Foxall Gordon R
Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University Cardiff, UK.
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Apr 1;8:184. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00184. eCollection 2014.
Interpretation of managerial activity in terms of neuroscience is typically concerned with extreme behaviors such as corporate fraud or reckless investment (Peterson, 2007; Wargo et al., 2010a). This paper is concerned to map out the neurophysiological and cognitive mechanisms at work across the spectrum of managerial behaviors encountered in more day-to-day contexts. It proposes that the competing neuro-behavioral decisions systems (CNBDS) hypothesis (Bickel et al., 2012b) captures well the range of managerial behaviors that can be characterized as hyper- or hypo-activity in either the limbically-based impulsive system or the frontal-cortically based executive system with the corresponding level of activity encountered in the alternative brain region. This pattern of neurophysiological responding also features in the Somatic Marker Hypothesis (Damasio, 1994) and in Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST; Gray and McNaughton, 2000; McNaughton and Corr, 2004), which usefully extend the thesis, for example in the direction of personality. In discussing these theories, the paper has three purposes: to clarify the role of cognitive explanation in neuro-behavioral decision theory, to propose picoeconomics (Ainslie, 1992) as the cognitive component of competing neuro-behavioral decision systems theory and to suggest solutions to the problems of imbalanced neurophysiological activity in managerial behavior. The first is accomplished through discussion of the role of picoeconomics in neuro-behavioral decision theory; the second, by consideration of adaptive-innovative cognitive styles (Kirton, 2003) in the construction of managerial teams, a theme that can now be investigated by a dedicated research program that incorporates psychometric analysis of personality types and cognitive styles involved in managerial decision-making and the underlying neurophysiological bases of such decision-making.
从神经科学角度对管理活动进行解读,通常关注诸如企业欺诈或鲁莽投资等极端行为(彼得森,2007;瓦尔戈等人,2010a)。本文旨在梳理在日常情境中所遇到的各类管理行为背后起作用的神经生理和认知机制。本文提出,竞争性神经行为决策系统(CNBDS)假说(比克尔等人,2012b)很好地涵盖了一系列管理行为,这些行为可被描述为基于边缘系统的冲动系统或基于前额叶皮质的执行系统中的过度或不足活动,以及在另一个脑区所遇到的相应活动水平。这种神经生理反应模式在躯体标记假说(达马西奥,1994)和强化敏感性理论(RST;格雷和麦克诺顿,2000;麦克诺顿和科尔,2004)中也有体现,这些理论有效地扩展了该论点,例如在人格方面。在讨论这些理论时,本文有三个目的:阐明认知解释在神经行为决策理论中的作用,提出微观经济学(安斯利,1992)作为竞争性神经行为决策系统理论的认知组成部分,并提出解决管理行为中神经生理活动失衡问题的方案。第一个目的通过讨论微观经济学在神经行为决策理论中的作用来实现;第二个目的通过在管理团队构建中考虑适应性 - 创新性认知风格(柯顿,2003)来实现,现在可以通过一个专门的研究项目来探讨这个主题,该项目纳入对管理决策中涉及的人格类型和认知风格的心理测量分析以及此类决策的潜在神经生理基础。