The effect of manager's time horizon on the comprehensiveness, speed and creativity of strategic decision making: The modulatory role of environmental dynamism

Öz

Purpose There is a significant gap in the existing literature on the relationship between managers' time horizon and strategic decision-making processes, especially how it is shaped under different environmental conditions. This study examines the effects of managers' time horizon on the three basic dimensions of strategic decision-making process, comprehensiveness, speed and creativity, and aims to reveal the moderating role of environmental dynamism in these relationships. Method This study adopted a quantitative research design and the sample consisted of senior managers working in medium and large-scale enterprises in the Marmara Region. A total of 450 valid responses were collected via an online survey. The data were analyzed using structural equation modeling after exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Findings The research results showed that managers with long-term time horizons have positive and significant effects on strategic decision comprehensiveness and strategic decision creativity. On the other hand, no significant effect of the manager's time horizon on decision speed was detected. The study also determined that environmental dynamism plays a moderating role in these relationships. It has been found that under conditions of high environmental dynamism, the long-term time horizon of the manager strengthens the tendency to make comprehensive and creative strategic decisions. Limitations The fact that this study is limited to medium and large-scale enterprises in the Marmara Region limits the generalizability of the findings. The study has a cross-sectional design and uses self-reported data, which makes it difficult to fully reveal causal relationships. In addition, additional factors such as organizational culture, top management team structure or sectoral differences were not controlled. Contribution This study contributes to the literature by revealing the effect of managers' time horizon on strategic decision processes and the moderating role of environmental dynamism in this relationship. The findings show that managers with a long-term perspective tend to make comprehensive and creative strategic decisions, especially in dynamic environments, and emphasize that businesses should evaluate time horizon and environmental factors together in order to increase strategic decision quality.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Time Horizon
• Strategic Decision
• Environmental Dynamism.

Yöneticinin zaman ufkunun stratejik kararın kapsamlılığı, hızı ve yaratıcılığına etkisi: Çevresel dinamizmin düzenleyici rolü

Öz

Amaç Mevcut literatürde yöneticilerin zaman ufku ile stratejik karar alma süreçleri arasındaki ilişki, özellikle farklı çevresel koşullar altında nasıl şekillendiği konusunda önemli bir boşluk bulunmaktadır. Bu çalışma, yöneticilerin zaman ufkunun stratejik karar alma sürecinin üç temel boyutu kapsamlılık, hız ve yaratıcılık üzerindeki etkilerini incelemekte ve bu ilişkilerde çevresel dinamizmin düzenleyici rolünü ortaya koymayı amaçlamaktadır. Yöntem Bu çalışma nicel araştırma tasarımını benimsemiş olup, örneklem Marmara Bölgesi'ndeki orta ve büyük ölçekli işletmelerde görev yapan üst düzey yöneticilerden oluşmaktadır. Toplam 450 geçerli yanıt çevrimiçi anket yöntemiyle toplanmıştır. Veriler keşfedici ve doğrulayıcı faktör analizleri sonrasında yapısal eşitlik modellemesi kullanılarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular Araştırma sonuçları, uzun vadeli zaman ufkuna sahip yöneticilerin stratejik karar kapsamlılığı ve stratejik karar yaratıcılığı üzerinde olumlu ve anlamlı etkilere sahip olduğunu göstermiştir. Buna karşılık, yöneticinin zaman ufkunun karar hızı üzerinde anlamlı bir etkisi tespit edilmemiştir. Çalışmada ayrıca, çevresel dinamizmin bu ilişkilerde düzenleyici bir rol oynadığı belirlenmiştir. Yüksek çevresel dinamizm koşullarında, yöneticinin uzun vadeli zaman ufkunun kapsamlı