Carroll, B W (1985) Bias and organizational outcomes. PhD thesis, American University, USA.
Abstract
Models of organizational decision-making rarely consider systematic bias as a source of difference in outcomes and performance between organizations. Based upon a multivariate analysis of corporate financial reports, this study considers the impact of management type and systemic values, in the form of varying degrees of conservatism, on the administrative cost levels of a matched sample of depository institutions, residential development companies and mortgage insurance companies in Canada and the United States. The conclusion of the research is that organizations and their management are biased in a fashion consistent with the systemic values of the country in which the organization is a part; and to a lesser extent in a fashion consistent with the values of the sub-system from which the management group emanate. While factors such as size, technology, task environment and previous performance levels are important in predicting outcomes, they are more important in some countries and to some types of management than others.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | Canada; United States; bias; insurance; mortgage; residential |
| Index terms: | bias, Canada, United States, decision-making, multivariate analysis, residential development, insurance, mortgage |
| Subjects: | decision analysis, economic analysis, probability and distributions, economic development, Geography, statistical analysis |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Risk Management, Urban Studies, Geographical Context, Business Strategy |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here