05 executive and consumer decision processes p401_s

Executive and consumer decisionprocesses increasing usefulsensemaking by identifyingsimilarities and departuresElizabeth J WilsonAssociate Professor of Marketing The Wallace E Carroll School ofManagement Boston College Chestnut Hill Massachusetts USA

Arch G WoodsideProfessor of Marketing The Wallace E Carroll School ofManagement Boston College Chestnut Hill Massachusetts USA

Keywords Decision making Executives Consumers

Abstract Both marketing executives and consumers engage in a combination ofautomatic and strategic (ie controlled) thinking and doing processes when they becomeaware of problemsopportunities Similarities and departures in these processes amongexecutives and consumers occur through all stages of their decisions This articleincludes a paradigm describing similarities (Si) and departures (Di) in the stream ofthinking and behaviors of executives and consumers For example both executives andconsumers apply simplifying categorizing rules for defining decision contexts forrepetitive decision-making contexts categorization rules are more often formalized inwriting by executives but not by consumers The extant literature on the quality ofdecision processes offers several easy-to-apply but often unknown rules helpful for bothexecutives and consumers for improving the quality of their decisions these rules areexamined briefly within the framework of similarities and departures Formal study by allmarketers of such similarities and departures of consumerbusiness buying decisions maybe helpful for recognizing nuances critical in selling-buying processes for achievingdesired outcomes plusmn such as getting a sale or building a marketing relationship Thearticle describes ` direct researchrsquorsquo studies of decision processes implemented byexecutives and consumers direct research studies hold particular promise for uncoveringsimilarities and departures when comparing the two areas of study

Whether or not executives and consumers exhibit similarities or differences intheir decision making is useful to consider Critical nuances in conversationsthought processes and behaviors associated with individual business andconsumer case studies support the view that every decision process is unique(see Woodside 1996) Yet a compelling need to categorize and simplify exists

in both theory and management practice that results in grouping cases into amanageable number of processes Effective thinking requires building andcomparing typologies and categories for example associating unique decisionprocesses with executive versus consumer problem solving implies twoprocess categories that differ meaningfully This compelling need is to achievedeep understanding of what is happening what outcomes are likely to occur

and not occur and the reasoning (ie the implicit ` mental modelsrsquorsquo beingimplemented by the decision makers) (see Senge 1990) supporting theobserved decision processes

The purpose of this article is not to offer an in-depth review of the literature butrather to formally state empirically testable propositions of similarities and

The research register for this journal is available at

httpwwwmcbupcomresearch_registers

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

httpwwwemerald-librarycomft

The authors acknowledge the helpful suggestions by two reviewers andNicole Coviello on earlier drafts of this article

Decision making

Empirical examination

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS amp INDUSTRIAL MARKETING VOL 16 NO 5 2001 pp 401-414 MCB UNIVERSITY PRESS 0885-8624 401

An executive summary formanagers and executivereaders can be found at theend of this article

departures between executive and consumer decision processes The creation

and empirical examination of such propositions provides useful ground for

context-based models that describe the conditions resulting in observed

similarities and departures By the end of the discussion the thesis presented

here reaches two central conclusions

(1) Noteworthy similarities in executive and consumer decision processesare useful to describe and test empirically to achieve greatersensemaking of both processes

(2) For every similarity proposition stating a relevant departure propositionmay be supportable empirically

Consequently the study of similarities and departures in such decision

processes presents multiple meanings and cues plusmn the answer most useful to the

principal issue is that both similarities and departures should be expected in

studies of thinking deciding and behaviors among executives and consumers

How can we understand similarities and differences in decision

processesUsing ` direct researchrsquorsquo (Mintzberg 1979) to examine similarities and

departures in the decision processes of executives and consumers helps fulfill

the compelling need for understanding Direct research compels explicit model

building when studying the nuances behind the similarities and differences plusmn

and how both the executive and consumer might improve their thinking

processes Direct research includes face-to-face interviews with decision

makers plusmn usually multiple interviews of the same persons in two or moresessions andor interviews with additional persons mentioned during initial

interviews Direct research on decision making attempts to capture deepknowledge of the streams of thinking and actions of ` emergent strategiesrsquorsquo

