Picture of virus under microscope

Research under the microscope...

The Strathprints institutional repository is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs.

Strathprints serves world leading Open Access research by the University of Strathclyde, including research by the Strathclyde Institute of Pharmacy and Biomedical Sciences (SIPBS), where research centres such as the Industrial Biotechnology Innovation Centre (IBioIC), the Cancer Research UK Formulation Unit, SeaBioTech and the Centre for Biophotonics are based.

Explore SIPBS research

The Psychology of why organisations can be slow to adapt and change

Wright, George and van der Heijden, Kees and Bradfield, Ron M. and Burt, George and Cairns, George (2004) The Psychology of why organisations can be slow to adapt and change. Journal of General Management, 29 (4). pp. 21-36. ISSN 0306-3070

Full text not available in this repository. (Request a copy from the Strathclyde author)

Abstract

This article discusses what can be done about bias in human decision making to make organizations adapt to change. In conclusion, individuals follow cognitive habits, seeing challenging situations through a singular frame of reference that makes assumptions about the nature of problems or opportunities that arise. Additionally, we feel that our judgment is good. Furthermore, this perception is reinforced by both the confirmation bias and the hindsight bias that underpin an inappropriate confidence in our judgment. Such over-confidence will lead to inappropriate best-guess thinking about the future--as illustrated in our earlier case studies of strategic inertia or business-as-usual thinking. Our analysis illustrated that the risks were perceived to be serious if the company did not change its current failing strategy and, also, that the risks were seen to be serious if the company did change the strategy. There was strong evidence that the senior management team attempted to shift responsibility for its adherence to the current strategy to the top level board of directors--that is, buck passing. Additionally, the management team also evidenced delay and procrastination--whilst bolstering the current failing strategy