ve yaratıcı stratejik kararlar alma eğilimini güçlendirdiği saptanmıştır. Sınırlılıklar Bu araştırmanın Marmara Bölgesi'ndeki orta ve büyük ölçekli işletmelerle sınırlı olması, bulguların genellenebilirliğini kısıtlamaktadır. Çalışma kesitsel bir tasarıma sahip olup, öz-bildirime dayalı veriler kullanılmıştır, bu da nedensel ilişkilerin tam olarak ortaya konmasını zorlaştırmaktadır. Ayrıca, örgüt kültürü, üst yönetim ekibi yapısı veya sektörel farklılıklar gibi ek faktörler kontrol edilmemiştir. Katkı Bu çalışma, yöneticilerin zaman ufkunun stratejik karar süreçleri üzerindeki etkisini ve çevresel dinamizmin bu ilişkideki düzenleyici rolünü ortaya koyarak literatüre katkı sağlamaktadır. Bulgular, uzun vadeli perspektife sahip yöneticilerin özellikle dinamik çevrelerde kapsamlı ve yaratıcı stratejik kararlar üretme eğiliminde olduklarını göstermekte ve işletmelerin stratejik karar kalitesini artırmak için zaman ufku ve çevresel faktörleri birlikte değerlendirmeleri gerektiğini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Zaman Ufku
• Stratejik Karar
• Çevresel Dinamizm.

Kaynakça

1. Adomako, S., Amankwah‐Amoah, J., Debrah, Y. A., Khan, Z., Chu, I., & Robinson, C. (2021). Institutional voids, economic adversity and inter‐firm cooperation in an emerging market: The mediating role of government R&D support. British Journal of Management, 32(1), 40–58. [CrossRef]
2. Amabile, T. M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39(5), 1154–1184. [CrossRef]
3. Amis, J., Slack, T., & Hinings, C. R. (2004). The pace, sequence, and linearity of radical change. Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), 15–39. [CrossRef]
4. Ashmos, D. P., Duchon, D., & McDaniel Jr, R. R. (2000). Organizational responses to complexity: The effect on organizational performance. Journal of Organizational Change Management, 13(6), 577–595. [CrossRef]
5. Baum, J. R., & Wally, S. (2003). Strategic decision speed and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1107–1129. [CrossRef]
6. Bluedorn, A. C. (2002). The human organization of time: Temporal realities and experience. Stanford University Press. [CrossRef]
7. Bluedorn, A. C., & Martin, G. (2008). The time frames of entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(1), 1–20. [CrossRef]
8. Bluedorn, A. C., & Standifer, R. L. (2006). Time and the temporal imagination. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 5(2), 196–206. [CrossRef]

9. Bourgeois III, L. J., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1988). Strategic decision processes in high velocity environments: Four cases in the microcomputer industry. Management Science, 34(7), 816–835. [CrossRef]
10. Burt, R. S. (1992). Structural holes: The social structure of competition. Harvard University Press.
11. Cangur, S., & Ercan, İ. (2015). Comparison of model fit indices used in structural equation modeling under multivariate normality. Journal of Modern Applied Statistical Methods, 14(1), Article 14. [CrossRef]
12. Carpenter, M. A., Geletkanycz, M. A., & Sanders, W. G. (2004). Upper echelons research revisited: Antecedents, elements, and consequences of top management team composition. Journal of Management, 30(6), 749–778. [CrossRef]
13. Chen, J., Lien, W. C., Miller, D., & Chen, T. (2024). Competitive actions under analyst pressure: The role of CEO time horizons. Journal of Management Studies, 61(5), 1916–1945. [CrossRef]
14. Chen, J., Miller, D., & Chen, M. J. (2021). Top management team time horizon blending and organizational ambidexterity. Strategic Organization, 19(2), 183–206. [CrossRef]
15. Clark, K. D., & Maggitti, P. G. (2012). TMT potency and strategic decision‐making in high technology firms. Journal of Management Studies, 49(7), 1168–1193. [CrossRef]
16. Coşkun, R., Bayraktaroğlu, S., Yıldırım, E., & Altunışık, R. (2012). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri: SPSS uygulamalı. Sakarya Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
17. Courtney, H., Kirkland, J., & Viguerie, P. (1997). Strategy under uncertainty. Harvard Business Review, 75(6), 67–79.
