Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of Cognitive Style on Group Decision and Negotiation

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Book cover Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation

Abstract

Numerous studies on group decision and negotiation have focused on the influence of the cognitive style of decision makers. Using number of instruments such as Kirton Adaption Innovation (KAI), Cognitive Style Index (CSI), Kolb Learning Style Inventory (KLS), Belbin team role self‐perception inventory, or the well-known Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), studies explore relationships between different dimensions of the personality traits of the individuals and the performance of group decisions. The results are very heterogeneous and sometimes contradictory, depending in particular on the decision contexts explored (strategic decision or not, etc.) and the type of measurement and proxy used to identify the cognitive style. When cognitive diversity is the variable used in these researches, it is no longer the influence of an individual cognitive style on the decision that becomes the object of study but the fact that several styles are represented among the members of a group of decision makers. Looking for an integrative group of decision makers, as it is finally proposed in this chapter through a cognitive mapping-based method, is then a way to increase group decision performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Allinson CW, Hayes J (1996) The cognitive style index: a measure of intuition-analysis for organizational research. J Manag Stud 33(1):119–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Armstrong SJ, Priola V (2001) Individual differences in cognitive style and their effects on task and social orientations of self-managed work teams. Small Group Res 32(3):283–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batra S, Vohra N (2016) Exploring the linkages of cognitive style and individual innovativeness. Manag Res Rev 39(7):768–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belbin M (1981) Management teams. Why they succeed or fail. Heineman, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Blaylock BK, Rees LP (1984) Cognitive style and the usefulness of information. Decis Sci 15(1):74–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunderson JS, Sutcliffe KM (2003) Management team learning orientation and business unit performance. J Appl Psychol 88(3):552–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Colón-Emeric CS, Ammarell N, Bailey D, Corazzini K, Lekan-Rutledge D, Piven ML et al (2006) Patterns of medical and nursing staff communication in nursing homes: implications and insights from complexity science. Qual Health Res 16(2):173–188

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Damart S (2010) A cognitive mapping approach to organizing the participation of multiple actors in a problem structuring process. Group Decis Negot 19(5):505–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Visser M, Faems D (2015) Exploration and exploitation within firms: the impact of CEOs’ cognitive style on incremental and radical innovation performance. Creat Innov Manag 24(3):359–372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drenkard K (2012) The transformative power of personal and organizational leadership. Nurs Adm Q 36(2):147–154

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Driver MJ (1979) Individual decision making and creativity. In: Kerr S (ed) Organizational behavior. Grid Publishing, Columbus

    Google Scholar 

  • Driver MJ, Brousseau KE, Hunsaker PL (1990) The dynamic decisionmaker. Harper and Row, Publishers, Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Eden C (1988) Cognitive mapping: a review. Eur J Oper Res 36:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eden C (2004) Analyzing cognitive maps to help structure issues or problems. Eur J Oper Res 159(3):673–686

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follett MP (1924) Creative experience. Longmans, Green & Co., New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Garnabuci G, Dioszegi B (2013) Social networks, cognitive style and innovative performance: a contingency perspective. Acad Manag J 58(3):881–905

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green GI, Hughes CT (1986) Effects of decision support systems training and cognitive style on decision process attributes. J Manag Inf Syst 3(2):83–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gul FA, Teoh HY, Shannon R (1992) Cognitive style as a factor in accounting students’ performance on multiple choice examination. Acc Educ 1(4):311–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harren VA (1979) A model of career decision making for college students. J Vocat Behav 14:119–133

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison DA, Price KH, Gavin JH, Florey AT (2002) Time, teams, and task performance: changing effects of surface- and deep-level diversity on group functioning. Acad Manag J 45(5):1029–1045

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoch JE, Dulebohn JH (2017) Team personality composition, emergent leadership and shared leadership in virtual teams: a theoretical framework. Hum Resour Manag Rev 27(4):678–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hough JR, Ogilvie D (2005) An empirical test of cognitive style and strategic decision outcomes∗. J Manag Stud 42(2):417–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jablokow KW, Defranco JF, Richmond SS, Piovoso MJ, Bilén SG (2015) Cognitive style and concept mapping performance. J Eng Educ 104(3):303–325

