Comment on “Heuristics in the strategy context” by Bingham and Eisenhardt (2011)

Authors

  • Natalia Vuori,

    1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Strategy and Venturing, Aalto University, Finland
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Timo Vuori

    Corresponding author
    1. Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Strategy and Venturing, Aalto University, Finland
    • Correspondence to: Timo Vuori, Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, Institute of Strategy and Venturing, PO Box 15500, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland. E-mail: timo.vuori@aalto.fi

    Search for more papers by this author

  • NATALIA VUORI and TIMO VUORI contributed equally to this paper.

Abstract

Bingham and Eisenhardt (2011) highlight the positive role of heuristics in the strategy context. They discuss four mechanisms through which heuristics have positive effects for strategy. The first mechanism—using a heuristic cue as a proxy for complex, correlated information—builds directly on Gigerenzer's research on positive heuristics. The second (capturing a window of opportunity) and third (providing some direction while allowing freedom to improvise) mechanisms, combine Gigerenzer's ideas with Eisenhardt's earlier work. The fourth one relates to coordination. In this commentary, we critically evaluate the applicability of these four mechanisms in the strategy context, which differs fundamentally from Gigerenzer's context. Our primary contribution is the explication of central limitations in the ways heuristics can function in the strategy context. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Ancillary