(Mintzberg 1979) Such emergent strategies include the nuances arising from

transforming planning with implementing decisionsactions including

adjustments in thinking searching for information modifications to decision

rules last minute third-party influences and unexpected contextual influences

Mintzberg (1979) provides six basic themes for direct research

(1) The research is as purely descriptive as the researcher is able to make it

(2) The research relies on simple plusmn in a sense inelegant plusmn methodologies

(3) The research is as purely inductive as possible

(4) The research is systematic in nature plusmn specific kinds of data are collectedsystematically

(5) The research in its intensive nature ensures that systematic data aresupported by anecdotal data because theory building seems to requiredescription the richness that comes from anecdote

(6) The research seeks to synthesize to integrate diverse elements intoconfigurations of ideal or pure types

Because direct research runs counter to the dominant logic of empirical

positivism (ie surveys or experiments that test deductively developed

hypotheses) it may be surprising to learn that a substantial body of literature is

available in organizational marketing and consumer research that uses direct

research methods Direct research examples in organizational marketing

include the following studies

Based on data from direct research Morgenroth (1964) and Howard andMorgenroth (1968) develop binary flow diagrams and a computerprogram that accurately predict distribution-pricing decisions by GulfOil executives

lsquolsquoDirect researchrsquorsquo

402 JOURNAL OF BUSINESS amp INDUSTRIAL MARKETING VOL 16 NO 5 2001

Howard et al (1975) review a series of organizational marketing studiesemploying direct research plusmn which they label ` decision systemsanalysisrsquorsquo

Montgomery (1975) shows the stream of thoughts (including heuristicsand decisions) within one supermarket buying committee of executivesthrough their deliberations on whether or not to buy new groceryproducts

Woodside (1992) includes in-depth reports of ten direct-research studiesconducted in Europe and North America by a team of academicresearchers

Woodside and Wilson (2000) show what-if decision trees based on` thick descriptionsrsquorsquo of marketersrsquo and buyersrsquo decision processesinvolved in the same B2B relationships

Direct research examples in consumer research include the following studiesCox (1967) conducted face-to-face interviews with two housewives separatelyeach week for 20 weeks to gain deep understanding of their automatic andimplicit thoughts related to grocery purchases Bettmanrsquos (1970) doctoraldissertation employed direct research to learn the heuristics implemented bytwo housewives when deciding what to place in their supermarket shoppingcarts Woodside and Fleck (1979) twice interviewed two beer drinkersseparately in their homes plusmn each of the four interviews lasted three hours plusmn tolearn their thoughts feelings and actions regarding beer as a beveragecategory brand preferences productbrand purchase decisions and beerconsumption decisions Payne et al (1993) compare and contrast findings fromconsumer field and laboratory studies employing direct research methodsFournier (1998) employs direct research to learn how brands relate to howconsumers come to understand themselves

Examining similarities and departures in the decision processes amongexecutives and consumers may help to achieve more useful ` sensemakingrsquorsquo(Weick 1995) of real life decision making For example research onexecutivesrsquo and consumer decision processes include modeling the implicitthinking and deciding processes by decision makers Even when organizationalmarketers and consumers report following explicit rules for search and makingchoices thick descriptions of what happens in real life do not support theirreports (eg see Woodside 1992) Automatic thinking rather than explicit (or` strategicrsquorsquo) thinking (see Bargh 1994) appears throughout most phases ofdecision making and often the decision makers are unaware of how suchunintended thoughts are influencing their choices

Why is the direct research logic particularly valuable for studying executiveand consumer decision processes Part of the answer lies in the work byGilovich (1991) he identifies overconfidence in our individual perceptions ofreality as likely to be the single greatest shortcoming to improved knowingThe human tendency is very strong to believe we know even though what weknow ` isnrsquot sorsquorsquo (Gilovich 1991) Thus answers to closed-end questions byexecutives or consumers in a mail survey fail to account for what is reported bythese decision makers that just isnrsquot so as well as what they fail to report that isso Because direct research often combines the collection of supportingdocuments confirmation of thoughts from multiple interviewing of multiplerespondents and direct observation of some interactions of peopleparticipating in the processes direct research studies increase the quality ofdata reported compared to one-shot survey-based studies

Direct research often includes two or more face-to-face interviews with thesame respondents spaced over weeks or months The use of such a methodallows respondents to reflect over their answers given in earlier interviewsBecause reflection clarifies and deepens understanding (see Weick 1995)