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung CG (1921) Psychological types. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Kilduff M, Angelmar R, Mehra A (2000) Top management-team diversity and firm performance: examining the role of cognitions. Organ Sci 11(1):21–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirton M (1989) Adaptors and innovators: styles of creativity and problem-salving. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurtzberg TR (2005) Feeling creative, being creative: an empirical study of diversity and creativity in teams. Creat Res J 17(1):51–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence PR, Lorsch JW (1967) Organization and environment. Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard University, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Martins LL, Schilpzand MC, Kirkman BL, Ivanaj S, Ivanaj V (2013) A contingency view of the effects of cognitive diversity on team performance. Small Group Res 44(2):96–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mello AL, Rentsch JR (2015) Cognitive diversity in teams. Small Group Res 46(6):623–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller CC, Burke LM, Glick WH (1998) Cognitive diversity among upper-echelon executives: implications for strategic decision processes. Strateg Manag J 19(1):39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell R, Nicholas S, Boyle B (2009) The role of openness to cognitive diversity and group processes in knowledge creation. Small Group Res 40(5):535–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohammed S, Ringseis E (2001) Cognitive diversity and consensus in group decision making: the role of inputs, processes, and outcomes. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 85(2):310–335

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt PC (1986) Decision style and strategic decisions of top executives. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 30:39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nutt PC (2002) Why decisions fail: avoiding the blunders and traps that Lead to debacles. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Peeters MAG, van Tuijl HFJM, Rutte CG, Reymen IMMJ (2006) Personality and team performance: a meta-analysis. Eur J Personal 20(5):377–396 . Retrieved from. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips WJ, Fletcher JM, Marks ADG, Hine DW (2016) Thinking styles and decision making: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 142(3):260–290

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rolfe P (2011) Transformational leadership theory: what every leader needs to know. Nurse Lead 9(2):54–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ruble TL, Cosier RA (1990) Effects of cognitive styles and decision setting on performance. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 46(2):283–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer J, Felsing T, Franke H, Ruttinger B (2006) Cognitive diversity and team performance in a complex multiple task environment. Ergonomics 49(10):934–954

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scott SG, Bruce RA (1995) Decision-making style: the development and assessment of a new measure. Educ Psychol Meas 55(5):818–831

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons T, Pelled LH, Smith KA (1999) Making use of difference: diversity, debate, and decision comprehensiveness in top management teams. Acad Manag J 42(6):662–673

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith DM, Kolb DA (1986) Leaming style inventory: user’s guide. McBer, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoyanov S, Jablokow K, Rosas SR, Wopereis IGJH, Kirschner PA (2017) Concept mapping—an effective method for identifying diversity and congruity in cognitive style. Eval Program Plann 60:238–244

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tegarden DP, Tegarden LF, Sheetz SD (2009) Cognitive factions in a top management team: surfacing and analyzing cognitive diversity using causal maps. Group Decis Negot 18:537–566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tegarden DP, Tegarden LF, Smith W, Sheetz SD (2016) De-fusing organizational power using anonymity and cognitive factions in a participative strategic planning setting. Group Decis Negot 25(1):1–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tyler BB, Gnyawali DR (2009) Managerial collective cognitions: an examination of similarities and differences of cultural orientations. J Manag Stud 46(1):93–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walton RE, McKersie RB (1965) A behavioral theory of labor negotiations. The economic journal, vol 76. McGraw Hill Book Company, London

    Google Scholar 

  • White KB (1984) MIS project teams: an investigation of cognitive style implications. MIS Q 8:95–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS, DRM, [MLab], Université Paris-Dauphine, Université PSL, Paris, France

    Sébastien Damart & Sonia Adam-Ledunois

Authors
  1. Sébastien Damart
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sonia Adam-Ledunois
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonia Adam-Ledunois .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Wilfrid Laurier University Dept. Mathematics, Waterloo, ON, Canada

    D. Marc Kilgour

  2. University of Strathclyde Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK

    Colin Eden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Damart, S., Adam-Ledunois, S. (2019). Impact of Cognitive Style on Group Decision and Negotiation. In: Kilgour, D., Eden, C. (eds) Handbook of Group Decision and Negotiation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_52-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-12051-1_52-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-12051-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation