組織決策嵌陷的陷溺與挽救歷程－個案研究取向

The Escalation and Turnaround Process of Organizational Decision Entrapment: Case Study Approach

10.6147/JHRM.2003.0302.02

林家五(Chia-Wu Lin)；鄭伯壎(Bor-Shiuan Cheng)；陳淑琪(Grace Chen)

決策嵌陷歷程 ； 承諾續擴 ； 個案研究 ； 模式契合 ； Decision making ； Entrapment process ； Escalation of commitment ； Case study method ； Pattern matching

人力資源管理學報

3卷2期（2003 / 06 / 01）

27 - 56

繁體中文

本研究主要的目的是探討組織發生決策嵌陷行為的歷程，所謂的決策嵌陷行為，就是當決策者在面對一連串負面的行動後果，仍然執著於先前的抉擇，投入更多的資源與心力，而導致越陷越深的現象。將過去個體層次研究決策嵌陷的結果整理，可以發現組織發生決策嵌陷行為主要有兩大原因，一是認知捷思效果導致，另一個是承諾續擴的因素影響。但是，這樣的論點對於為何組織層次也會發生決策嵌陷現象，顯然解釋力不足。因此，Ross & Staw(1986)提出一個決策嵌陷行為的動態歷程模式，他們認為有四類決定要素影響著嵌陷行為的發生，這四類決定要素分別為，計畫要素、心理要素、社會要素以及結構要素。因此，本研究以該動態模式為基礎，捷運木柵線為對象，採用個案分析的方式，收集過去20年內超過1000多篇的剪報，來驗證此一模式。研究結果除了確認了Ross與Staw(1986)模式的四個要素，以及要素出現的順序之外，也發現其他新的因素，例如，愛面子、政治力支持、結構惰性等。最後，研究者依據資料提出了七項新的命題。

This paper explore the processes of decision entrapment behavior, it means when decision makers faced the negative result of their prior choices and still want to invest more resources on it. The reasons why people adapt such entrapment behavior are two main concerns, one is cognitive heuristic effect, and the other is the escalation of commitment. But both of theses two approaches are too narrow, they only focus on individual level factors. Therefore, Ross & Staw (1986) proposed a new dynamic process model of the entrapment behavior, which cover individual and organizational level. They propose four determinants affect the entrapment behavior, which are project determinant, psychological determinant, social determinant, and structural determinant. The object of this research is to verify the Ross & Staw's model through the case study method. We choose the Mass-Transportation System in Taipei as the entrapment case. The MRT Mucha Line is famous with its most expensive cost in the whole world. And this medium capacity system also did not fit into the other system in Taipei, which cause much more resources waste and customers inconvenient. We collect over 1000 documents in the past 20 years, which are from the newspaper, magazine, and some official documents. Then we used the pattern matching as the analysis concept. The results are four determinants have been supported, but not all of the sub-factors are also supported. And the sequential of determinant appearance were not like the model expected. We also find the new factors that are Taiwan people particular owed, such as face-saving (in Chinese culture context), political factor, and the structural inertia. Finally, we draw four propositions from the results. 1.If political factor affect the decision process too early, it will cause more resources waste and make withdraw more difficult. 2. In the structural determinant, professional technology and knowledge should be add into it. And if these two factors affect the entrapment process in the early stage and are not replaceable, then it will make entrapment behavior more serious. 3. When decision-maker does not have to be responsible for the failure choice, and his character are face-saving, dominant leadership style, then he will justify the choice and his behavior. The entrapment behavior will last. 4. When the organization involves the entrapment process, it also has the technical and knowledge superior perception then the organization will tend to ignore the negative information. And the entrapment process will keep going on.

