管理風險的决定因素.ppt

管理风险的决定性因素:探讨个性和文化的影响 Determinants of Managerial Risk:Exploring Personality and Cultural Influences Steve Williams & Sunitha NarendranThe Journal of Social PsychologyVol. 139 No. 1 Feb. 1999 一.前人成果 1.管理者的风险行为已被视为组织有效性 的重要决定性因素,但对管理者风险倾向 的研究很有限。 Managerial risk behavior has been identified as an important determinant of organizational effectiveness, however, a limited amount of research has dealt with managerial risk propensity . 对管理者风险倾向的研究 MacCrimmon 和 Wehrung 对来自美国和加拿大的509名高层管理者进行了与风险相关的特质的分析，发现：管理者年龄越大越不喜欢风险；教育水平越高的管理者越爱冒险；美国和加拿大管理者的风险行为没有差别；最高层的管理者更倾向于冒险；权力越大的管理者表现出越高的风险行为；资历越深的管理者越不喜欢风险；越小的公司的管理者越可能冒险；一些产业的管理者（如：银行业）更不喜欢风险。 2.目前,稳定的个体差异对作出多风险的 决策(risky decision)的影响有待调查 目前已确立了控制范围与所冒风险间的联系 relations between locus of control(LOC) and risk taking 个体的冒险意愿或倾向会影响风险行为 An individual willingness or predisposition to take risks can influence risk behavior3.民族和文化的差异可能会影响管理者的 风险行为 Farmer 和 Richman 假设社会和文化因素是影响后 来的理性冒险的有效性的决定性因素。 Farmer and Richman proposed that social and cultural factors are likely determinants of the subsequent effectiveness of rational risk taking. 不同国家管理者的风险倾向有所差异。对不同国家管理者的风险倾向的研究 Cummings ,Harnett 和 Stevens (1971) 发现,中欧、斯堪的那维亚和希腊的管理者与美国的管理者相比，不太喜欢风险。 Harnett 和 Cummings (1980) 发现，欧洲管理者与美国管理者相比，不太喜欢风险。 Bass 和 Burger(1979) 发现，美国和日本的管理者的风险意愿要比其它国家高。 MacCrimmon 和 Wwhrung(1986) 发现，在509名美国和加拿大管理者中，在风险倾向方面没有显著的差异。 Hopkins, LoPeterson 和 Seo 发现，日本和美国管理者间并没有明显的冒险差异。二.研究目的1.进一步探讨个体特征对管理者风险行为 的影响程度 Our study further explores the extent to which individual characteristics influence managerial risk-taking behavior. 2.测定管理者个性的不同方面对做出风 险决策的影响One focus of our study was on determining the influence of various aspects of managerial personality on risky decision making. 3.检验文化对管理者风险行为的影响 A further purpose of our study was to examine the effects of culture on managerial risk behavior.三.界定风险(Defining Risk) 风险难界定的原因 Sitkin 和 Pablo 对风险行为决定性因素的重构 本研究的重点1.风险难界定的原因 常将不同的要素与整个风险的构成相混淆 。 (several distinct elements are often confused with the entire risk construct) 风险在不同的状况下表现出不同的特征，以致难于识别和分清 。 (risk exhibits different characteristics under different situations that make it difficult to recognize and identify) 风险本身固有的主观性,因为不同的人对风险的理解不同。(risk is inherently subjective because risk perceptions invariably differ among individuals) 2.Sitkin 和 Pablo(1992)对风险行为决定性因素的重构 提出风险行为包括两个因素： 风险倾向 (risk propensity) 风险观念 (risk perception) 二者关系： 风险观念直接受个人的风险倾向的影响，风险倾向 又由决策者的风险意愿（即谋求风险还是避免风险 的倾向性的差异）、惯例（即处理风险决策的常规 方法）以及成果历史（即以往的冒险成功还是失败） 决定。 Risk perception is directly influenced by an individuals risk propensity ,and risk propensity is determined by the decision makers risk preferences(i.e.,stable differences in risk-seeking or risk-avoiding inclinations),inertia(i.e., routine ways of handling risky decisions), and outcome history (i.e., prior risk- taking successes or failures) 3.本研究的重点验证Sitkin 和 Pablo 的模型中的两个特殊的部分：风险意愿影响管理者的风险倾向的程度 ( the extent to which risk preferences influence managerial risk propensity)个体特性影响风险意愿的程度 (the extent to which individual characteristics influence risk preferences )四.