Quality of group decisions by board members:A hidden-profile experiment

Purpose Reaching decisions in a deliberative manner is of utmost importance for boards, as their decision-making impacts entire organisations. The current study aims to investigate (1) the quality of group decisions made by board members, (2) their confidence in, satisfaction with, and reflection on the decision-making, and (3) the effect of two discussion procedures on objective decision quality and subjective evaluations of the decision-making. Design/methodology/approach Board members of various Dutch non-profit organisations (N = 141) participated in a group decision-making task and a brief questionnaire. According to the hidden-profile paradigm, information was asymmetrically distributed among group members and should have been pooled to reach the objectively best decision. Half of the groups received one of two discussion procedures (i.e. advocacy decision or decisional balance sheet), while the other half received none. Findings Only a fifth of the groups successfully chose the best decision alternative. The initial majority preference strongly influenced the decision, which indicates that discussion was irrelevant to the outcome. Nevertheless, board members were satisfied with their decision-making. Using a discussion procedure enhanced participants' perception that they adequately weighed the pros and cons, but did not improve objective decision quality or other aspects of the subjective evaluation. These findings suggest that board members are unaware of their biased decision-making, which might hinder improvement. Originality/value Rather than using student samples, this study was the first to have board members participating in a hidden-profile task

A multidisciplinary perspective on COVID-19 exit strategies

Lockdowns and associated measures imposed in response to the COVID-19 crisis inflict severe damage to society. Across the globe, scientists and policymakers study ways to lift measures while maintaining control of virus spread in circumstances that continuously change due to the evolution of new variants and increasing vaccination coverage. In this process, it has become clear that finding and analysing exit strategies, which are a key aspect of pandemic mitigation in all consecutive waves of infection, is not solely a matter of epidemiological modeling but has many different dimensions that need to be balanced and therefore requires input from many different disciplines. Here, we document an attempt to investigate exit strategies from a multidisciplinary perspective through the Science versus Corona project in the Netherlands. In this project, scientists and laypeople were challenged to submit (components of) exit strategies. A selection of these were implemented in a formal model, and we have evaluated the scenarios from a multidisciplinary perspective, utilizing expertise in epidemiology, economics, psychology, law, mathematics, and history. We argue for the integration of multidisciplinary perspectives on COVID-19 and more generally in pandemic mitigation, highlight open challenges, and present an agenda for further research into exit strategies and their assessmen

Bias in supervision : A social psychological perspective on regulatory decision-making

Supervisory bodies, such as market authorities and inspectorates, are expected to make decisions independently and objectively. To what extent are supervisory officers—who work at these institutions—able to make decisions in an objective and unbiased manner? From a social psychological perspective, the current dissertation provides more insight into the decision-making of supervisory officers at the individual and group level. By conducting questionnaire studies and field experiments among diverse samples of supervisory officers, this dissertation examines the extent to which supervisory officers are aware of and affected by biases. Moreover, it tests the effectiveness of various communication strategies and decision-making tools (i.e., advocacy decision procedure and decisional balance sheet) that aim to increase awareness and improve the decision-making of supervisory officers. This dissertation’s findings suggest that supervisory officers are influenced by biases, both at the individual and group level, which increases the risk of making suboptimal decisions. Moreover, results indicate that supervisory officers are in general not so much aware of their own biases and tend to be overconfident about the quality of their decisions. The findings of this dissertation further suggest that informing supervisory officers about the risks of biases and providing a decision-making tool are ineffective strategies to correct for biases. However, results of the current dissertation also imply that participative leaders can stimulate supervisory officers to make informed and timely decisions. These insights can help supervisory officers in taking a closer look at how they reach their decisions and taking the next steps in improving their decision-making

Enthusiastic in balance: Support of the work-life balance to promote performance and ambition

Werknemers vinden het steeds belangrijker om een goede balans te vinden tussen werk en privé. Zeker nu het meer gewoon wordt om vanuit huis te werken, blijkt het lastiger om werk en privé gescheiden te houden wat kan leiden tot stress en burn-out. In dit artikel wordt de vraag beantwoord of ondersteuning van de werk-privébalans door de leidinggevende relateert aan meer bevlogen werknemers die beter presteren en meer ambitieus zijn. Uit een vragenlijst onder werknemers van een belangenorganisatie (n=278) blijkt inderdaad dat ondersteunend leiderschapsgedrag in verband staat met minder werk-privéconflict en met meer werk-privéverrijking en bevlogenheid. Werknemers hebben het gevoel dat zij daardoor beter hun taken volbrengen en meer ambitieus zijn in het stellen van doelen voor hun loopbaan. Deze uitkomsten bieden bedrijfsartsen de kans om leidinggevenden positief te stimuleren om meer oog te hebben voor de werk-privébalans van werknemers

