Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
ABSTRACT This paper presents a framework for the comparative analysis of strategic decision‐making processes. It draws together and integrates predominant but previously disparate theories of decision‐making. Examples are given of how decision‐making processes may be characterized and, hence, facilitate comparison across all types of strategic decisions. Explanation of why decision processes may differ is from two perspectives. First, the complexity of the topic may lead to particular characteristics of the decision process. Secondly, the cleavage of interests which a topic arouses may also lead to particular aspects of decision processes. We argue that each decision topic has varying levels of both complexity and cleavage and four examples of strategic decisions are analyzed on these dimensions. We identify four profiles of decision‐making processes associated with varying levels of complexity and cleavage and we finally suggest that our model may explain and empirically demonstrate variations across a large number of diverse strategic decisions.
Astley et al. (Fri,) studied this question.