假设（Hypotheses) 风险意愿与风险倾向 (Risk Preferences and Risk Propensity) 风险意愿的人口统计方面的决定性因素 (Demographic Determinants of Risk Preferences) 风险行为的工作方面的决定性因素 (Work-Related Determinants of Risk Behavior) 风险行为的组织方面的决定性因素 (Organizational Determinants of Risk Behavior) 风险行为的个性方面的决定性因素 (Personality Determinants of Risk Behavior)1.风险意愿与风险倾向假设1：风险意愿越高的管理者的风险倾向 越大 Hypothesis 1. Managers who express higher risk-willingness preferences will exhibit greater risk propensity 2.风险意愿的人口统计方面的决定性因素 假设 2A：年轻的管理者比年长的管理者表现出更大的冒 险意愿。 Hypothesis 2A. Younger managers will exhibit greater willingness to take risks than older managers. 假设 2B：男性管理者比女性管理者更愿意冒险。 Hypothesis 2B. Male managers will be more willing to take risks than female managers. 假设 2C：教育水平高的管理者比教育水平低的管理者更 愿意冒险。 Hypothesis 2C. Managers with higher levels of education will be more willing to take risks than managers with less education.假设 2D：持有现代文化价值观的管理者比持有传统价值观 的管理者更愿意冒险。 Hypothesis 2D. Managers with modern cultural values will be more willing to take risks than managers with traditional values.假设 2E：印度的管理者比新加坡的管理者更愿意冒险。 Hypothesis 2E. Managers in India will be more willing to take risks than managers in Singapore.3.风险行为的工作方面的决定性因素 假设 3A：管理者的风险意愿随其工作年限和 受雇年限的增加而降低。 Hypothesis 3A. Managerial risk willingness will decrease as both managerial tenure and length of employment increase. 假设 3B：权力越大的管理者和越接近组织层级 的顶层的管理者越愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 3B. Managers with greater authority and managers who are closer to the top of the organizational hierarchy will be more willing to seek risks.4.风险行为的组织方面的决定性因素假设 4A：管理者的风险意愿随产业而改变。 Hypothesis 4A. Managerial risk willingness will vary by industry.假设 4B：小公司的管理者比大公司的管理者更愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 4B. Managers in smaller firms will be more willing to seek risks than managers in larger firms.假设 4C：由政府控制的组织中的管理者不如非政府机构的 管理者愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 4C. Managers in government-controlled organizations will be less willing to seek risk than managers in nongovernmental agencies.假设 4D：认为其组织愿意冒险的管理者比认为其组织倾向于避免 风险的管理者更愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 4D. Managers who believe organizations take risks will be more willing to seek risks than managers who believe their organizations avoid risks.5.风险行为的个性方面的决定性因素假设 5A：成就需要高的管理者比成就动机低的管理者更愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 5A. Managers with higher achievement needs will be more willing to seek risk than managers with lower achievement motivation.假设 5B：有内部控制范围的管理者比有外部控制范围的管理者表现出更多的 风险意愿。 Hypothesis 5B. Managers with an internal LOC will exhibit greater risk willingness than those with an external LOC.假设 5C：越能容忍意义含糊的话的管理者比不能容忍意义含糊的话的管理者 更愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 5C. Managers with higher levels of ambiguity tolerance will be more willing to seek risks than managers who cannot tolerate ambiguity.假设 5D：A型管理者更愿意寻找风险。 Hypothesis 5D. Type A managers are more willing to seek risks. 注： A型行为，即人们表现出来的一种行为模式的程度，包括增加的竞争力， 时间紧迫感，急噪（Friedman & Rosenman,1974) (the degree to which people exhibit a pattern of behavior that includes increased competitiveness ,a sense of time urgency,and irritability )五.评估风险倾向（Assessing Risk Propensity)1.理解和度量风险存在困难，原因： 风险随其重要程度而变化 (Risk varies along key dimension) 每个人对构成风险的因素的看法不同 （Individuals differ in their perceptions of what constitutes a risky situation)2.