The Determinants of Commitment Escalation (Experimental Study: Covid-19 Pandemic as A Contextual)

Managers play an important role in making the right decisions so that the company can survive and face unexpected situations such as the Covid-19 pandemic. This pandemic has left many business sectors struggling to survive hence managers need to make the right decisions according to current situations. A wrong decision can be caused by the action of a manager who justifies the decisions that havehave been made such as increasing their commitment to a project that has indicated failure. This can be referred to as commitment escalation or a person's tendency to continue a project despite the potential for failure. This study aims to determine the effect of adverse selection, framing, and the implementation of reward and punishment systems on the escalation of commitment by including the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. This study is experimental research with a 2x2x2 between and within subject design in the form of case problems distributed to undergraduate students majoring in accounting at Widya Mandala Catholic University Surabaya who have taken management accounting and financial management courses. The data obtained were processed using the ANOVA or Analysis of Variance. The results of this study indicate that adverse selection has marginally significant on commitment escalation. Framing has an impact on commitment escalation. Negative framing promotes higher commitment escalation than positive framing. The implementation of reward and punishment has no impact on commitment escalation. The implication of this study is framing plays an important role toward commitment escalation during the covid-19 pandemic. Managers have to seek positive information rather than negative information to make investment decisions during the covid-19 pandemic, to reduce commitment escalation

Framing purposeful evaluation through critical systems thinking

Two traditions of practice – evaluation and systems – share three significant concerns regarding development intervention: (i) making sense of complex interrelationships and the continual change brought about by such relationships; (ii) engaging with multiple (including exogenous and endogenous), often conflicting, perspectives on situations; and (iii) challenging vicious cycles of practice and understanding by cultivating a more radical learning culture. These challenges might be described successively in terms of cultivating a shift from (i) summative to formative evaluation (ii) positional bargaining to interest based negotiation, and (iii) purposive to purposeful action. Some ideas from traditions of social learning and critical systems thinking are presented to support a re-framing of intervention and evaluation from one serving the 'project state' towards one serving more radical transformative practice

Employee acceptability of wearable mental workload monitoring in industry 4.0 : a pilot study on motivational and contextual framing

As Industry 4.0 will greatly challenge employee mental workload (MWL), research on objective wearable MWL-monitoring is in high demand. However, numerous research lines validating such technology might become redundant when employees eventually object to its implementation. In a pilot study, we manipulated two ways in which employees might perceive MWL-monitoring initiatives. We found that framing the technology in terms of serving intrinsic goals (e.g., improving health) together with an autonomy-supportive context (e.g., allowing discussion) yields higher user acceptability when compared to framing in terms of extrinsic goals (e.g., increasing productivity) together with a controlling context (e.g., mandating use). User acceptability still panned out neutral in case of the former, however - feeding into our own and suggested future work

To Frame or Reframe: Where Might Design Thinking Research Go Next?

Design thinking is gaining widespread attention in the practitioner and academic literature. Successful implementation has been documented, and its value shown in empirical studies. There is little examination, however, of how design thinking practices fit with other approaches from which firms might choose to frame and solve problems such as agile, lean startup, scientific method, Six Sigma, critical thinking, and systems thinking. By digging into the basic capabilities underlying design thinking, academic researchers might better understand problem framing and solving in general and provide insight for practitioners as to where alternative approaches might be applied

Assessing framing of uncertainties in water management practice

Dealing with uncertainties in water management is an important issue and is one which will only increase in light of global changes, particularly climate change. So far, uncertainties in water management have mostly been assessed from a scientific point of view, and in quantitative terms. In this paper, we focus on the perspectives from water management practice, adopting a qualitative approach. We consider it important to know how uncertainties are framed in water management practice in order to develop practice relevant strategies for dealing with uncertainties. Framing refers to how people make sense of the world. With the aim of identifying what are important parameters for the framing of uncertainties in water management practice, in this paper we analyze uncertainty situations described by decision-makers in water management. The analysis builds on a series of ¿Uncertainty Dialogues¿ carried out within the NeWater project with water managers in the Rhine, Elbe and Guadiana basins in 2006. During these dialogues, representatives of these river basins were asked what uncertainties they encountered in their professional work life and how they confronted them. Analysing these dialogues we identified several important parameters of how uncertainties get framed. Our assumption is that making framing of uncertainty explicit for water managers will allow for better dealing with the respective uncertainty situations. Keywords Framing - Uncertainty - Water management practic

Towards a pragmatic approach for dealing with uncertainties in water management practice

Management of water resources is afflicted with uncertainties. Nowadays it is facing more and new uncertainties since pace and dimension of changes (e.g. climatic, demographic) are accelerating and are likely to increase even more in the future. Hence it is crucial to find pragmatic ways to deal with these uncertainties in water management. So far, decision-making under uncertainty in water management is based on either intuition, heuristics and experience of water managers or on expert assessments all of which are only of limited use for water managers in practice. We argue for an analytical yet pragmatic approach to enable practitioners to deal with uncertainties in a more explicit and systematic way and allow for better informed decisions. Our approach is based on the concept of framing, referring to the different ways in which people make sense of the world and of the uncertainties. We applied and tested recently developed parameters that aim to shed light on the framing of uncertainty in two sub-basins of the Rhine. We present and discuss the results of a series of stakeholder interactions in the two basins aimed at developing strategies for improving dealing with uncertainties. The strategies are synthesized in a cross-checking list based on the uncertainty framing parameters as a hands-on tool for systematically identifying improvement options when dealing with uncertainty in water management practice. We conclude with suggestions for testing the developed check-list as a tool for decision aid in water management practice. Key words: water management, future uncertainties, framing of uncertainties, hands-on decision aid, tools for practice, robust strategies, social learnin