Rationality in decision-making within interorganisational networks

dc.citation.epage14
dc.citation.issue2
dc.citation.spage9
dc.contributor.affiliationLviv Polytechnic National University
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversity of Silesia in Katowice (Poland)
dc.contributor.authorDanylovych-Kropyvnytska, M.
dc.contributor.authorLimański, A.
dc.coverage.placenameLviv
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-31T08:20:35Z
dc.date.available2018-05-31T08:20:35Z
dc.date.created2017
dc.date.issued2017
dc.description.abstractA networking structure is a natural phase in the evolution of organisational forms. An organisational form of a network is a set of interconnected structures and technological elements, i.e. individual economic agents, cultural and social values that arrange inter-organisational relations in a certain order and make network processes operate in a systemlike fashion. Effective joint work in inter-organisational networks suggests a need for a common goal, which is perceived to be a critical factor for joint activities. The paper studies the rationality of decisionmaking for inter-organisational networks. The analysis of behaviour within inter-organisational networks that consist of agents, like firms, entrepreneurs, governmental authorities, scientific centres, proves that group decisions are not always an optimal method to achieve a goal. There are certain tasks and circumstances when an authoritarian approach to problem solving is more sensible. It analyses a formalized model for joint choice, prevailing practice and rationality of group decisionmaking in order to reach a strategic balance within a network. The study summarizes key advantages and drawbacks in case a decision is made by a group.
dc.format.extent9-14
dc.format.pages6
dc.identifier.citationDanylovych-Kropyvnytska M. Rationality in decision-making within interorganisational networks / M. Danylovych-Kropyvnytska, A. Limański // Economics, Entrepreneurship, Management. — Lviv : Lviv Politechnic Publishing House, 2017. — Vol 4. — No 2. — P. 9–14.
dc.identifier.citationenDanylovych-Kropyvnytska M. Rationality in decision-making within interorganisational networks / M. Danylovych-Kropyvnytska, A. Limański // Economics, Entrepreneurship, Management. — Lviv : Lviv Politechnic Publishing House, 2017. — Vol 4. — No 2. — P. 9–14.
dc.identifier.issn2312-3435
dc.identifier.urihttps://ena.lpnu.ua/handle/ntb/41304
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherLviv Politechnic Publishing House
dc.relation.ispartofEconomics, Entrepreneurship, Management, 2 (4), 2017
dc.relation.references1. Levine, J. M. & Moreland, R. L (1998). Small groups. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed., Vol. 2, P. 415–469.
dc.relation.references2. Bornstein, G. & Yaniv, I. (1998). Individual and group behaviour in the ultimatum games: are groups more “rational” players. Experimental Economics, Vol. 1, P. 101–108.
dc.relation.references3. Cox, J. C. (2002). Trust, reciprocity and otherregarding preferences: groups vs. individuals and males vs. females. Avoidances in Experimental Business Research, Vol. 108, P. 331–350.
dc.relation.references4. Blinder, A. S. & Morgan, J. (2005). Are two heads better than one? An experimental analysis of group vs. individual decision making. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Vol. 7, P. 183–191.
dc.relation.references5. Cason, T. N. & Mui, V.-L. (1997). A laboratory study of group polarisation in the team dictator game. Economic Journal, Vol. 107, P. 1465–1483.
dc.relation.references6. Kozeletsky, Iu. (1979). Psychological theory of decisions. Moscow: Progress.
dc.relation.references7. Diev, V. S. Joint decisions: pros & cons. Retrieved from www.philosophy.nsc.ru.
dc.relation.referencesen1. Levine, J. M. & Moreland, R. L (1998). Small groups. The Handbook of Social Psychology, 4th ed., Vol. 2, P. 415–469.
dc.relation.referencesen2. Bornstein, G. & Yaniv, I. (1998). Individual and group behaviour in the ultimatum games: are groups more "rational" players. Experimental Economics, Vol. 1, P. 101–108.
dc.relation.referencesen3. Cox, J. C. (2002). Trust, reciprocity and otherregarding preferences: groups vs. individuals and males vs. females. Avoidances in Experimental Business Research, Vol. 108, P. 331–350.
dc.relation.referencesen4. Blinder, A. S. & Morgan, J. (2005). Are two heads better than one? An experimental analysis of group vs. individual decision making. Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Vol. 7, P. 183–191.
dc.relation.referencesen5. Cason, T. N. & Mui, V.-L. (1997). A laboratory study of group polarisation in the team dictator game. Economic Journal, Vol. 107, P. 1465–1483.
dc.relation.referencesen6. Kozeletsky, Iu. (1979). Psychological theory of decisions. Moscow: Progress.
dc.relation.referencesen7. Diev, V. S. Joint decisions: pros & cons. Retrieved from www.philosophy.nsc.ru.
dc.rights.holder© Національний університет "Львівська політехніка", 2017
dc.subjectinter-organisational networks
dc.subjectrationality
dc.subjectdecision-making procedures
dc.subjectstrategic balance
dc.subjectcooperative game
dc.subjectcoalition
dc.subject.udc65.012.123
dc.titleRationality in decision-making within interorganisational networks
dc.typeArticle

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2017v4n2_Danylovych-Kropyvnytska_M-Rationality_9-14.pdf
Size:
153.45 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Thumbnail Image
Name:
2017v4n2_Danylovych-Kropyvnytska_M-Rationality_9-14__COVER.png
Size:
364.97 KB
Format:
Portable Network Graphics

License bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
2.97 KB
Format:
Plain Text
Description: