Coccia M. 2020.

Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision

making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

CRITICAL DECISIONS IN CRISIS MANAGEMENT:

RATIONAL STRATEGIES OF DECISION MAKING

Mario Coccia

CNR -- National Research Council of Italy, Torino, Italy

Address:
National Research Council of Italy
IRCRES-CNR, Via Real Collegio, n. 30
(Collegio Carlo Alberto)
10024 - Moncalieri (TO), Italy
Phone: (+39) 011 68-24-925

E-mail: mario.coccia@cnr.it

Abstract.

Turbulent environment can create crises that management has to soles in a limited time with critical
decisions. Critical decisions are an attempt to apply efficient modes of cognition and action to enable
the organization to cope with consequential environmental threats or take advantage of important
opportunities in the presence of highly restricted time in turbulent markets and/or specific situations.
Critical decisions involve a process of the organization’s leadership to think, consult, act, gain
acceptance for optimal solutions to complex problems in the presence of highly restricted time in crisis
given by scarce resources, uncertain factors, aversive environment, environmental difficulties,
ambiguous circumstances, unclear and volatile situations, or a combination of these factors. This study
presents the endogenous and exogenous types of crises for organizations and vital factors for critical
decisions that can be categorized in responsitive, proactive and recovery critical decisions. After that,
the study shows strategic operations and steps of critical decisions in a perspective of reductionism, and
a rational structure based on tree diagram to systematize the process of decision making. The study
here also suggests strategies for critical decisions in different environments based on theory of rational
choice, such as max-min, max-max and min-max approaches, described with a vital example. Final part
of this study shows how a complex problem can be treated in different ways in a wider perspective of
ecological rationality by approaches of resolution, solution and dissolution. The implications of
strategic management are that the approach of dissolution of a complex problem requires design of a
critical decision that may incorporate research and trial and error activities. Overall, then, this paper
suggests one of the most effective way of solving systemic and complex problems by private and public
organizations operating in, more and more, turbulent markets and volatile environments.
Keywords: strategic management; decision making; critical decision; crisis management; competitive
advantage; strategies; strategic change; business strategy; operational excellence; problem solving;
bounded rationality; decision rule; decision theory, natural disasters, risk management, bounded
rationality; environmental threats, ecological rationality, theory of rational choice

JEL Codes: C44, D70, D81, D91, H12, M51, Q54

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

1. Introduction

The markets and environment have, more and more, a growing dynamism that generates

environmental uncertainty and turbulence (Johnson and Scholes, 1988; Emery and Trist, 1965). In this

uncertain and unstable environment, organizations are open systems having activities in interaction

with external factors (McDermott and Taylor, 1982; Gioia and Chittipeddi, 1991). Crises and

problematic situations confront organizations and leaders with complex issues they do not face on a

daily basis—for example, in the presence of hurricane, earthquake, political instability, terroristic

attacks, high custom duties, high taxation, market restrictions, etc. Critical decisions are hard calls,

which involve tough value trade-offs and also major changes, such as stop the production after

disasters, staff cuts and/or move the location of firms in other geoeconomic regions (Coccia, 2018r).

These manifold factors lead to organization and management to take critical decisions to cope with

consequential environmental threats in the presence of highly restricted time, endeavoring to minimize

the possible loss for a worst case scenario. A critical and effective decision also requires interagency and

inter-organizational coordination. Moreover, the effective implementation of critical decisions requires

that personnel of different departments work together. In this context, public organizations are

originally designed to conduct routine business in accordance with values of fairness, lawfulness, and

efficiency. However, critical decisions in the presence of a crisis require flexibility, improvisation,

redundancy, and the breaking of rules in a very short time. An effective critical decision to a crisis is, to

a large extent, the result of a naturally evolving process that may not be managed in linear, step-by-step,

and comprehensive fashion. Next sections show sources of risk for open organizations that trigger

critical decisions, logical steps of the process of critical decision making and a set of general strategies

for critical decisions to cope with consequential environmental threats in turbulent markets.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

2. Type of crisis for applying critical decisions

A critical decision occurs in the presence of a crisis given by an unexpected complex problem that

involves the stability of a public and/or private organization, institution or country at risk. These

sources can either originate internally or they can be due to external factors to organizations. If

organizations do not decide timely, and sources of risk are left unaddressed, they can permanently

damage the business, public service or cause it to fail with consequent socioeconomic problems. The

identification of a crisis for organizations needs the evaluation of vital elements, such as: a) the problem

must pose an imminent threat to the organization; b) the situation must involve an element of surprise

or shock; c) unexpected and uncertain nature of a complex problem will place pressure on business to

make timely and effective critical decisions. However, some crises are unavoidable, and organization

has to be ready to handle conflicts. A general definition of risk for organizations is a performance

variance or environment change, whether they impact the organization and business negatively (cf.,

Bouchet et al., 2003, p. 10). Crisis can be due to endogenous and exogenous factors that trigger a

process of critical decisions for survival and or adaptation of organizations themselves in new contexts.

 Endogenous crises to organizations are:

1. Financial Crisis
2. Personnel Crisis
3. Organizational Crisis
4. Technological Crisis

1. A financial crisis occurs when a business loses value in its assets and the organization cannot

afford to pay off its debt. This crisis can be due to a significant drop in demand for the product or

service of firms that should move funds around to cover immediate short-term costs.

2. Personnel crises can be due to strikes for contractual claims, such as higher salary, benefits,

occupational safety, etc. It can be also due to unethical or illegal misconduct of employees.

Organizations need to identify the scope of the situation and determine appropriate meetings with

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

representatives of personnel and trade-unions in order to find a plausible solution, and if

necessary, provide a written agreement.

3. Organizational crises are due to many situations, such as a low demand of products and services,

conflict between owners or between shareholders and management, etc. This type of crisis can

also include misconduct misusing managerial powers.

4. Rapid evolution of technology can create problems to organizations that have to apply flexibility

and capacity of adaptation in the presence of technical change in markets. The first step is to hire

personnel with high-tech experience in emerging technologies and/or design strategic alliances

with high-tech firms to cope with consequential and rapid technological change (Coccia, 2017,

2017a, 2019; Coccia and Watts, 2020)1.

 Exogenous crises to organizations are due to:

1. natural disasters
2. social risk
3. economic risk
4. political risk
5. terrorist risk

1. Natural disasters refer to phenomena of physical geography, such as earthquake, hurricane, flood,

etc., that may negatively impact the infrastructure, facilities, equipment, machines, markets of

organizations, etc. This situation can be worsened by weak infrastructure and inefficiencies of local

and national institutions.

2. Social risk is due to collective actions of specific organizations, such as trade unions, non-

governmental organizations, lobbies of local authorities and/or international organizations that

influence policy and/or management of public and private organizations. In this context, the

worst-case scenario, associated with social risk, is the physical aggression of employees and even

1For other studies about the interaction between science, technology and innovation, their sources, evolution, diffusion and impact
on socioeconomic systems, see: Calabrese et al., 2005; Chagpar and Coccia, 2019; Coccia, 1999, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2005a,b,c,d,
2006, 2006a, 2007, 2007a, 2008, 2008a, 2009, 200a, b, 2010, 2010a, b, c, 2011, 2012, 2012a, b, c, 2013, 2014, 2014a, b, c, d, e, f, g,
2015, 2015a, b, c, d, 2016, 2016a, b, 2017, 2017a, b, c, e, f, g, h, 2018d, e, f, g, h, i, l, m, n, o, p, q, 2019, 2019a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, l,
m, n, o, p, Coccia, 2020; Coccia and Benati, 2018; Coccia and Cadario, 2014; Coccia and Finardi, 2012; Coccia and Rolfo, 2002,
2008, 2009, 2013; Coccia and Wang, 2015, 2016; Coccia and Watts, 2020.

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

kidnapping for firms/institutions located in problematic geoeconomic regions, such as in Libya,

Nigeria, Chad, etc. (cf., Coccia, 2017d).

3. Economic risk refers to the variability of structural indicators in economy, such as output, price,

interest rate, foreign exchange, trade, employment, public debt, etc. For instance, hyperinflation in

some countries of South America, high public debt of some European countries, etc. (cf., Coccia,

2017b). Another source of economic risk is devaluation or general increase of prices, etc. (cf.,

Coccia, 2016). In general, macroeconomic risk includes all negative events that may affect

industries or firms. Some of these risks are difficult to identify exclusively within a single category,

such as energy shortages is an economic risk that can also be due to natural causes (cf., Coccia,

2005, 2007, 2010)

4. Political risk is associated with political instability and uncertainty of countries. This risk can lead

to alter governmental policy or political regime (cf., Coccia, 2019b). Political risk covers any

unanticipated detrimental actions to domestic/foreign organizations taken by local authorities,

such as expropriation, breach of contract including loan repudiation, foreign exchange controls,

trade restrictions or trade agreements that could favor some competitors at the expense of others,

etc. (cf., Miller, 1992; Coccia, 2017c). In particular, political risk concerns any potential or actual

change in the political system, but also includes any sociopolitical regression that may disrupt the

foreign and/or domestic businesses, such as in countries of Latin America or Africa (Coccia,

2019a, 2019b, 2019c).

