Šiuolaikinės organizacijos gyvena intensyvių pokyčių sąlygomis, kai reikia keisti nusistovėjusius darbo būdus. Vis didesnį pagreitį įgauna komandinio darbo tempas (Lipinskienė, Stokaitė, 2005). Tačiau ribotas sprendimų racionalumas pastebimas net ir kai sprendimai priimami komandoje (Vathanophas, Suensilpong, Pacharapha, 2008; Chugh, Bazerman, 2005; Fleming, 2003). Iš vadovaujančio personalo darbuotojų, paprastai, yra laukiama kokybiškų ir objektyvių sprendimų Taigi tikėtina, kad kognityviniai poslinkiai dažniau pasireikš tarp nevadovaujančio personalo darbuotojų, kuriems sprendimus, bent jau kuriančius pridėtinę vertę, tenka priimti rečiau. Tačiau šios prielaidos vis dar verčia abejoti tyrėjus (Certo, Connelly ir Tihanyi, 2008; Puškorius 2006). Keliamas šio darbo tikslas - nustatyti kognityvinių poslinkių pasireiškimą vadovaujančiam ir nevadovaujančiam personalui, priimant sprendimus grupėse ir individualiai. Tyrime dalyvavo 246 mažmeninės prekybos įmonės UAB „Eiginta“ darbuotojai, iš jų 18,7 % vyrų (n=46) ir 81,3 % moterų (n=200), nuo 24 iki 58 metų amžiaus (amžiaus vidurkis – 37,52 ± 6,06 metų). Kad įvertintume kognityvių poslinkių pasireiškimą, asmenims priimant sprendimus tiek individualiai, tiek grupėse, vieni tyrimo dalyviai turėjo užpildyti užduočių lapą A forma, kiti- B Forma. A ir B formas sudarė dešimt užduočių (5 skirtingos, 5 vienodos), nagrinėjančių įvairių euristikų panaudojimą. Tyrimo rezultatai leidžia teigti, kad kognityviniai poslinkiai pasireiškia tiek... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / Contemporary organizations are existing under conditions of intense changes when established ways of work are to be altered and the speed of the teamwork is regularly increasing; nevertheless, limited rationality in solution taking is also observed when decisions are made in a team. There is no doubt that high-quality objective decisions are expected from the management personnel; it is also plausible that thinking biases will manifest more frequently among non-management employees who also have to make decisions less frequently. However, these assumptions still raise doubts among researchers (Certo, Connelly and Tihanyi, 2008; Puškorius 2006). The aim of this work is to discover the manifestation of thinking biases in management and non-management personnel when making decisions in groups and individually. 246 employees of Eiginta Ltd., an enterprise specializing in retail trade, took part in the analysis including 18.7 % males (n=46) and 81.3 % females (n=200), aged from 24 to 58 (age average 37.52 ± 6.06 years). In order to assess the manifestation of thinking biases when making decisions, participants of the research individually and in groups had to fill in an assignment sheet: Form A and Form B. Both sheets of assignments, i.e. Forms A and B consisted of ten tasks dealing with the manifestation of various types of heuristics among employees. The results of the research allow to claim that thinking biases are manifested both among the management personnel and... [to full text]

Most consequential decisions are made by more than two people. People frequently argue with each other to make better decisions. However, most decision making research usually only involves small purchases and individual decisions. The lacking of investigation in high-cognition decisions and argumentative settings is the motivation of this research. Researchers studying decision making have largely focused on how the decisions that people make are affected by task characteristics, and how labile decisions are with respect to situational factors. However, the fact that many preferences are constructed does not imply that all constructions are equally good. That people differ from each other in thinking is obvious. How and why they differ is less clear. Therefore, the first two studies are foundational studies in order to find out the most important and germane individual difference factor that may be the best predictor of thinking ability, including argument generation quality, evaluation ability, and debiasing ability. I found that logical reasoning ability is the best predictor of both thinking and debiasing ability. Argumentative Theory (Mercier & Sperber, 2011) claims that when reasoning is used in argumentative contexts, the confirmation bias contributes to an efficient form of division of cognitive labor, and then lead to better decisions and attitude depolarization. In study 3, I provided implication evidence to show that either arguing with the other person or viewing arguments from the opposite perspective may lead to attitude depolarization. Most interestingly, individual differences did moderate the main effects. / Business Administration/Marketing