首页 > 资料专栏 > 论文 > 专题论文 > 其他论文 > 两人风险决策研究_MBA硕士毕业论文DOC

两人风险决策研究_MBA硕士毕业论文DOC

richeng***
V 实名认证
内容提供者
热门搜索
风险决策
资料大小:4293KB(压缩后)
文档格式:DOC
资料语言:中文版/英文版/日文版
解压密码:m448
更新时间:2019/2/2(发布于广东)

类型:金牌资料
积分:--
推荐:升级会员

   点此下载 ==>> 点击下载文档


文本描述
摘要
国内外都有两句很有名的古话:一是“三个臭皮匠顶一个诸葛亮”(Two
heads better than one);二是“江山易改,本性难移’’(The leopard cannot change
its spots)。这两句话引出了四个管理学领域的问题:第一,个体决策与群体决
策哪一个更好第二,作为个体的本质属性,人格特质是如何影响人们的决策
第三,团队人格对团队决策有怎样的影响第四,相同人格特质下的个体和群
体决策存在什么样的差异
本研究针对以上四个问题,基于管理学的风险决策相关理论和心理学的人
格特质理论,采用问卷法(大五人格量表简版(NEO-FFI))和行为学实验(仿
真气球模拟实验(BART))相结合的方法,对上述问题进行了实证研宄。其主
要研宄结果如下:
1.个人和两人团队的风险偏好存在显著性差异,尤其是在两人群体经过沟
通联合决策的风险偏好明显高于个人的风险偏好。沟通对团队决策的风
险偏好有影响,且沟通使得团队风险偏好提高,但与无沟通决策方式相
比,没有统计学意义

2.人格特质对个体风险决策的风险偏好有影响。其中,神经质、高级人格
因素A对个体的风险偏好负向影响;开放性、外向性、高级人格因素
B对个体风险偏好正向影响;顺同性和严谨性对个体风险偏好有负向影
响,但没有统计学意义

3.团队人格特质对团队的风险偏好有影响。在团队成员未沟通的情况下,
神经质特质对两人团队的风险偏好有负向影响,外向性特质对两人团队
的风险偏好正向影响,而顺同性、严谨性、开放性、高级人格因素A、
高级人格因素B对两人团队的风险偏好没有显著性影响。在团队成员
自由交流、充分沟通联合决策情况下,团队神经质特质与两人团队的风
险偏好负相关,外向性和开放性特质与两人团队的风险偏好正相关,而
顺同性和严谨性对两人团队的风险偏好没有影响

4.相同人格特质下,个体与两人团队的风险偏好存在显著性差异。其中,
在神经质特质高分、开放性高分、高级人格因素A高分三种情况下,个
体与两人团队沟通联合决策的风险偏好存在显著差异,且两人团队沟通
联合决策的风险偏好高于个人的风险偏好。此外,无论是神经质、顺同 性、严谨性、高级人格因素A、开放性、外向性、高级人格因素B七大
人格特质高分还是低分情况下,个人决策与未沟通交替决策、未沟通交
替决策与有沟通联合决策之间的风险偏好都不存在显著差异

以上结论,对于个人择业、企业或其它社会组织在选择人员上有一定的参
考意义。例如对于需要具有冒险精神的创业企业来说,可以采用联合领导
(Co-Leader)的方式,或者选择那些神经质和高级人格因素A得分较低,外向
性、开放性和高级人格因素B得分较高的人。在组建团队时,也可以根据企业
的需要,选择更加合适的团队去从事相关工作,如选用外向性、开放性得分高
的团队去进行开拓创新。而对于需要保守策略的团队时,则选用神经质得分较
高,开放性和外向性得分较低的团队人格组合