5. Terrorism is due to some group organized that has technical skills to carry out a terrorist action

directed to challenge a nation's authority and induce fear and anxiety into civilian population (cf.,

Crenshaw, 1981, p. 380). Terrorism can be due to economic factors (such as low income, poverty,

inequality…), high demographic growth associated with poor resources, political factors, etc. (cf.,

Coccia, 2017d, 2018, 2018a, b, c; Krueger, 2007; Newman, 2006). Ackoff and Rovin (2003, p. 146)

argue that “countries that are the breeding grounds for terrorists are the least advanced

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

economically”. Terrorism is a source of risk for public and private organizations that need critical

decisions in volatile and uncertain environment.

3. Critical decisions and strategies to cope with consequential environmental threats

A crisis management team is a task force within organizations to proactively prepare for managing

crises and taking critical decisions. These teams are in charge of anticipating potential problems and

making critical decisions to resolve strenuous situations and complex problems for organizations.

Successful crisis management teams understand the different types of crisis and are thoroughly

prepared for all situations. In a crisis, leaders are expected to reduce uncertainty and provide an

authoritative account of problems, solutions and difficulties. When leaders have formulated a strategy

for complex problems, they must get others to accept the proposed solution. In fact, the strategy of

leaders can coincide and compete with those of other parties, who hold other positions and interests,

and who are likely to espouse various alternative solutions and actions. Management of critical

decisions is the process by which an organization deals with a disruptive and unexpected event that

threatens to harm the organization or its stakeholders. Vital factors for a critical decision in aversive

environment: are:

(a) a threat to the organization,

(b) the element of surprise,

and (c) a short decision time.

Venette (2003) argues that "crisis is a process of transformation where the old system can no longer be

maintained". Therefore, a critical decision generates a “strategic change” (cf., Gioia and Chittipeddi,

1991). In this context, critical decision process endeavors to find the best ways to avoid effective and

potential threats to organization. In particular, critical decisions should deal with threats before, during,

and after they have occurred. Management has to be able, using high skill competencies and techniques,

to identify, assess, understand, and cope with a serious situation, especially from the moment it first

occurs to recovery procedures (cf., Groh, 2014).

6

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Different types of critical decisions are (cf., Seeger et al., 1998; Shrivastava et al., 1988; Bundy et al.,

2017):

Responsive critical decision

When a problem hits business of organizations, it is important to have a plan of action ready that

matches the situation at hand. Crisis management executes the plan of critical decisions and handles

any unexpected roadblocks that may pop up. Responsive critical decisions are used for financial and/or

personnel crises where organizations must provide a timely response.

Proactive critical decision

Proactive critical decision anticipates a potential problem and works to prevent it, or prepare for it. For

example, building an earthquake-resistant factory and sharing an evacuation plan with employees are

methods to prepare for natural disasters. While not all crises can be prevented or planned for, actively

monitoring for threats to business of organizations can reduce the impact of potential problematic

situations in future.

Recovery critical decision

Sometimes, it is not possible to see the complex problem coming (e.g., earthquake), or it is too late to

prevent the damage it caused. In these cases, company may not be able to lessen the impact, but it can

begin to salvage what is left of the situation.

The usual perspective for critical decisions is based on strategic operations and steps, such as (Linstone,
1999):

- the definition of a complex problem Pr from volatile environment, and the implicit assumption that
the problem can be solved. After that, it is important to gather information for possible solutions
of the problem Pr
- Reductionism, the study of complex problems in terms of a very limited number of variables and the
critical interaction among them
- Identification of the purpose of critical decision about the complex problem Pr under study
- Suggestion and evaluation of different alternative solutions to complex problem Pr under study
- Ignoring or avoiding the individual interests
- Selection of the optimal solution, or the search, whenever possible, for a best solution in a short
time
- Implementation of the critical decision and evaluation of results

In short, the starting point of critical decision is a complex problem that we assume a possible solution

exists. A complex problem has several solution concepts (Sl), each of which leads to several
7

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

consequential problems (Pr) and solutions (Sl). A critical decision can be systematized by a tree

structure of decision making with different levels of Pr and Sl succeeding (Fig. 1).