本研究针对这一困难设计了一套风险评估工具， 包括十种假设 (scenarios)3.每种假设中都发生变化的因素十种假设：控制对不确定的项目的预算投资 （controlling a budget investment in an uncertain project)没有再销售所需的进口许可的保证就大量采购 (making a bulk purchase without the guarantee of an import license needed for resale)决定是否冒潜在的违反专利权的风险 (deciding whether to risk a potentially negative patent violation lawsuit)决定是否和竞争对手进行风险大的联合冒险 (deciding whether to undertake a risky joint venture with a competitor)继续还是终止对未成功的生产线的投资 (continuing or discontinuing investment in an unsuccessful product line)决定是进行一种风险大但有潜在利润的新产品的设计，还是继续已经 确定的设计方案. (choosing whether to go with a risky but potentially profitable new product design or continue with an established design ) 在处理有缺陷的消费品时，决定是否冒有潜在的消极的后果的风险. (deciding whether to risk potential negative consequences in dealing with a faulty consumer product)投资风险大的国外风险项目. (investing in a risky foreign venture)冒着工业生产不按正常程序进行的风险，以确保最初的成本储存. (risking an over-order of an industrial product to ensure initial cost savings)决定是否接受一个刚起步的公司提供的多风险的工作.（deciding whether to accept a risky job offer with a start-up company) 3.每种假设中下列因素是变化的： 决策者风险后果的程度 (the decision makers risk outcome magnitude) 个人面对的风险 (personal exposure to risk) 风险结果的不确定性 (risk outcome uncertainty) 管理者有关风险的预期 (managerial risk-related expectations)六.方法（Method) 参加者(Participants) 过程(Procedure) 量具(Measures)1.参加者 在印度和新加坡的2000名印度管理者。 在孟买、德里、加尔各答、班加罗尔和马德拉斯的196名印度管理者和在新加坡的89名印度管理者返还了有用的报告(n=285),返还率达14%。被试中85%是男性，79%已获得学士或硕士学位。参加者的平均年龄为38岁。管理者来自各行各业，其中大多数来自规模在1000人或1000人以下的公司，只有33%来自较大规模的企业。接近一半的被试是中层管理者。平均受雇年限是9年以上，在目前工作岗位上的平均工作年限超过4年，超过82%的管理者已从事目前的行业5年以上。所有被试的英语流利。2.过程 风险意愿： 用一个问题来评估个体的风险态度，即“与你的同事相比你怎样评价你的冒险愿望？”(How would you rate your willingness to take risks as compared to your colleagues?) 结果表明，被试都认为他们自己比同辈更可能追求风险。 风险倾向： 使用10个商业风险假设来评估管理者的风险行为，并建立了从属变量，通过计算被试风险性回答的分值来衡量风险倾向. (We created the dependent variable measuring risk propensity by summing the risky response scores across the 10 business scenarios for individual respondents) 操作核对：对选择风险选项和选择安全选项的参加者观念中的风险性进行了比较。结 果表明，参加者认为，事实上风险选择是比安全选择风险更大的行为过程。 (We compare perceived riskiness for participants who selected the risky choice and for participants who selected the safer option.It indicate that participants believed that the first option was, in fact, a riskier course of action than the safer option.) 为了测定该风险评估工具是否充分考虑了管理者风险行为的变动，本研究 对寻求风险者和避免风险者的频率进行了统计。 结果表明，多维风险测 量没有偏离答案的分布。 (We performed a frequency count for risk seekers and risk avoiders to determine if the risk-assessment instrument allow for sufficient variation of managerial risk behavior.The result suggests that the multidimensional risk measure did not skew or bias the distribution of responses.)3.量具人口统计方面：年龄(age)、性别(gender)、教育程度(education)、 国籍(nationality)工作方面：工作年限(tenure)、受雇年限(length of employment) 管理跨度(level to president)、管理者的地位 (managerial level)个性方面：成就需要(need for achievement)、控制范围(locus of control)、对意义含糊的话不能容忍的程度 (ambiguity intolerance)、A型行为(Type A behavior)组织方面：行业性质(nature of industry)、政府控制的程度 (degree of government control)、组织规模(organizational size)、 组织的风险意愿(organizational risk willingness)评估文化： 采用Nedd 和 Marsh设计的从传统主义到现代的21条指标 (21 items from the Traditionalism-Modernity Scale),一个选项 表示传统价值观(traditional values)，另一个表示现代价值 观(modern values), 这两项又转化为10个级别，较小的数值 表示传统的价值观，较大的数值表示现代价值观。