M3 STRATEGIC DECISION-MAKING UNDER UNCERTAINTY: MODES, MODELS, & MOMENTUM Thesis Submitted to Newcastle University Business School In Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management Studies By Emmalinde Roelofse, BA, MBA, PgDip, CASAP, EDI, HDFP, FHEA NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY Newcastle Upon Tyne, England September 2017 ii ABSTRACT The M3 theory contributes to new knowledge through original research and advanced scholarship by introducing a descriptive framework for strategic decision-making in uncertain and changing environments. Aided by the introduction of a Social Realism epistemology into management literature it is differentiated its ability to present complex strategic positions as essentialist (via modes), relative (via models), and dynamic (via momentum) to plot the dynamic trajectory of innovation emergence, change, adaptation and transformation over time. At a fundamental level, the M3 theory identifies a consistent set of rules that decision-makers intentionally or unintentionally engage with or ignore to take strategic positions based on four integrated yet polarized pairs of modes: systematic (+S) vs. responsive (+R) strategies, and conforming (+C), vs. differentiating (+D) strategies. Systematic strategies (+S) is the mode dedicated to increasingly sophisticated rational cognitive processes; these processes plan, purposefully compartmentalize, and regulate emotions. Responsive strategies (+R) conversely, is the mode dedicated to increasingly sensitized intuitive processes; these processes are reflective, associative, action-orientated and emotionally expressive. The second pair of modes intersects with the two aforementioned modes with conforming strategies (+C) moving towards convergence by adapting or conveying socially perceived superior norms; these processes include the exploitation of existing power. In contrast, differentiating strategies (+D) represents the mode dedicated to diverging from traditional norms with empowerment for exploration. These processes include novelty-seeking, sabotage, risk-taking, experimentation, play, flexibility, discovery, and higher levels of innovation. Finally, the dynamic (momentum) component informs how strategic modes and models under uncertainty improve and adjust in sophistication under the pressure and demands of the four drives (+L). The M3 theory is informed by three distinct but interrelated and simultaneous empirical streams of data: (i) field data from five ethnographic case studies, with research participant feedback loops; (ii) the mapping of 200+ peer reviewed decision-making models; and (iii) prototyping the principles in the construction of the emergent M3 theory. iii Dedicated to my daughter, Io iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It could be argued that the epitome of decision-making under uncertainty is selling your assets following a decade as a professional and executive in the workforce, and then packing the most important earthly possessions you can fit into two suitcases to move internationally in pursuit of a doctorate degree. The destination, a place you have only seen through the fisheye lens of the Internet. Moving to England was indeed one of the riskiest decisions I have made without access to perfect information and resources. But as it turns out, once I was in the foreign land, that single decision to move abroad was also just the first in a long line of important decision crossroads that I would encounter over the course of my four- year doctoral student evolution. In this study it was thus not only the well documented research participants’ ideas and strategies that was undergoing emergence of innovation and transformation, I as the embedded field worker was also deeply transformed as an individual and scholar by immersing in the new culture(s) with the persons I am acknowledging as an important part of this journey. First and foremost, I want to acknowledge and thank the 40+ world-class strategists and 367+ participants (and actors) who accepted me into one of five collaborations as a participant researcher. Even though our confidentiality contract ensures your anonymity, I recognise that you made yourselves vulnerable with real-time observation and analysis when I documented our journey in real-time. Often in research like this, participants are interviewed in retrospect and allowed to hide behind rationalization and 20/20 hindsight to distort and reinterpret the journey, or they are put in an artificial lab experiment that removes chaos, or options for innovation are sterilized. I thank you deeply for trusting me and taking this risk by letting go of some control. I am proud to say that together we are making a more sizable contribution to the advancement of decision-making scholarly literature than we might have had we stuck to the safe path. Additionally, I want to express my sincere appreciation to my doctoral supervisory team. Professor Tyrone S. Pitsis that had been advising me from day (and Year) 1, Professor Frank Mueller that started advising me in Year 2, and Doctor Andreas Giazitzoglu that joined the advising team in Year 3. Thank you for your patience and v willingness to allow me to sometimes press the boundaries on what was common and traditionally done. I can unequivocally say that this theory is better because I had to work hard to also think like each of you as a strategist and scholar. Also, a sincere thank you to my editor, Professor Emeritus Gloria Campbell from Wartburg College. I may have only known you for a few days, but in the intensity of the days leading up to the submission deadline you were an Academic Guardian Angel. Thank you for not only for the support in taking the clarity of communication to the next level, but also lending your kindness and strength as an educator. On a personal level, I would like to also acknowledge the global village of friends and family from around the world who enveloped this doctoral experience with love and kindness as this uncharted territory was navigated. An especially heartfelt thank you to Oma and Opa (who passed away in the days leading up to this thesis’ submission battling cancer.) I didn’t know that I didn’t know about the love of a grandparent before getting to know you two as a team of caring grandparents. We love you two too. Then, last but definitely not the least, I dedicate this monograph to my daughter and the inspiration behind the M3 theory of strategic decision-making under uncertainty. I have heard murmurs of lucky financially secure British parents who use their maternity leave pause to travel the world, write a book, or change career paths. I have never heard of baby that allowed that "maternity leave timeslot" to be invested into all three those things at once, and more: continuously maintaining multiple active employment contracts to make ends meet; teaching at four different higher education institutions; traveling and/or living in four different countries with research related obligations; a Masters Certificate in Advanced Studies in Academic Practices (CASAP); then becoming a Fellow of the Higher Education Academy (FHEA); and ultimately also finishing a PhD monograph. All within the standard unit of time that is expected of all traditional doctoral students. This would only have been possible with the most resilient (+S), loving (+C), brave (+R), curious (+D) new-borns. Every day for the past two plus years (and nine months before that) you have astutely moulded your body and temperament to my hugs. I can't wait to see what new moulds lie ahead as you and I continue to strengthen and evolve our bond with the emergence, development, adaptation and transformation of new life stages and more adventures into the unknowable future. vi vii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ........................................................................................... iii DEDICATION PAGE .............................................................................. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................ v LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................. xi LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................. xiii LIST OF SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................... xiv PART I: THE FOUNDATION .................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION................................................................. 2 1.1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 3 1.2. Background .................................................................................................................... 4 1.3. Analytical Framework ................................................................................................... 6 1.4. Methodological Framework ...........................................................................................7 1.5. Layout of Thesis ............................................................................................................. 8 CHAPTER 2: FUNDAMENTAL LITERATURE REVIEW ........................... 11 2.1. Introduction ................................................................................................................ 11 2.2. Decision-making under uncertainty theories ............................................................. 13 2.2.1. Classic Rationality decision-making theories .............................................16