Combineren van (over)werk en privé in het hoger beroepsonderwijs

Onder 108 hbo-docenten is onderzoek gedaan naar de relatie tussen werk-privé cultuur en de ervaren werk-privé balans. Uit de resultaten blijkt dat de werk-privé cultuur en het aantal overuren van invloed zijn op het ervaren werk-privé conflict. Dit betekent dat docenten die zich belemmerd voelen, een gebrek aan steun ervaren en regelmatig overwerken, een grotere kans hebben op het ervaren van werk-privé conflict. Bevindingen van het huidige onderzoek leiden tot een advies aan onderwijsorganisaties, hoe direct leidinggevenden de docenten kunnen ondersteunen in het combineren van werk en privé, om gezonde en tevreden medewerkers te behouden

Bevlogen in balans: Ondersteun de werk-privébalans om prestatie en ambitie te bevorderen

Werknemers vinden het steeds belangrijker om een goede balans te vinden tussen werk en privé. Zeker nu het meer gewoon wordt om vanuit huis te werken, blijkt het lastiger om werk en privé gescheiden te houden wat kan leiden tot stress en burn-out. In dit artikel wordt de vraag beantwoord of ondersteuning van de werk-privébalans door de leidinggevende relateert aan meer bevlogen werknemers die beter presteren en meer ambitieus zijn. Uit een vragenlijst onder werknemers van een belangenorganisatie (n=278) blijkt inderdaad dat ondersteunend leiderschapsgedrag in verband staat met minder werk-privéconflict en met meer werk-privéverrijking en bevlogenheid. Werknemers hebben het gevoel dat zij daardoor beter hun taken volbrengen en meer ambitieus zijn in het stellen van doelen voor hun loopbaan. Deze uitkomsten bieden bedrijfsartsen de kans om leidinggevenden positief te stimuleren om meer oog te hebben voor de werk-privébalans van werknemers

Stimulating Regulatory Compliance and Ethical Behavior of Organizations: a Review

Regulators aim to influence behavior of regulatees, such as compliance (i.e., following rules and regulations), but also ethical behavior (i.e., doing the right thing, irrespective of the rules and regulations). A literature review was conducted to collect, summarize, and analyze empirical evidence on how regulators can stimulate regulatees’ compliance and ethical behavior. We introduce a novel framework, in which we propose that regulatory actions influence compliance and ethical behavior through regulatees’ capability, opportunity, and motivation. Combining the findings of 35 articles, we showed that studies on ‘sanctions’ and 'cooperation' demonstrated mixed results regarding their effectiveness, whereas ‘inspections’ were found more effective. Notably, the subcomponents psychological capability, social opportunity, and reflective motivation were more effective in stimulating behavior than physical capability, physical opportunity, and automatic motivation. We reflect on how these insights can be used by regulators to increase their effectiveness, as well as for the aim to further develop regulatory theory

Quality of group decisions by board members: a hidden-profile experiment

Purpose Reaching decisions in a deliberative manner is of utmost importance for boards, as their decision-making impacts entire organisations. The current study aims to investigate (1) the quality of group decisions made by board members, (2) their confidence in, satisfaction with, and reflection on the decision-making, and (3) the effect of two discussion procedures on objective decision quality and subjective evaluations of the decision-making. Design/methodology/approach Board members of various Dutch non-profit organisations (N = 141) participated in a group decision-making task and a brief questionnaire. According to the hidden-profile paradigm, information was asymmetrically distributed among group members and should have been pooled to reach the objectively best decision. Half of the groups received one of two discussion procedures (i.e. advocacy decision or decisional balance sheet), while the other half received none. Findings Only a fifth of the groups successfully chose the best decision alternative. The initial majority preference strongly influenced the decision, which indicates that discussion was irrelevant to the outcome. Nevertheless, board members were satisfied with their decision-making. Using a discussion procedure enhanced participants' perception that they adequately weighed the pros and cons, but did not improve objective decision quality or other aspects of the subjective evaluation. These findings suggest that board members are unaware of their biased decision-making, which might hinder improvement. Originality/value Rather than using student samples, this study was the first to have board members participating in a hidden-profile task