Examples

Examining similarities anddepartures

Face-to-face interviews

JOURNAL OF BUSINESS amp INDUSTRIAL MARKETING VOL 16 NO 5 2001 403

respondents often will provide deeper insights into the reasons for theirdecisions and actions than expressed earlier Multiple interviews with the same

respondents permit these respondents to learn what they really believe and feelrelated to the topics covered in the study Weick (1979 p 5) captures this pointwell when discussing the criticality of retrospection ` How can I know what Ithink until I see what I sayrsquorsquo

Closely related to the principle of overconfidence is the ` fallacy of centralityrsquorsquo(ie experts underestimating the likelihood of an event because they would

surely know about the phenomenon if it actually were taking place) (seeWestrum 1982 Weick 1995)

This fallacy is all the more damaging in that it not only discourages curiosity on

the part of the person making it but also frequently creates in himher an

antagonistic stance toward the events in question (Westrum 1982 p 393)

Consequently thinking we know the answer to the issue of whether or notexecutives and consumers may be similar or different in their decisionprocesses is likely to be a false premise To overcome the overconfidence biasand the fallacy of centrality data and information from field studies are needed

on the decision processes enacted by executives and consumers Fortunatelyfield studies are available in the literature for both consumer and executivedecision processes (eg for reviews see Payne et al 1993 Woodside 1992)

Previous research on executive and consumer decision processesA number of field studies provide findings and conclusions about how

decisions are framed and made by consumers and executives Consequentlyrudimentary examinations of similarities and differences in the decisionsimplemented by consumers and executives can be compared Suchcomparisons are rudimentary because the studies reported were not done with

such comparisons in mind and usually different research methods were usedfor collecting data in the studies Still striking similarities and differences canbe noted when examining these studies Striking similarities include thefollowing observations

Both executives and consumers apply very limited search strategies toframe decision contexts to find solutions and to create rules fordeciding Simonrsquos (1957) principle of ` satisficingrsquorsquo rather thanmaximizing applies frequently in decision making by executives andconsumers

Both executives and consumers frequently create and implementnoncompensatory rather than compensatory heuristics for bothidentifying candidate solutions and making final choice decisions plusmn evenwhen they report using compensatory rules careful analysis of theimplemented decisions indicates that they donrsquot

Automatic mental processes (see Bargh 1994) rather than strategicthinking tends to be found in all phases of decision making by bothexecutives and consumers neither executives nor consumers frequentlyexplicitly consider alternative ways of framing and solving problems

For major decisions looping of thoughts back-and-forth to memory andthinking about external stimuli occurs frequently during decisionmaking for example in ` new taskrsquorsquo problems by executives or` extensive problem-solvingrsquorsquo situations experienced by consumers Suchfeedback loops are depicted in Figure 1 by left-to-right arrowsMintzberg (1979) in particular emphasizes that feedback loops are oftenfound in the decisions implemented by executives

Both executives and consumers frequently consult and seek approval ofothers before making a final decision (see Box 8 in Figure 1)

False premise


Figure 1 Decision processes by executives and consumers


Several differences in decision making between executives and consumers can

be identified in the cited literatures Here are some noteworthy examples

Formal written rules for searching for suppliers and evaluating vendorproposals are created for many categories of decisions withinorganizations but rarely by consumers

Formal performance audits by external audit professionals occurannually for purchasing and in many marketing organizations but rarelyare such audits done for consumer decisions

For many categories of decisions documentation of deliberations anddecision outcomes is more extensive in business organizations comparedto consumer households

Five formal propositions of similarities and departures are described in

separate sections following this introduction these five propositions are

summarized in Table I The discussion closes with implications of the

propositions for improving sensemaking to help plan and implement decisions

that achieve desired outcomes

Similarity Departure

Strategy and research

implications

S1 Thinking deciding and

actions by marketing and

purchasing executives and

household consumers often

include automatic as well as

conscious processing of

information

D1 Research evidence of

business and organizational

marketers and purchasers

engaging in meta-thinking is

more substantial compared

to household consumers

Recognizing the multiple

categories of thinking will

likely improve the quality of

decisions made by business

and industrial marketers few

may recognize the impact of

automatic thoughts

S2 Both executives and

consumers apply

simplifying categorizing

rules for defining decision

contexts

D2 For repetitive decision-

making contexts

categorization rules are more

often formalized in writing

by executives but not by

consumers

How the decision maker

frames the problem decision

has a large impact on hisher

willingness to consider new

vendors

S3 All decision makers

appear to create and use

simplifying decision rules

when faced with two or

more alternatives

D3 Formal written

evaluation and choice rules

are created and applied more

often by professional buyers

compared to household

consumers

Beware industrial buyers

may use formal written

choice rules for comparing

outcomes with informal

unwritten choice rules that

are in fact applied (see

Woodside and Wilson 2000)