18. Daft, R. L. (2001). Organization theory and design. South-Western College Publishing.
19. Das, T. K. (1987). Strategic planning and individual temporal orientation. Strategic Management Journal, 8(2), 203–209. [CrossRef]
20. Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (1998). Time and entrepreneurial risk behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 22(2), 69–88. [CrossRef]
21. Das, T. K., & Teng, B. S. (2001). Strategic risk behaviour and its temporalities: Between risk propensity and decision context. Journal of Management Studies, 38(4), 515–534. [CrossRef]
22. D’Aveni, R. A. (2010). Hypercompetition. Simon and Schuster.
23. Dean Jr, J. W., & Sharfman, M. P. (1996). Does decision process matter? A study of strategic decision-making effectiveness. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 368–392. [CrossRef]
24. Dess, G. G., & Beard, D. W. (1984). Dimensions of organizational task environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 52–73. [CrossRef]
25. Dill, W. R. (1958). Environment as an influence on managerial autonomy. Administrative Science Quarterly, 2(4), 409–443. [CrossRef]
26. Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 32(3), 543–576. [CrossRef]
27. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bourgeois III, L. J. (1988). Politics of strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 737–770. [CrossRef]
28. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Martin, J. A. (2000). Dynamic capabilities: What are they? Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 1105–1121. [CrossRef]
29. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Zbaracki, M. J. (1992). Strategic decision making. Strategic Management Journal, 13(S2), 17–37. [CrossRef]
30. Forbes, D. P. (2005). Managerial determinants of decision speed in new ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 26(4), 355–366. [CrossRef]
31. Ford, C. M., & Gioia, D. A. (2000). Factors influencing creativity in the domain of managerial decision making. Journal of Management, 26(4), 705–732. [CrossRef]
32. Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50. [CrossRef]
33. Fredrickson, J. W. (1984). The comprehensiveness of strategic decision processes: Extension, observations, future directions. Academy of Management Journal, 27(3), 445–466. [CrossRef]
34. Fredrickson, J. W. (1986). The strategic decision process and organizational structure. Academy of Management Review, 11(2), 280–297. [CrossRef]
35. Greven, A., Fischer-Kreer, D., Müller, J., & Brettel, M. (2022). Inter-firm coopetition: The role of a firm's long-term orientation. Industrial Marketing Management, 106, 47–57. [CrossRef]
36. Gürbüz, S., & Şahin, F. (2014). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma yöntemleri. Seçkin Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
37. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis. Pearson Education.
38. Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers.
39. Academy of Management Review, 9(2), 193–206. [CrossRef]
40. Hitt, M. A., Jackson, S. E., Carmona, S., Bierman, L., Shalley, C. E., & Wright, M. (2017). The Oxford handbook of strategy implementation. Oxford University Press. [CrossRef]
41. Huber, G. P., & Power, D. J. (1985). Retrospective reports of strategic‐level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy. Strategic Management Journal, 6(2), 171–180. [CrossRef]
42. Judge, W. Q., & Miller, A. (1991). Antecedents and outcomes of decision speed in different environmental contexts. Academy of Management Journal, 34(2), 449–463. [CrossRef]
43. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (2013). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. In Handbook of the fundamentals of financial decision making: Part I (pp. 99–127). [CrossRef]
44. Karasar, N. (2007). Bilimsel araştırma yöntemi: Kavramlar, ilkeler, teknikler. Nobel Akademi. [Turkish]
45. Kauppila, O. P., Bizzi, L., & Obstfeld, D. (2018). Connecting and creating: Tertius iungens, individual creativity, and strategic decision processes. Strategic Management Journal, 39(3), 697–719. [CrossRef]
46. Kline, R. B. (2008). Becoming a behavioral science researcher: A guide to producing research that matters. Guilford Press.