关键词:人格特质、大五人格、仿真气球模拟实验(BART)、风险决策、两人
决策 TWO PEOPLE RISK DECISION OF RESEARCH:
BASED ON THE PERSPECTIVE OF PERSONALITY
TRAITS
ABSTRACT
There are two old-saying:The first one is Two heads are better than one . The
second isThe leopard always change its spots Including four problems in the
field of management: Firstly, individual decision and group decision which one is
better Secondly, The influence of Personality Traits on Decision - making Thirdly,
The effect of Team Personality on Group Decision - making Fourthly, under the
same personality traits ,the differences between individual decision and group
decision
This study addresses the above four questions, based on risk decision theories
and personality trait, using the big five personality model (NEO-FFI) and Balloon
Analogue Risk Task (BART).
Throughing experimental research, main research results including:
1. There was significant difference in risk preference between individual and
team.Especially, in the free discussion condition, the risk preference of the
group is significantly higher than that of the individual. The risk preference of
the communication teams are higher than that of the non-communication
teams, but there is no significant difference between the two groups.
2. Personality traits influence the risk preference of individual risk decision.
Neuroticism, senior personality factor A and personal risk appetite has a
negative relationship; openness, extroversion, and senior personality factor B
have positive effects on individual risk appetite; agreeableness and
conscientiousness had a negative impact on individual risk appetite, but no
statistical significance.
3. Team personality traits have an effect on risk preference of group . Under the
condition of non-communication, neuroticism has a negative impact on the risk
appetite;extraversion trait has a positive effect on the risk
preference;conscientiousness, openness, senior personality factors A, senior
personality factor A, senior personality factor B has no significant effect on the
risk preference of the group. Under the condition of free discussion,
neuroticism is negatively correlated with the team&39;s risk appetite; extroversion and openness are positively correlated with the team&39;s risk appetite;
agreeableness and conscientiousness have no effect on the risk reference of
group.
4. In the same personality traits, There are significant difference in risk preference
between individual and group.In the condicition of the high scores of
neuroticism,openness ,senior personality factors A,the risk perference of group
decision in communication condicition is higher than individual. In addition,
neither in neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness, senior personality
factor A 3openness, extroversion, senior personality factor B higher scores nor
lower scores, There was no significant difference in the risk preference between
the individual decision - making and non - communication decision - making,
non-communicative and the communicative decision-making.
All the above conclusions, these are meaningful for personal career, business or
other social organizations in the selection of personnel.For exemple,the start-up
companies need the adventurous person, may choose the Co-leader, or choose the
people who have lower scores of neuroticism, senior personality factor A, or higher
scores of openness, extroversion, senior personality factor B. Building a team, you
can choose the higher scores of openness, extroversion to carry out pioneering and
innovative. When you need to select a conservative policy ,choosing the people with
high neuroticism scores.
Key Words: personality traits, big five personality, balloon analogue risk task, risk
decision, two person decision making. 目录
第一章绪论 1
1.1研宄背景1.2研宄目的1.3 研究内容1. 个人风险决策与无沟通交替两人风险决策的差异性;2. 个人风险决策与有沟通联合两人风险决策的差异性;3. 无沟通交替两人风险决策与有沟通联合两人风险决策的差异性。1.4研究方法思路及技术路线1.4.1 研究方法1.4.2研究思路1.4.3 技术路线1.5 研宄意义及创新点1.5.1 研究意义1.5.2创新点1.6 论文框架第二章文献综述2.1 賴 9
2.1.1风险决策2.1.2群体决策2.1.3个体决策与群体决策2.2 人格特质理论2.2.1大五人格理论概述2.2.2大五人格理论研宄现状2.3人格特质对风险决策的影响2.3.1人格特质对个体风险决策的影响2.3.2团队人格组合对团队决策的影响2.4提出问题第三章实验研宄3.1 实验被试3.2 量表设计3.3行为学实验设计3.4 实验流程
21 第四章数据分析
23
4.1个体与两人决策的差异性研究
23
4.2人格特质对个体风险决策的影响
24
4.2.1大五人格五个维度对个体风险决策的影响
24
4.2.2大五人格高级因素对个体风险决策的影响
25
4.3团队人格对两人风险决策的影响
25
4.3.1团队人格的五个维度对两人风险决策的影响
26
4.3.2团队人格组合的高级因素对两人风险决策的影响
28
4.4相同人格特质下个体风险决策与两人决策的差异性研究
29
4.4.1大五人格五个维度下两者的决策差异性研宄
29
4.4.2大五人格高级因素下两者的决策差异性研宄
38
4.4.3 总结
42
第五章研宄结果的讨论
45
5.1 结论讨论
45
5.1.1个人与两人风险决策的差异性研宄
45
5.1.2人格特质对个体风险偏好的影响
45
5.1.3团队人格对两人风险决策的影响
45
5.1.4相同人格特质下个体与两人群体风险决策的差异性
46
第六章研究结论
47
6.1 结论
47
6.2 研宄的应用
47
6.3 研宄局限与展望
48
6.3.1研究的局限性
48
6.3.2 研究展望
.....49
参考文献 50
隱 58
附录1:知情同意书
58
附录2:大五人格量表
59
m. 61
作者攻读论文期间所发表的论文
62
第一章绪论
第一章绪论
1.1研究背景
中国有句古话:“三个臭皮匠顶个诸葛亮”,国外也有句俗语:“two heads
better than one”,这两句话引出了一个管理学中研究的热点:群体决策与个体决
策和个体决策哪一个更好,其风险偏好又有什么样的差异而随着社会的然而
随着社会的日趋多样化、复杂化,决策的难度也就越来越大,很多政府部门和
企业己经在决策层做出了调整,由个人独裁制变为两人或更多人联合决策,例
如,中国各级政府机关中的党委书记和行政机关的决策者(省委书记和省长、
市委书记和市长等),高校中的党委书记和校长。同样一些企业也采用双总裁制
或双CEO制,华为公司的轮值CEO制。同样,国外也有类似的现象,谷歌(Google)
就是由两名创始人共同负责经营管理、巴菲特的伯克希尔哈撒韦也是由巴菲特
和查理组成了最高决策层,甚至一直霸道的乔布斯,在苹果创立之初也是由他
和沃兹亚克共同领导的。双联席总裁
。。。以上简介无排版格式,详细内容请下载查看