Upper echelons theory describes that executives are influenced by their
personalities and perceptions in strategic decision-making. One
subordinate notion of upper echelons theory is that objectively observable characteristics of executives can be used as a valid approximation of executives' personalities and thereby serve as a predictor for strategic decision-making. However, this notion has been questioned, and there has been demand for more direct measures of strategic decision makers' personalities and the psychological processes underlying strategic decision-making. This paper aims at contributing to the explanation of these psychological processes by defining dimensions to profile top executives' personalities and developing a theory that explains the relationship between this personality profile, anger and decision-making processes of top executives. Our central argument is that top executives' personality is linked to the decision-making process, and that anger mediates this relationship. This contributes to current research by (1) suggesting a comprehensive range of profiling dimensions, (2) investigating the influence of this personality on the emotion anger during the strategic decision-making process, and (3) analyzing if and how this personality directly influences strategic decision-making processes.
How do top-managers cognize on their organizations' role in the societal environment? As of today, we lack sufficient psychometric data about such perceived impact on society. In this paper, data from top managers from 40 organizations (half private, half public) are presented. In our empirical study we applied a version of the
Kelly-Grid to elicit managerial cognitions. The richness of constructs points to a broad awareness of distinct impacts on society. The study also shows that subjects tend to assume that "the wider public" does not differentiate between distinct value dimensions and is basically "in line" with the top management views - unless the organization is confronted with concrete public critique. This phenomenon of "idealized value merger" is interpreted from different theoretical viewpoints.
Die technische und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung von Robotern nimmt im Rahmen der vierten industriellen Revolution (Industrie 4.0) weltweit zu. Diese Entwicklung wirft zahlreiche neue Rechtsfragen auf. Deshalb setzen sich immer mehr Rechtswissenschaftler mit den rechtlichen Konsequenzen des Einsatzes von Robotern, dem Roboterrecht, auseinander. Rechtliche Fragen stellen sich etwa bei der Zulassung von selbstfahrenden Fahrzeugen oder Drohnen. Sind Roboter erst mal zugelassen, so will man wissen, wer für Unfälle mit Robotern haftet. Auch am Arbeitsplatz muss klar sein, wer für Entscheide und Weisungen von robotischen Chefs einsteht. Die Einführung eines Rechtsstatus für Roboter, der sogenannten E-Personhood, ist einer von vielen Lösungsansätzen für die Haftungsfrage. Nicht nur am Arbeitsplatz, sondern in sämtlichen Lebensbereichen sind sensorgetriebene Roboter eine Herausforderung für Datenschutz und Privatsphäre. Dieser Herausforderung wird denn auch zu Recht viel Forschung gewidmet.
