SRA-E 2018

The overall aim of this research was to determine the effects influencing the decision-making processes in academic settings compared to other types of organisations, and to demonstrate that 'less than ideal' decision-making based on power and influence, usually associated with academic institutions, could be connected with the decision-making style, effects of framing and perception of previous investments, vocational inclinations, and outcome focus in decision-making process. In total, 76 participants were involved in 2 phases of survey. All participants were part of managements of 3 types of examined institutions: academic institutions, private sector companies and public-sector organisations. Results have confirmed case-studies subjects’ preference towards the analytical decision-making style. For some less complex and familiar situations, they reported reaching decisions in shorter time and relying on the ‘gut-feeling’, thus implying use of the intuitive decision-making style. Those results were supported by the second part of the survey conducted via online questionnaire. The subjective perception of risk or chance involved in decision-making is a bit higher across all groups, but given the small sample, it could be merely the tendency of the examined sample of managers. The starting hypothesis about absence of knowledge and experience in academic sector managers hasn’t been supported in this sample, since the average time spent on managerial positions suggest more than a decade of experience across all subjects’ groups. The results suggest women being moderately more prone to analytical decision-making style than men. All participants showed resistance to framing. The same trend continued in estimating resistance to sunk costs. Similarly, no significant difference regarding following of the decision rules between all groups of managers was observed. Finally, all respondents in this research unanimously showed very high rate of avoiding negative decision outcomes. Statistically significant differences were determined between the groups of managers in demonstrated personality types according to RIASEC typology; Social profiles are in general greater than Realistic and Investigative profiles for all 3 groups of managers, suggesting that those personality types might be dominant compared to the rest of typology.