S4 Decisions are often

made in groups of two or

more persons both in

industrial firms and

consumer households

D4 Formal group procedures

are enacted often within

industrial firms but not

households during meetings

to frame problems

opportunities evaluate

alternatives and make

choices

Influencing how a problem

is framed will likely affect

who is influential in the

industrial marketing group

decision-making (see Wilson

et al 1991)

S5 Post-experience

evaluations and assessments

of (dis)satisfaction occur

often among both industrial

firms and consumer

households

D5 Performance audits of

suppliers products purchased

and the professional buyers

marketers employed by the

organization are done more

frequently by industrial

firms but rarely if at all by

households

Assessment of best practices

for formal performance

audits done by business and

industrial firms will likely

improve marketing

strategies research is needed

on B2B performance

auditing behavior

Table I Executive and consumer decision processes similarities departures

and strategy implications

Differences in decisionmaking

Formal propositions


Propositions for research

S1 Automatic and controlled thinking D1 Meta-thinkingBargh (1989 1994) and Bargh et al (1996) empirically support the proposition

that most thinking deciding and doing processes include combining bits and

pieces of automatic and conscious processes Consequently all decision

makers can only partly report the motivations and steps taken in their thoughts

and actions because they are only partly aware of their own decision processes

` All decision makersrsquorsquo would include marketers and buyers in organizations

and consumers in households Such a view has profound implications for

theory research and marketing practice Evidence supporting this viewpoint is

available in the field of business and industrial marketing (see Woodside

1987 Woodside and McMurrian 2000) as well as household buying behavior

(Cohen 1966 Thelen and Woodside 1997)

S1 Thinking deciding and actions by marketing and purchasing executivesand household consumers often include automatic as well as consciousprocessing of information

Meta-thinking is defined as thinking about how thinking occurs including how

thinking should occur Meta-thinking by decision makers is a higher form of

conscious thought compared to conscious thoughts directly relevant to

immediate issues Here is an example of meta-thinking versus first-level

conscious thinking

Meta-thinking What supplier performance attributes really make a difference in my

own purchasing performance

First-level conscious thinking Does our major supplier provide on-time delivery

consistently

The creation of written checklists such as safety procedures that must be

followed by a pilot before lift-off is an example of meta thinking While

written procedures on how to think and act with customers and suppliers are

often prescribed in industrial marketing and purchasing departments written

guidelines of purchasing procedures are not found in households

Written evaluation methods using weighted compensatory models are required

in some industrial purchasing departments (see Woodside and Wilson 2000)

but likely are rarely available in households In the USA the National

Association of Purchasing Managers (NAPM) offers short courses and

educational certification programs to train managers on how to think and act

effectively as buyers and purchasing managers more than 30000 professional

buyers are ` Certified Purchasing Managersrsquorsquo Similar certification programs

for training household consumers do not appear to be available

D1 Evidence of business and organizational marketers and purchasersengaging in meta-thinking is more substantial compared to householdconsumers

S2 Use of simplifying categorization rules D2 Formalizing such rulesBoth executives and consumers appear to use a few framing rules when

deciding the nature of the problem or opportunity before them Learning these

problemopportunity framing rules has important implications for influencing

the thinking and subsequent actions of both managers and consumers For

example if a buyer perceives an upcoming purchase as a standard re-order

from current suppliers a new vendor may need to influence the buyer to

reframe the purchase as a ` new task buyrsquorsquo (Howard and Sheth 1969) before

the buyer will consider the new vendorrsquos product or service This implication

follows from the related proposition that the amount of effort in searching for

alternatives and in evaluating alternatives is likely to be influenced by how

decision makers frame problems

Automatic and consciousprocesses

Written checklists


S2 Both executives and consumers apply simplifying categorizing rules fordefining decision contexts

