The Implications of Cognitive-style Findings for Operational Research

Cognitive style refers to differences that can be perceived in individuals due to differing cognitive structures. There has been a large amount of research on how cognitive style affects managerial decision-making, particularly in the context of management information systems, but little or no attempt to relate these findings to operational research. This paper reviews the findings of cognitive-style research from the perspective of operational research, and draws a number of useful inferences concerning the matching of OR aids to managers, the presentation of information and recommendations, the use and acceptance of OR, and the structure of OR groups. Further, it is argued that cognitive-style findings help to give a justification to the move towards ‘soft’ approaches to analysis.

[1]  Daniel Robey,et al.  Measuring Managers' Minds: The Assessment Of Style in Human Information Processing , 1981 .

[2]  Harvey J. Brightman,et al.  Matching problem diagnostic tools to managers' decision styles: A contingency approach , 1988 .

[3]  Michael Jackson,et al.  Present positions and future prospects in management science , 1987 .

[4]  W. Hamilton,et al.  Cognitive Style and the Acceptance of Management Science Recommendations , 1973 .

[5]  R. Zmud.  INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AND MIS SUCCESS: A REVIEW OF THE EMPIRICAL LITERATURE* , 1979 .

[6]  Martin De Waele,et al.  Style complementarity as a design criterion for decision aids , 1980 .

[7]  Ian I. Mitroff,et al.  A Program for Research on Management Information Systems , 1973 .

[8]  John W. Slocum,et al.  Decision-Making Style and Acquisition of Information: Further Exploration of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator , 1981 .

[9]  Michael J. Ginzberg,et al.  Finding an adequate measure of or/ms effectiveness , 1978 .

[10]  Edward J. Lusk,et al.  The Effect of Cognitive Style and Report Format on Task Performance: The MIS Design Consequences , 1979 .

[11]  Colin Eden,et al.  Messing about in problems , 1983 .

[12]  Peter C. Bell,et al.  Visual Interactive Modelling in Operational Research: Successes and Opportunities , 1985 .

[13]  Ian I. Mitroff,et al.  Qualitative versus Quantitative Analysis for Management Science: Different Forms for Different Psychological Types , 1976 .

[14]  Donald L. Davis,et al.  User cognitive types for decision support systems , 1984 .

[15]  D. Robey.  Cognitive Style and DSS Design: A Comment on Huber's Paper , 1983 .

[16]  Jan H. B. M. Huysmans,et al.  The Effectiveness of the Cognitive-Style Constraint in Implementing Operations Research Proposals , 1970 .

[17]  Robert W. Zmud.  Note—On the Validity of the Analytic-Heuristic Instrument Utilized in “The Minnesota Experiments” , 1978 .

[18]  Rolfe Tomlinson,et al.  The Personality of O.R. Workers—Are They Different? , 1986 .

[19]  J. C. Henderson,et al.  The Influence of Decision Style on Decision Making Behavior , 1980 .

[20]  John Fripp,et al.  Problem-Solving Styles , 1982 .

[21]  M. Carlyn,et al.  An assessment of the Myers-Briggs Type indicator. , 1977, Journal of personality assessment.

[22]  B. K. Blaylock,et al.  COGNITIVE STYLE AND THE USEFULNESS OF INFORMATION , 1984 .

[23]  G. Huber.  Cognitive Style as a Basis for MIS and DSS Designs: Much ADO About Nothing? , 1983 .

[24]  I. Benbasat,et al.  Individual-Differences In The Use Of Decision Support Aids , 1982 .