其他摘要 | Innovation holds great significance for human progress and development, encompassing the entire process from idea generation to implementation. Among them, of particular importance is the recognition stage, which serves as a crucial bridge and has increasingly become a key factor for individuals and organizations seeking to gain competitive advantages in the marketplace. In reality, this stage has garnered increasing attention from organizations and institutions, and the critical role of decision-makers in innovation recognition has become more widely recognized. However, previous research has primarily focused on the impact of three factors一the characteristics of recognition subjects (i.e., decision-makers), the characteristics of recognition objects (i.e., ideas and creators), and social environmental factors一on innovation recognition, while overlooking the significant role that interpersonal factors play in decision-makers' innovation recognition. Specifically, rivalry, as a critical social relationship among decision-makers, affects their motivation and cognitive processes, ultimately influencing the outcome of their evaluation and selection. Given the high level of uncertainty that characterizes many innovative endeavors, further exploration of this topic is needed.
Based on the rivalry theory, this paper hopes to further explore the idiosyncratic effects of rivalry brought about by rivals compared to their general peers on decision makers' innovation recognition. This study proposes that when the decision maker's perceived rivalry with the other peers is strong, they will view them as rival and pay more attention to the comparison with them, which in turn will increase the decision maker's motivation and behavior of desiring to win, as well as paying too much attention to the opponent. From the perspective of cognitive processing of decision makers, the rivalry affects the depth and breadth of their cognitive processing, which in turn affects the quality of innovation recognition and the consistency of innovation selection. Specifically, from the viewpoint of processing depth, rivalry makes decision makers eager to grasp more information and surpass competitors, which in turn affects the way decision makers process information and increases individuals' intentional processing, systematic processing and comprehensive analysis of relevant information, which is conducive to improving the quality of decision makers' identification of these ideas. From the viewpoint of the breadth of processing, the rivalry affects the scope of information processing, and when the decision makers focus on surpassing the rivals, it will form a tunnel vision pointing to the rivals, appear too much focus on the ideas within the vision, and enhance the consistency of the decision makers' innovation selection, while making the quality of innovation recognition dependent on the rivals一when the quality within the rivals' vision is low, the rivalry the negative effect of narrowing horizons on innovation recognition due to the relationship is highlighted. In addition, the above effects are influenced by decision maker traits, i.e., they are significant when decision maker self-efficacy or rationality or intuition are low, and insignificant when decision maker self-efficacy or rationality and intuition are high.
This study consists of three sub-studies. The preliminary study first established a creative repository for subsequent evaluation, and used experts to develop standards for evaluating accuracy. Study 1 used laboratory experimental method to explore the depth path of the impact of rivalry on decision-makers' innovation recognition. Experiment la explored the main effect of the impact of rivalry on innovation recognition quality, and supported the positive effect of rivalry. Experiment 1b further tested the mediating mechanism of systematic processing. Study 2 also used laboratory experimental method to explore the breadth path of the impact of rivalry on decision-makers' innovation recognition. Experiment 2a explored the positive effect of rivalry on high evaluation preferences and investment tendencies of creative target through tunnel vision on the opponent's target of concern. Experiment 2b also found that the rivalry had a high evaluation and selection tendency on the target through tunnel vision, regardless of whether the creative idea was of high or low quality. Finally, Study 3 further tested the above model using archive data on fund managers' investment in listed companies. We used social network analysis to code the rivalry between fund managers and explored the impact of these relationships on stock selection and fund performance. The results showed that for the breadth path, the stronger the rivalry between decision-makers, the higher the consistency of their stock selection and fund performance. For the depth path, the greater the extensiveness and intensity of rivalry between decision-makers, the deeper the processing of heavy-weighted stocks, and the higher the performance level of fund managers. All three studies supported the main hypotheses of the model.
This study makes theoretical contributions to two areas: innovation recognition and rivalry. First, in terms of innovation recognition, the study adopts a new perspective of dyad interpersonal influence and further explores the important impact of the rivalry specificity between decision-makers on innovation recognition, expanding the research on the effects of relational factors on innovation recognition. Second, in terms of rivalry, the study enriches the research on work-related social motivation, supplements the exploration of the influence of rivalry on decision-makers' cognitive processing in high-uncertainty and unpredictable innovation situations, distinguishes the different paths of information processing under the
influence of rivalry, enriches and develops the theory of rivalry, expands its application scenarios, and provides evidence of the moderating effect of personal traits.
From a practical perspective, decision-makers can, on the one hand, seek suitable rivals, expose themselves to the rivalry with them, and improve their systematic processing level, which is beneficial to the quality of their innovation recognition. On the other hand, we need to be cautious in dealing with rivals' ideas in their field of vision and choose high-quality rivals, which is positively significant for the accuracy of their innovation recognition. |
修改评论