Three problem dimensions may dominate how decision makers frame aproblemopportunity (see Wilson et al 2000) familiarity financialcommitment and technical complexity Assuming two levels are used as a wayof simplifying each of these three dimensions then eight framing categories

may be identified See Figure 2 Such problem framing thoughts are noted inboth the industrial and consumer research literatures (see Woodside 1992Payne et al 1993)

D2 For repetitive decision-making contexts categorization rules are moreoften formalized in writing by executives but not by consumers

Several rationales may be suggested for written problemopportunity framingrules occurring for executives but not for consumers The formal requirementslisted in the occupational specialty often require written order routines that

differ by product categories (ie raw materials versus MRO items) forpurchasers and buyers in firms but not in households Most householdconsumers may view the purchase of low-priced consumer goods to beperipheral actions not worth the effort of creating and following writtenguidelines Training of new professional buyers is facilitated often by detailedwritten order routines for all product categories such written order routinesmay be prepared rarely for household consumers because training in buying ismore informal and one-on-one for example parent-to-child and sibling-to-

sibling

S3 Use of simplifying evaluationchoice rules D3 Formalizing evaluation

choice rules

S3 All decision makers appear to create and use simplifying decision ruleswhen faced with two or more alternatives

For example both professional buyers and household consumers create and usesimple conjunctive rules to eliminate all but a few possible suppliers or brandswhen faced with many alternatives (ie more than seven or so) A conjunctiverule sets minimum levels of performance that must be met or surpassed in theproduct provided as well as supplier service performance Consequently a` short listrsquorsquo or ` consideration setrsquorsquo of three to five alternatives is formed formore in-depth evaluation using some other evaluation and choice rule Aweighted compensatory or lexicographic rule may be applied for evaluating thealternatives in the short list (consideration set) See Payne et al (1993) for a

discussion of these heuristics

Thus a combination of evaluation and choice rules may occur often for bothexecutives and household consumers when faced with many alternatives toevaluate even though printed forms using weighted compensatory rules forevaluating competing vendors likely are printed only among industrial firmsnot households Consequently organizational buyers and household consumersdepart from each other in the degree of formalization in creating weightedcompensatory heuristics

D3 Formal written evaluation and choice rules are created and appliedmore often by professional buyers compared to household consumers

Organizational marketers should be aware that the final evaluations fromcustomersrsquo written weighted compensatory rules often do not reflect the finalchoices and purchase agreements (see Woodside and Wilson 2000) plusmn theoutcomes of using the weighted compensatory rules may be revised to account

for seemingly idiosyncratic preferences in the organization See Woodside andSherrell (1980) for such choice behavior examples Nevertheless buyers usingweighted compensatory rules report that doing the necessary calculations is

Problem dimensions

Formal requirements

Evaluation and choice rules


Figure 2 An inductive paradigm of organizationa l buying frames


helpful because the approach forces them to consider more product and serviceattributes than they would consider without the use of such rules

S4 Meetings for evaluating alternative products and suppliers

D4 Formalizing rules of discussion and application of group choice rules

S4 Decisions are often made in groups of two or more persons both inindustrial organizations and households

Even when all members of a group name one person as the sole decisionmaker other members of the group and group discussion are likely to influencethe choices made (Wilson et al 1991)

D4 Formal group procedures are enacted often within industrial firms butnot in households for meetings to frame problemsopportunities evaluatealternatives and make choices

Written procedures of discussion and minutes of conversations and decisionoutcomes (including formal purchase agreements) often follow from cross-departmental meetings in business organizations more often than in meetingsof household members To achieve effective decisions and savings in bulkpurchases meetings for the purpose of evaluating and selecting suppliers mayextend across several manufacturing locations for an industrial firm on anannual basis for several product categories (see Woodside and Samuel 1981)Such meetings may be held rarely by adult siblings living in separatehouseholds However Sirsi et al (1996) offer an exception to this observationin their direct research report of a consumer cooperative buying organization

S5 Evaluating outcomes of buying transactions and quality-in-use

experiences D5 Formal performance audits

S5 Post-experience evaluations and assessments of (dis)satisfaction occuroften among both industrial firms and households

Some judgments influence intentions toward suppliers as well as buyingspecific products Consequently industrial and consumer marketers oftendesign marketing information systems to measure customer satisfaction withuse of products and services plusmn including service provided by salespersons

D5 Performance audits of suppliers products purchased and the profes-sional buyersmarketers employed by the organization are done morefrequently by industrial firms and rarely if ever done by households

