficacy and satisfaction with the leader, which will be negatively related to task withdrawal. A laboratory experiment was conducted with 126 participants performing a computerized decision-making task in 42 teams. Each team consisted of a leader in addition to 3 participants performing as subordinates. Path analysis results support the proposed model. Implications for applying justice theory to team effectiveness and leadership are discussed.

A proposed improvement to the multilevel theory for hierarchical decision-making teams

The multilevel theory proposed by Hollenbeck et al. identified a set of core variables that are central to accuracy in decision-making in hierarchical teams with distributed expertise. Following the identification of the limitations of the original core variables, a new set of core variables is proposed: (a) member validity, which represents the overall predictability of team members with regard to the correct decision and (b) hierarchical sensitivity, which represents the effectiveness of the leader's weightings of members' recommendations. To test the revised theory, a computational model called Team-Soar is used. The simulation results show that the small set of new core variables explains a large portion of the variance in the team decision accuracy and mediates the effects of other variables on the accuracy. The revised theory can be used as a conceptual vehicle to parsimoniously explain the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams. The theory could also be used to diagnose and train real teams in terms of the core variables.

Do physicians' recommendations pull patients away from their preferred treatment options?

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE

Shared decision making is especially advocated for preference-sensitive decisions. We investigated whether physicians' recommendations pull patients away from their preferred treatment option when making a preference-sensitive decision. DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Inpatients (N = 102 with schizophrenia, N = 101 with multiple sclerosis) were presented with a hypothetical scenario (the choice between two drugs). They were first asked about their preferences concerning the two drugs and then they received a (fictitious) clinician's recommendation that was contrary to their preferences. Subsequently they made a final choice between the two drugs.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The main outcome measure was whether the patient followed the physician's advice in the hypothetical scenario. Thereby patient's (pre-recommendation) preferences served as a baseline.

RESULTS

In the decision scenario, about 48% of the patients with schizophrenia and 26% of the patients with multiple sclerosis followed the advice of their physician and thus chose the treatment option that went against their initial preferences. Patients who followed their physician's advice were less satisfied with their decision than patients not following their physician's advice (schizophrenia: t = 2.61, P = 0.01; multiple sclerosis: t = 2.67, P = 0.009).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

When sharing decisions with patients, physicians should be aware that their advice might influence patients' decisions away from their preferred treatment option. They should encourage their patients to identify their own preferences and help to find the treatment option most consistent with them.

A proposed improvement to the multilevel theory for hierarchical decision-making teams

The multilevel theory proposed by Hollenbeck et al. identified a set of core variables that are central to accuracy in decision-making in hierarchical teams with distributed expertise. Following the identification of the limitations of the original core variables, a new set of core variables is proposed: (a) member validity, which represents the overall predictability of team members with regard to the correct decision and (b) hierarchical sensitivity, which represents the effectiveness of the leader's weightings of members' recommendations. To test the revised theory, a computational model called Team-Soar is used. The simulation results show that the small set of new core variables explains a large portion of the variance in the team decision accuracy and mediates the effects of other variables on the accuracy. The revised theory can be used as a conceptual vehicle to parsimoniously explain the performance of hierarchical decision-making teams. The theory could also be used to diagnose and train real teams in terms of the core variables.

The role of justice in team member satisfaction with the leader and attachment to the team

This study examined the effects of team decision accuracy, team member decision influence, leader consideration behaviors, and justice perceptions on staff members' satisfaction with the leader and attachment to the team in hierarchical decision-making teams. The authors proposed that staff members' justice perceptions would mediate the relationship between (a) team decision accuracy, (b) the amount of influence a staff member has in the team leader's decision, and (c) the leader's consideration behaviors and staff attachment to the team and satisfaction with the leader. The results of an experiment involving 128 participants in a total of 64 teams, who made recommendations to a confederate acting as the team leader, generally support the proposed model.

The role of decision influence and team performance in member self-efficacy, withdrawal, satisfaction with the leader, and willingness to return

This study examines team performance as a moderator of the relationship between decision influence and outcomes relevant to team effectiveness in hierarchical teams with distributed ex pertise. In this type of team staff members have unique roles and make recommendations to the team leader, who ultimately makes the team's final decisions. It is suggested that the positive rela tionship between decision influence and favorable outcomes (e.g., satisfaction) consistently described in the literature is dependent on team performance in this type of team. Specifically, team effec tiveness outcomes are proposed to be consistently more favorable in higher performing than in lower performing teams. Decision influence is proposed to relate positively to member satisfaction with the leader, willingness to return, and self-efficacy and to relate negatively to withdrawal in higher performing teams. The opposite pattern of relationships is expected in lower performing teams. A laboratory study was conducted with 228 undergradu ates performing a computer task as subordinates in 76 four-person teams with a confederate leader. The results generally support the hypotheses and illustrate a dilemma for leaders attempting to manage team effectiveness.