COGNITIVE CONFLICT IN STRATEGIC DECISION OF MANAGEMENT TEAMS IN SMALL ENTERPRISES

MAIA, TATIANE S. T.; LIMA, EDMILSON

doi:10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMR200177

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

RAM. Revista de Administração Mackenzie

Español English

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Resources and Entrepreneurial Development • RAM, Rev. Adm. Mackenzie 21 (3) • 2020 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-6971/eRAMR200177 copy

COGNITIVE CONFLICT IN STRATEGIC DECISION OF MANAGEMENT TEAMS IN SMALL ENTERPRISES

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

ABSTRACT

Purpose:

The objective of this article is to explain how cognitive conflict happens and what are its contributions to the decision-making processes of management teams in small enterprises (SE).

Originality/value:

Although SEs are important and numerous, the cognitive conflict in their management team and the strategic decision making of this team are understudied. This article helps to feel this gap with contributions and implications which are helpful for research and practice related to those themes.

Design/methodology/approach:

The descriptive methodological approach was adopted based on qualitative methods and multicase study (Eisenhardt, 1989Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 522-550. doi:10.5465/amr.1989. 4308385
https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989. 430838... ). Data were collected with interviews and analyzed within and cross-case procedures, according to Miles and Huberman’s (1994)Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. California: Sage. recommendations. Four cases of SE were studied.

Findings:

The strategic decision processes were considerably determined by cognitive conflicts. Such conflicts questioned decision possibilities and highlighted aspects related to intuition and improvisation, both normally useful and present in the strategic decision processes of SE. Cognitive conflict inhibits improvisation because its occurrence creates useful questionings in decision making preparation. Those questionings generated deepness in discussion and analysis for decision making in the studied SEs.

KEYWORDS
Cognitive conflict; Strategic decision; Management team; Small enterprise; Strategic management

Team	Age	Share	Foundation	Local	Service	Employees
Alpha Father Son Former employee	48 years 23 years 30 years	60% 20% 20%	1992 (23 years)	São José do Rio Preto (SP)	Information system development	9
Beta Pai Filha	55 years 32 years	75% 25%	2005 (nine years)	Ribeirão Preto (SP)	Vaccine development, laboratory testing	10
Gama Co-manager 1 Co-manager 2 Co-manager 3	55 years 54 years Retired	33% 33% 33%	1986 (29 years)	São José do Rio Preto (SP)	Information system development	48
Delta Co-manager 1 Co-manager 2 Co-manager 3	35 years 33 years 26 years	40% 40% 20%	2010 (five years)	São Paulo (SP)	Consulting for systems development	23

SEs	SDP identified	Highlighting factors
Alfa	Formation of the management team (2010), professionalization of services (2011), pricing reformulation (2013), and system restructuring (2014).	Possibility analysis, disagreements, complementarity in the team, brainstorming, openness to dialogue, and channeling cognitive conflicts.
Beta	International consulting hiring (2009), partnership establishment (2011), quality control and specifications (2012), and society with partners (2014).	Settlement of disagreements, disagreements, complementarity in the team, brainstorming, openness to dialogue, and trust.
Gama	Insertion of human resources management practices (HRM) (2009), CEASA software enhancement (2010) departmentalization of sectors (2012), new branding (2013), and hiring expert consulting (2014).	Obstacle discussion, settlement of disagreements, brainstorming, disagreements, complementarity in the team, and openness to dialogue.
Delta	Delta product creation (2010), from product to consulting (2011), differential exploration in software design (2012), shareholder entry, and exit on the management team (2012-2014).	Trust, disagreements, complementarity in the team, brainstorming, and openness to dialogue.

PEs/PDE	Fatores de destaque dos conflitos cognitivos
ALPHA: New team formation	The search for channeling conflicts and taking advantage of them positively in the conduct of joint decisions materialized in the founder's stance of not taking unilateral control of the company and intensified after the formation of the new management team.
Professionalization of services	More energetic brainstorming around service professionalization posed the following dilemma: maintaining a cordial relationship with customers or creating stricter protocols to ensure service flows in more methodical work processes? The complementarity in the team facilitated such debates, as well as the openness to resolving differences of opinion.
Pricing reformulation	There was a stalemate in this process, with persistent analysis of possibilities. However, there was team engagement over a long period, in which co-directors analyzed the pros and cons of reformulating pricing changes to newer and older customers.
Restructuring of systems	The complementarity that involved this process went as follows: "In order to function, one has to take care of an area, this is very important. For example, I do not enter my son's area and he does not enter mine. I don't go into the programmer's area and vice versa...".
BETA: Partnership establishment	The brainstorming arose in view of the different alternatives analyzed: closing the company, renting a headquarters, making a commercial or production partnership.
Partnership with partners	Strong disagreements between the co-directors, manifestation of important cognitive conflict, marked by the way the director rationalizes the work and the way the scientist researcher values her creations in the company.
Quality control	More disagreements stemmed from a divergent interpretation, the result of the professional training of directors: medicine and administration. The conflict in cognitive modality easily found its place in this team because of the long working relationship between the co-leaders: father and daughter.
GAMA: HR practices insertion	Managing the well-being of people at work began to worry one of the co-directors, who fueled many brainstorming discussions. His intention was to convince another co-director to support him in the necessary changes. The openness to dialogue in the management team, made up of two longtime friends, made a difference in this decision-making process. There was an effort to establish dialogues to understand very different points of view.
CEASA software enhancement	In this process, the openness to dialogue was manifested in the position of co-directors to resolve inconsistency of vision of the business, in the face of distinct professional training. Frank weighting occurred around changes in the CEASA product. However, this was only due to strong complementarity in the management team.
New branding	This decision-making process sparked a lot of brainstorming, a highlighting factor of the cognitive conflict that triggered the following controversy between co-directors: would the materialization of the focus given to both products need to involve changing the company's brand? Would it justify the high cost involved in this process?
DELTA: Delta product creation	Debates of ideas regarding an original product were a rich exercise, in which the management team could begin to test its operation. In addition, it has built trust, an essential factor in this process, and is manifest in the attitudes of using all its resources to create an innovative business.
From product to consulting	In this process, the brainstorming intensified, especially around the possibility of keeping the company based on transparency and free of any politicking, providing consultancy services in accordance with the principles of the team.
Shareholder entry/exit	Much evidence of disagreement, which could not be maintained merely as a divergence of views between the new member and the founding co-directors.

Editora Mackenzie; Universidade Presbiteriana Mackenzie Rua da Consolação, 896, Edifício Rev. Modesto Carvalhosa, Térreo - Coordenação da RAM, Consolação - São Paulo - SP - Brasil - cep 01302-907 - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revista.adm@mackenzie.br

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tatiane S. T. Maia, SC-484, Km 02, Fronteira Sul, Chapecó, Santa Catarina, Brazil, CEP 89815-899. E-mail: tatiane.maia@uffs.edu.br