Written guidelines are available on how to evaluate the performance ofmarketers professional buyers and the strategy of the organization forindustrial firms much of the popular business literature is devoted to reports ofsuch performance audits (see Woodside and Sakai 2001) Compared to thebusiness-to-business literature the written reports on the effectiveness andefficiency of buying decisions by households are less extensive

Implications for business and industrial marketing strategyOf course the five sets of identified similarities and departures are not intendedto be exhaustive Many additional sets may be described For example manykey relationships among variables involved in decision processes may gounrecognized by participants when making decisions (eg see Senge 1990Hall 1984) However in many industrial contexts systems analyses (egmathematical modeling and simulations) have been applied for identifying keyleverage points affecting outcomes desired by executives (eg see Hall 1984)such work does not appear to be available in the consumer research literatureTaking the time and making the effort to study feedback loops may be criticalfor achieving deep sensemaking of how our decisionsactions result in desiredand undesired outcomes (see Senge 1990) Also many executives in industrial

Meetings

Additional sets


firms and household consumers resist adoption of productsservices built on

new technology platforms proven to be superior to installed productsservices(see Ram 1987 Woodside 2000a) However such resistance may lead to

decline and death of business organizations (see Christensen 1997) but rarely

among household consumers

The main benefit from studying and comparing both the industrial andconsumer research literatures may be gaining deep understanding of the

subtleties and unexpected interdependencies in thinking deciding talking and

actions of decision makers Most likely sensemaking skills are improved fromlearning the similarities and departures in the processes of both categories of

decision making Thus the issue of what similarities and departures in

decisions and actions occur among business executives and household

consumers may be more useful than advocating that the study of decisionmaking by executives is distinct from the study of decision making by

consumers

Business and industrial strategists are likely to increase their skills in making

effective decisions from studying both the industrial marketing and theconsumer research literature Too often the thought is expressed ` My

company situation is unique plusmn it would not be useful to consider the behavior

of other firms let alone household consumers in similar situations because the

situation is really unique to my companyrsquorsquo Expressing such a mental modeloften indicates an inability to create and learn from analogies Better to start by

casting a wider net let us admit that important similarities in decisions and

behaviors do exist between business firms and household consumers whilerecognizing that success lies also in studying the nuances occurring in the

unique combinations of events in each case study (seeRagin (1987) for a complete development of this point)

References

Bargh JA (1989) ` Conditiona l automaticity varieties of automatic influence in social

perception and cognitionrsquorsquo in Uleman JS and Bargh JA (Eds) Unintended Thought

Guilford Press New York NY pp 3-51

Bargh JA (1994) ` The four horsemen of automaticityrsquorsquo in Wyer RS and Srull TK (Eds)

Handbook of Social Cognition Erlbaum Hillsdale NJ pp 1-40

Bargh JA Chen M and Burrows L (1996) ` Automaticity of social behavior direct effects

of trait construct and stereotype activation on actionrsquorsquo Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology Vol 71 No 2 pp 230-44

Bettman JR (1970) ` Information processing models of consumer behaviorrsquorsquo Journal of

Marketing Research Vol 7 No 3 pp 370-6

Christensen CM (1997) The Innovatorrsquos Dilemma Harvard Business School Press

Cambridge MA

Cohen L (1966) ` The level of consciousness a dynamic approach to the recall techniquersquorsquo

Journal of Marketing Research Vol 3 No 2 pp 142-8

Cox DF (1967) ` Risk handling in consumer behavior plusmn an intensive study of two casesrsquorsquo in

Cox DF (Ed) Risk Taking and Information Handling in Consumer Behavior Harvard

University Graduate School of Business Administration Boston MA pp 18-57

Fournier S (1998) ` Consumers and their brands developing relationship theory in consumer

researchrsquorsquo Journal of Consumer Research Vol 24 No 4 pp 343-74

Gilovich T (1991) How We Know What Isnrsquot So Free Press New York NY

Hall RI (1984) ` The natural logic of management policy making its implications for the

survival of an organization rsquorsquo Management Science Vol 30 pp 905-27

Howard JA and Morgenroth WM (1968) ` Information processing model of executive

decisionrsquorsquo Management Science Vol 14 March pp 416-28

Howard JA and Sheth JN (1969) The Theory of Buyer Behavior Wiley New York NY

Howard JA Hulbert J and Farley JU (1975) ` Organizationa l analysis and information-

systems design a decision-proces s perspectiversquorsquo Journal of Business Research Vol 3