47. Langley, A. (1995). Between “paralysis by analysis” and “extinction by instinct.” Sloan Management Review, 36, 6376.
48. Laverty, K. J. (1996). Economic “short-termism”: The debate, the unresolved issues, and the implications for management practice and research. Academy of Management Review, 21(3), 825–860. [CrossRef]
49. Levinthal, D. A. (1997). Adaptation on rugged landscapes. Management Science, 43(7), 934–950. [CrossRef]
50. Levinthal, D. A., & Warglien, M. (1999). Landscape design: Designing for local action in complex worlds. Organization Science, 10(3), 342–357. [CrossRef]
51. Li, Y., Liu, Y., Duan, Y., & Li, M. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation, strategic flexibilities and indigenous firm innovation in transitional China. International Journal of Technology Management, 41(1–2), 223–246. [CrossRef]
52. Lin, Y., Shi, W., Prescott, J. E., & Yang, H. (2019). In the eye of the beholder: Top managers’ long-term orientation, industry context, and decision-making processes. Journal of Management, 45(8), 3114–3145. [CrossRef]
53. Lumpkin, G. T., & Brigham, K. H. (2011). Long–term orientation and intertemporal choice in family firms. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(6), 1149–1169. [CrossRef]
54. Marginson, D., & McAulay, L. (2008). Exploring the debate on short‐termism: A theoretical and empirical analysis. Strategic Management Journal, 29(3), 273–292. [CrossRef]
55. Menon, A., Bharadwaj, S. G., Adidam, P. T., & Edison, S. W. (1999). Antecedents and consequences of marketing strategy making: A model and a test. Journal of Marketing, 63(2), 18–40. [CrossRef]
56. Miller, C. C. (2008). Decisional comprehensiveness and firm performance: Towards a more complete understanding. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21(5), 598–620. [CrossRef]
57. Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1983). Strategy‐making and environment: The third link. Strategic Management Journal, 4(3), 221–235. [CrossRef]
58. Milliken, F. J. (1987). Three types of perceived uncertainty about the environment: State, effect, and response uncertainty. Academy of Management Review, 12(1), 133–143. [CrossRef]
59. Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D., & Theoret, A. (1976). The structure of “unstructured” decision processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(2), 246–275. [CrossRef]
60. Moorman, C. (1995). Organizational market information processes: Cultural antecedents and new product outcomes. Journal of Marketing Research, 32(3), 318–335. [CrossRef]
61. Nadkarni, S., & Chen, J. (2014). Bridging yesterday, today, and tomorrow: CEO temporal focus, environmental dynamism, and rate of new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 57(6), 1810–1833. [CrossRef]
62. Nadkarni, S., Chen, T., & Chen, J. (2016). The clock is ticking! Executive temporal depth, industry velocity, and competitive aggressiveness. Strategic Management Journal, 37(6), 1132–1153. [CrossRef]
63. Nerkar, A. (2003). Old is gold? The value of temporal exploration in the creation of new knowledge. Management Science, 49(2), 211–229. [CrossRef]
64. Opper, S., & Burt, R. S. (2021). Social network and temporal myopia. Academy of Management Journal, 64(3), 741–771. [CrossRef]
65. Perry-Smith, J. E., & Shalley, C. E. (2003). The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 28(1), 89–106. [CrossRef]
66. Peters, T. J., & Waterman, R. H. (2019). In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best-run companies. Profile Books.
67. Peterson, R. M., Dibrell, C. C., & Pett, T. L. (2002). Long- vs. short-term performance perspectives of Western European, Japanese, and US countries: Where do they lie? Journal of World Business, 37(4), 245–255. [CrossRef]
68. Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J. Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. [CrossRef]
69. Schilit, W. K., & Paine, F. T. (1987). An examination of the underlying dynamics of strategic decisions subject to upward influence activity. Journal of Management Studies, 24(2), 161–187. [CrossRef]
70. Schwenk, C. R. (1988). The cognitive perspective on strategic decision making. Journal of Management Studies, 25(1), 41–55. [CrossRef]
71. Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Broadway Business.