七.结果和讨论(Results and Discussion) 1.结果： 管理者的冒险意愿与其冒险倾向无关。 Managerial willingness to take risks was unrelated to a managers tendency to take or to avoid risks. 因此，第一个假设不成立。 性别、国籍、文化明显预示了风险行为，解释了7%的风险意愿。证明人口统计方面的假设成立。 Gender, nationality and culture were significant predictors of risk behavior, explaining 7% of willingness to take risks. 个人工作方面的变量与风险意愿没有显著的关联。 None of the individual work-related variables were significantly related to risk preference.在组织方面的变量中，只有组织的冒险意愿明显预示了风险 意愿，解释了10%的风险倾向差异。 Of the organizational variables, perceived organizational willingness to take risks was the only significant predictor of risk preference, explaining an additional 10% of risk propensity variance.在个性变量中，管理者的成就需要和A型行为解释了9%的冒 险意愿差异。 Of the personality variables, managerial need for achievement and Type A behavior accounted for another 9% of the variance in willingness to take risks.不考虑实际行为的风险性，有风险意愿的管理者更可能了解 他们的行为是多风险的。 Managers who expressed preferences toward risks were significantly more likely to believe that their behavior were risky, regardless of the actual riskiness of their actions.不考虑实际的管理者的风险倾向，与有安全意愿的管理者相 比，有风险意愿的管理者感觉他们的选择的风险更多。 Regardless of actual managerial risk propensity , managers with preferences for risk perceived their selected options to be riskier than those with safer preferences.个人和环境因素直接或间接地影响风险倾向。 2.与预测相悖的几方面:(contrary to our predictions)人口统计方面的年龄和教育与管理者的风险意愿无关。 The demographic characteristics of age and education were not related to managerial risk preference.工作方面的工作年限、等级中的地位，以及组织方面的行业性质、政府控制的程度、组织的规模与管理者的风险意愿无关。 The work-related characteristics of nature of industry, amount of government control, and organizational size were not related to managerial risk preferences.有关个性特征中控制范围和对意义含糊的话不能容忍的程度的假设不成立。 Our hypotheses concerning the personality traits of LOC and ambiguity intolerance were not supported. 3.与假设相悖可能的原因：(1)风险研究中测量的很多个体特征和其它的个体差别一起变动。 Many of the individual characteristics measured in risk studies co-vary with other individual differences. 如：性别和年龄与其它的环境和个人变量普遍联系，以致很难测定变动的真正来源。 Gender and age are generally linked with other situational and personal variables, making it difficult to determine specific sources of variation.(2)研究设计的局限：(research design limitations)回答率相对较低 (response rate was relatively low)参加研究的管理者与未参加者间真实存在的差别。 (substantial differences between managers who participated in the study and managers who did not .)(3)样本数量有限。4.研究的局限性： 由于使用了抽样设计，研究所暗示的因果关系不能明确确定。 Because we used a cross-sectional design, causality as implied by this study cannot be firmly established. 使用管理者观念来评估独立变量和从属变量，这可能导致共同的方法偏见。 Another limitation of our study was in our use of managerial perceptions to assess both the independent and dependent variables,which may have resulted in a common methods bias. 风险观念的测量仅依赖一个可靠性无法证实的条款。 The risk perception measure relied on a single item whose reliability cannot be confirmed. 5.研究的价值 本研究证明了，尽管在特殊条件下管理者的风险行为难以预测，但总的风险倾向是可以测定的。 Although managerial risk behavior in specific situations is difficult to predict, it is possible to determine generalized risk propensity.战洪丽制作