No 2 pp 133-48

Learning from analogies


Montgomery DF (1975) ` New product distribution an analysis of supermarket buyer

decisionsrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Research Vol 12 August pp 255-64

Morgenroth WM (1964) ` A method for understanding price determinants rsquorsquo Journal of


Mintzberg H (1979) ` An emerging strategy of `directrsquo researchrsquorsquo Administrative Science

Quarterly Vol 24 December pp 582-9

Payne JW Bettman J and Johnston E (1993) The Adaptive Decision-maker Cambridge

Press New York NY

Ragin CC (1987) The Comparative Method University of California Press Berkeley CA

Ram S (1987) ` A model of innovation resistancersquorsquo in Wallendorf M and Anderson P

(Eds) Advances in Consumer Research Vol 14 Association for Consumer Research

Provo UT pp 193-7

Senge PM (1990) The Fifth Discipline Doubleday New York NY

Simon HA (1957) Administrative Behavior Macmillan New York NY

Simon HA (1990) ` Invariant s of human behaviorrsquorsquo Annual Review of Psychology Vol 41

pp 1-19

Sirsi AK Ward JC and Reingen PH (1996) ` Microcultura l analysis of variation in

sharing of causal reasoning about behaviorrsquorsquo Journal of Consumer Research Vol 22

No 4 pp 345-72

Thelen EM and Woodside AG (1997) ` What evokes the brand or storersquorsquo International

Journal of Research in Marketing Vol 14 November pp 125-43

Weick KE (1979) The Social Psychology of Organizing McGraw Hill New York NY

Weick KE (1995) Sensemaking in Organizations Sage Thousand Oaks CA

Westrum R (1982) ` Social intelligence about hidden eventsrsquorsquo Knowledge Vol 3 No 3

pp 381-400

Wilson EJ Lilien GL and Wilson DT (1991) ` Developing and testing a contingency

paradigm of group choice in organizationa l buyingrsquorsquo Journal of Marketing Research

Vol 28 November pp 452-66

Wilson EJ McMurrian RC and Woodside AG (2000) ` How business-to-business buyers

frame problems and the influence of value-added customer services (VACS) on supplier

choicersquorsquo in Arch GW (Ed) Designing Winning Products Elsevier Science Amsterdam

pp 245-54

Woodside AG (1987) ` Customer awareness and choice of industrial distributors rsquorsquo

Industrial Marketing amp Purchasing Vol 2 No 2 pp 47-68

Woodside AG (Ed) (1992) Mapping How Industry Buys JAI Press Stamford CT

Woodside AG (Ed) (1996) Case Studies for Industrial and Business Marketing JAI Press

Stamford CT

Woodside AG (2000a) ` When superior new technologie s are rejectedrsquorsquo in Woodside AG

(Ed) Designing Winning Products Elsevier Science Amsterdam

Woodside AG and Fleck RA Jr (1979) ` The case approach to understanding brand

choicersquorsquo Journal of Advertising Research Vol 19 No 2 pp 23-30

Woodside AG and McMurrian RC (2000) ` Automatic cognitive processing and choice of

suppliers by business-to-business customersrsquorsquo in Woodside AG (Ed) Designing

Winning Products Elsevier Science Amsterdam pp 245-54

Woodside AG and Sakai M (2001) Meta-Evaluation Sagamore Publishing Champaign

IL

Woodside AG and Samuel DM (1981) ` Observation s of corporate procurementrsquorsquo

Industrial Marketing Management Vol 10 pp 191-205

Woodside AG and Sherrell DC (1980) ` New replacement part buyingrsquorsquo Industrial

Marketing Management Vol 9 pp 123-32

Woodside AG and Wilson EJ (2000) ` Constructing thick descriptions of marketersrsquo and

buyersrsquo decision processes in business-to-busines s relationshipsrsquorsquo Journal of Business amp

Industrial Marketing Vol 15 No 5 pp 354-69

amp


departures between executive and consumer decision processes The creation

and empirical examination of such propositions provides useful ground for

context-based models that describe the conditions resulting in observed

similarities and departures By the end of the discussion the thesis presented

here reaches two central conclusions

(1) Noteworthy similarities in executive and consumer decision processesare useful to describe and test empirically to achieve greatersensemaking of both processes