1. Arkes, H. R.,Blumer, C.(1985).The psychology of sunk cost.Organizational Bechavior and Human Decision Processes,35,124-140.
2. Baumeister, R.(1982).A self-presentational view of social phenomena.Psychological Bulletin,91,3-26.
3. Bazerman, M. H.,Beekun, R. I.,Schoorman, F. D.(1982).Performance evaluation in a dynamic context: A laboratory study of the impact of a prior commitment to the rater.Journal of Applied Psychology,67,873-876.
4. Bazerman, M. H.,Giuliano, T.,Appelman, A.(1984).Escalation in individual and group decisions making.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,33,141-152.
5. Brockner, J.,Houser, R.,Birnbaum, G.,Lloyd, K.,Deitcher, J.,Nathanson, S.,Rubin, J. Z.(1986).Escalation of commitment to an ineffective course of action: The effect of feedback having negative implication for self-identity.Administrative Science Quarterly,31,109-126.
6. Brockner, J.,Nathanson, S.,Friend, A.,Harbeck, J.,Samuelson, C.,Houser, R.,Bazerman, M. H.,Rubin, J. Z.(1984).The role of modeling process in the "knee deep in the big muddy" phenomenon.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,33,77-99.
7. Brockner, J.,Rubin, J. Z.(1985).Entrapment in escalating conflicts: A social psychological analysis.New York:Springer-Verlag.
8. Brockner, J.,Rubin, J. Z.,Lang, E.(1981).Face-saving and entrapment.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,17,68-79.
9. Brockner, J.,Shaw, M. C.,Rubin, J. Z.(1979).Factors affecting withdrawal from an escalating conflict: Quitting before it`s too late.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,15,492-503.
10. Caldwell, D. F.,O`Reilly, C. A.(1982).Response to failure: The effects of choice and responsibility on impression management.Academy of Management Journal,25,121-136.
11. Campbell, D. T.(1975)."Degrees of Freedom" and the case study.Comparative Political Science,8,178-193.
12. Christensen-Szalanski, J. J.,Northcraft, G. B.(1985).Patient compliance behavior: The effect of time on patients` values of treatment regimens.Social Science of Medicine,21,263-273.
13. Conlon, E. J.,Wolf, G.(1980).The moderating effects of strategy, visibility, and involvement on allocation behavior: An extension of Staw`s escalation paradigm.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,26,172-192.
14. Festinger, L.(1954).A theory of social comparison processes.Human Relations,7,117-140.
15. Houser, R. F.(1982).Unpublished master`s thesis, Tufts University.
16. Kahneman, D.,Tversky, A.(1979).Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk.Econometrica,47,263-291.
17. Northcraft, G. B.,Wolf, G.(1984).Dollars, sense, and sunk cost: A life cycle model of resource allocation decision.Academy of Management Review,9,225-234.
18. Ross, J.,Staw, B. J.(1993).Organizational escalation and exit: Lessons from the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant.Academy of Management Journal,36,701-732.
19. Ross, J.,Staw, B. J.(1986).Expo 86: An escalation prototype.Administrative Science Quarterly,31,274-297.
20. Rubin, J. Z.,Brockner, J.(1975).Factors affecting entrapment in waiting situation: The Rosencrantz and Guildenstern effect.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,31,1054-1063.
21. Schlenker, B. R.(1980).Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations.Monterey, CA:Brook/Cole.
22. Snyder, M.,L. Wrightsman,K. Deaux （Eds.）(1981).Social psychology in the 80s.Monterey, CA:Brook/Cole.
23. Staw, B. M.(1981).The escalation of commitment to a course of action.Academy of Management Review,6,577-587.
24. Staw, B. M.(1976).Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance,16,27-44.
25. Staw, B. M.,Fox, F.(1977).Escalation: Some determinants to a previously chosen course of action.Human Relations,30,431-450.
26. Staw, B. M.,Ross, J.(1987).Behavior in escalation situation.Research in Organizational Behavior,9,39-78.
27. Staw, B. M.,Ross, J.(1980).Commitment in an experimenting society: An experiment on the attribution of leadership from administrative scenarios.Journal of Applied Psychology,65,249-260.
28. Staw, B. M.,Ross, J.(1978).Commitment to a policy decision: A multi-theoretical perspective.Administrative Science Quarterly,23,40-64.
29. Teger, A.(1980).Too much invested to quit.New York:Pergamon.
30. Thaler, R.(1980).Toward a positive theory of consumer choice.Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,1,39-60.
31. Whyte, G.(1986).Escalating commitment to a course of action: A reinterpretation.Academy of Management Review,11,311-321.
32. Yin, R. K.(1989).Case study research: Design and methods.Newbury Park, CA:Sage.
33. 中央日報（1991/06/11）
34. 中央日報（1988/04/21）
35. 中時晚報（1991/09/02）
36. 中時晚報（1991/10/10）
37. 中時晚報（1994/03/21）
38. 中時晚報（1991/05/23）
39. 中國時報（1995/05/23）
40. 中國時報（1993/10/10）
41. 中國時報（1989/04/21）
42. 中國時報（1994/01/18）
43. 中國時報（1993/12/16）
44. 中國時報（1991/11/26）
45. 中國時報（1993/10/12）
46. 中國時報（1993/08/05）
47. 中國時報（1991/05/08）
48. 中國時報（1988/01/21）
49. 中國時報（1987/01/30）
50. 中國時報（2000/05/10）
51. 中國時報（1991/01/09）
52. 中國時報（1988/09/12）
53. 中華日報（1987/08/11）
54. 中華日報（1990/10/18）
55. 中華日報（1991/08/13）
56. 民生報（1992/05/23）
57. 民生報（1992/08/10）
58. 自由時報（1994/01/13）
59. 自由時報（1993/04/13）
60. 自由時報（1993/04/17）
61. 自由時報（1993/10/20）
62. 自由時報（1993/10/24）
63. 自立早報（1993/11/30）
64. 林家五、鄭伯壎、蔡明宏(2000)。決策嵌陷的成因分析。管理學報，17(3)，515-546。
65. 青年日報（1992/07/26）
66. 臺灣日報（1992/01/21）
67. 臺灣日報（1991/06/08）
68. 臺灣日報（1991/01/29）
69. 臺灣時報（1993/07/07）
70. 臺灣時報（1992/06/04）
71. 臺灣時報（1989/10/13）
72. 臺灣時報（1992/03/06）
73. 聯合晚報（1993/12/17）
74. 聯合報（1991/10/16）
75. 聯合報（1990/11/12）
76. 聯合報（1993/02/27）
77. 聯合報（1990/01/11）
78. 聯合報（1993/07/26）
79. 聯合報（1991/07/25）
80. 聯合報（1990/03/04）