72. Shalley, C. E., & Gilson, L. L. (2004). What leaders need to know: A review of social and contextual factors that can foster or hinder creativity. The Leadership Quarterly, 15(1), 33–53. [CrossRef]
73. Shepherd, D. A., Patzelt, H., & Wolf, C. (2021). Managing and enabling ambidexterity for innovation in uncertain contexts. Academy of Management Perspectives, 35(2), 261–277.
74. Shepherd, D. A., Saade, F. P., & Wincent, J. (2023). The entrepreneurial process of pivoting: The role of cognition and emotion. Journal of Business Venturing, 38(5), 1–23.
75. Shipp, A. J., Edwards, J. R., & Lambert, L. S. (2009). Conceptualization and measurement of temporal focus: The subjective experience of the past, present, and future. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 110(1), 1–22. [CrossRef]
76. Siggelkow, N., & Rivkin, J. W. (2005). Speed and search: Designing organizations for turbulence and complexity. Organization Science, 16(2), 101–122. [CrossRef]
77. Simon, H. A., Donald, W. S., & Victor, A. T. (1985). Kamu yönetimi (C. Mıhçıoğlu, Trans.). Ankara Üniversitesi Siyasal Bilgiler Fakültesi Yayınları. [Turkish]
78. Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995). Market orientation and the learning organization. Journal of Marketing, 59(3), 63–74. [CrossRef]
79. Slawinski, N., & Bansal, P. (2015). Short on time: Intertemporal tensions in business sustainability. Organization Science, 26(2), 531–549. [CrossRef]
80. Slovic, P. (1995). The construction of preference. American Psychologist, 50(5), 364–371. [CrossRef]
81. Souder, D., & Bromiley, P. (2012). Explaining temporal orientation: Evidence from the durability of firms' capital investments. Strategic Management Journal, 33(5), 550–569. [CrossRef]
82. Souitaris, V., & Maestro, B. M. (2010). Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures. Strategic Management Journal, 31(6), 652–678. [CrossRef]
83. Stacey, R. D. (1995). The science of complexity: An alternative perspective for strategic change processes. Strategic Management Journal, 16(6), 477–495. [CrossRef]
84. Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509–533. [CrossRef]
85. Thompson, J. D. (2017). Organizations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. Routledge. [CrossRef]
86. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. (2023). İl bazında gayrisafi yurt içi hasıla, 2022. https://data.tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=Il-Bazinda-Gayrisafi-Yurt-Ici-Hasila-2022-45867
87. Volberda, H., & van Bruggen, G. (1997). Environmental turbulence: A look into its dimensionality. In M. T. A. Bemelmans (Ed.), Dynamiek in organisatie en bedrijfsvoering (pp. 137–146).
88. Wally, S., & Baum, J. R. (1994). Personal and structural determinants of the pace of strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 37(4), 932–956. [CrossRef]
89. Wang, X. (2024). Does CEO temporal myopia always lead to firm short-termism? The critical role of CEO optimism and perceived opportunity costs. Journal of Business Research, 180, 114739. [CrossRef]
90. Woodman, R. W., Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W. (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18(2), 293–321. [CrossRef]
91. Yazıcıoğlu, Y., & Erdoğan, S. (2014). SPSS uygulamalı bilimsel araştırma yöntemleri. Detay Yayıncılık. [Turkish]
92. Zellweger, T. (2007). Time horizon, costs of equity capital, and generic investment strategies of firms. Family Business Review, 20(1), 1–15. [CrossRef]
93. Zimbardo, P. G., & Boyd, J. N. (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. [CrossRef]