(2) For every similarity proposition stating a relevant departure propositionmay be supportable empirically

Consequently the study of similarities and departures in such decision

processes presents multiple meanings and cues plusmn the answer most useful to the

principal issue is that both similarities and departures should be expected in

studies of thinking deciding and behaviors among executives and consumers

How can we understand similarities and differences in decision

processesUsing ` direct researchrsquorsquo (Mintzberg 1979) to examine similarities and

departures in the decision processes of executives and consumers helps fulfill

the compelling need for understanding Direct research compels explicit model

building when studying the nuances behind the similarities and differences plusmn

and how both the executive and consumer might improve their thinking

processes Direct research includes face-to-face interviews with decision

makers plusmn usually multiple interviews of the same persons in two or moresessions andor interviews with additional persons mentioned during initial

interviews Direct research on decision making attempts to capture deepknowledge of the streams of thinking and actions of ` emergent strategiesrsquorsquo

(Mintzberg 1979) Such emergent strategies include the nuances arising from

transforming planning with implementing decisionsactions including

adjustments in thinking searching for information modifications to decision

rules last minute third-party influences and unexpected contextual influences

Mintzberg (1979) provides six basic themes for direct research

(1) The research is as purely descriptive as the researcher is able to make it

(2) The research relies on simple plusmn in a sense inelegant plusmn methodologies

(3) The research is as purely inductive as possible

(4) The research is systematic in nature plusmn specific kinds of data are collectedsystematically

(5) The research in its intensive nature ensures that systematic data aresupported by anecdotal data because theory building seems to requiredescription the richness that comes from anecdote

(6) The research seeks to synthesize to integrate diverse elements intoconfigurations of ideal or pure types

Because direct research runs counter to the dominant logic of empirical

positivism (ie surveys or experiments that test deductively developed

hypotheses) it may be surprising to learn that a substantial body of literature is

available in organizational marketing and consumer research that uses direct

research methods Direct research examples in organizational marketing

include the following studies

Based on data from direct research Morgenroth (1964) and Howard andMorgenroth (1968) develop binary flow diagrams and a computerprogram that accurately predict distribution-pricing decisions by GulfOil executives

lsquolsquoDirect researchrsquorsquo










Examples





















False premise
















implications







information













automatic thoughts


consumers apply



contexts


making contexts




consumers





vendors





more alternatives

D3 Formal written





consumers












consumer households





to frame problems



choices






et al 1991)

S5 Post-experience




firms and consumer

households








households





improve marketing


on B2B performance

auditing behavior




Formal propositions



















conscious thinking




consistently



























Written checklists








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp










Examples





















False premise
















implications







information













automatic thoughts


consumers apply



contexts


making contexts




consumers





vendors





more alternatives

D3 Formal written





consumers












consumer households





to frame problems



choices






et al 1991)

S5 Post-experience




firms and consumer

households








households





improve marketing


on B2B performance

auditing behavior




Formal propositions



















conscious thinking




consistently



























Written checklists








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp



















False premise
















implications







information













automatic thoughts


consumers apply



contexts


making contexts




consumers





vendors





more alternatives

D3 Formal written





consumers












consumer households





to frame problems



choices






et al 1991)

S5 Post-experience




firms and consumer

households








households





improve marketing


on B2B performance

auditing behavior




Formal propositions



















conscious thinking




consistently



























Written checklists








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp
















implications







information













automatic thoughts


consumers apply



contexts


making contexts




consumers





vendors





more alternatives

D3 Formal written





consumers












consumer households





to frame problems



choices






et al 1991)

S5 Post-experience




firms and consumer

households








households





improve marketing


on B2B performance

auditing behavior




Formal propositions



















conscious thinking




consistently



























Written checklists








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp



















conscious thinking




consistently



























Written checklists








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp








sibling


choice rules








Problem dimensions

Formal requirements



















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp


















Meetings

Additional sets












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp












consumers









References












Cambridge MA
















No 2 pp 133-48










Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp









Press New York NY




Provo UT pp 193-7




pp 1-19



No 4 pp 345-72






pp 381-400







pp 245-54





Stamford CT









IL








amp


05 executive and consumer decision processes p401_s

Documents

theobserved decision

marketing executives

processes amongexecutives

decision makers

behaviors of executives

quality ofdecision processes

similarities si

executives andconsumers