Sl111

Pr11
Sl112
Sl1
Sl111
Pr12
Sl112

Pr
Sl211
Pr11
Sl212

Sl2
Sl221
Pr12
Sl222

Time limited 1h, 24h, 48h, 1 weeks or 1 month depending on situation under study
Figure 1. The problem-solution tree for critical decisions. Note. Pr=problem; Sl=Solution.

Different rules and strategies can be applied for critical decisions in the presence of turbulent scenario,
such as:

o max-min critical decision

o max-max critical decision
o critical decision based on highest expected value with different probability of scenarios
o critical decision based on highest expected value with equal probability of scenarios
o min-max critical decision

A simple example can clarify these different approaches for critical decisions (cf., Lloyd and Dicken,
1977).

First of all, we create a matrix of results (or payoffs) as in Table 1.

Table 1. Matrix of payoffs for a critical decision process

Environmental Situation
I II III
Strategy 1 200 155 145
Strategy 2 130 220 130
Strategy 3 118 118 225

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Critical decision depends on manifold endogenous and exogenous factors, also considering the

behavior of management toward risk and uncertainty. The critical decision based on different rules is as

follows.

o Pessimistic critical decision is based on a rule of max-min, selecting the max of the worst result in each
strategy:

145 for strategy 1 Critical decision with max-min

130 for strategy 2
118 for strategy 3

o Optimistic critical decision is based on a rule of max-max, selecting the max of the best result in each
strategy:

200 for strategy 1

220for strategy 2
225 for strategy 3 Critical decision with max-max

o Rational critical decision considers relative probabilities of each environmental situation.

For instance, if the probabilities of situations in table 1 are assumed to be:

Probability
Environmental Situation I 0.2
Environmental Situation II 0.5
Environmental Situation III 0.3
Total 1.0

then, critical decision here is based on selecting the strategy with the highest expected value, given by:

Strategies Expected value

strategy 1 0.2(200)+0.5(155)+0.3(145) =161
strategy 2 0.2(130)+0.5(220)+0.3(130) =175 Critical decision
strategy 3 0.2(118)+0.5(118)+0.3(225) =150.1

o Approximate critical decision assumes that the probabilities of all environmental situations are equal.
Table 1 has three environmental situations and the equal probability is 0.333 (i.e.,
1/3=0.333….):

Probability
Environmental Situation I 0.333…
Environmental Situation II 0.333…
Environmental Situation III 0.333…
Total 1.000
9

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

This critical decision is also based on selecting the strategy with the highest expected value:

Strategies Expected value

strategy 1 0.33(200)+ 0.33 (155)+ 0.33 (145) =165 Critical decision
strategy 2 0.33 (130)+ 0.33 (220)+ 0.33 (130) =158.4
strategy 3 0.33 (118)+ 0.33 (118)+ 0.33 (225) =152.5

o Critical decision with Min-Max strategy

If the critical decision, a priori, is strategy 3 and the environmental situation, a posteriori, is I in table

1, the best critical decision ex-post would be strategy 1, rather than strategy 3, and the regret ex-post

for the wrong choice done a priori is 83 (i.e., 200-118). The calculation of this value for each cell is

the base for Min-Max rule of critical decision, given by minimizing the max value of strategies, i.e.,

80 for strategy 1
95 for strategy 2
82 for strategy 3 Critical decision with Min-Max

4. Conclusion and management implications

The decision rule and mechanism for critical decisions, of course, change according to the situation that

can be affected by manifold variables. In this context, it is important to consider the ecological rationality

that claims how the rationality of a decision depends on the circumstances in which it takes place, so as

to achieve one's goals in this particular context. What is considered rational under the theory of rational

choice account, it might not always be considered rational under the ecological rationality account. In

short, rational choice theory puts a premium on internal logical consistency, whereas ecological

rationality also targets external performance in the world (cf., Allais, 1953; Kahneman et al., 1982;

Gigerenzer and Todd, 1999; Simon, 1955). In some markets, timing is the essence of management

behavior in markets. In particular, management must nurture quick-footed capability for getting into

the market before competitors enter the same niche and destroy profitability. For instance, in the

presence of a technological crisis, firms have to improve specialized complementary assets, and
10

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

undertake specific Research and Development (R&D) investments in new technologies or strategic

alliances with high-tech firms that may help to support R&D process and competitive advantage in

turbulent markets. However, within process of critical decisions, it is also important to consider

bounded rationality of decision makers, i.e., rationality is limited when individuals make decisions by

the tractability of the decision problem, the cognitive limitations of the mind, and the time available to

make the decision. Firms, in a context of bounded rationality, aim to a behavior of satisficing rather than

maximizing critical decisions (Simon, 1947; 1957; Gigerenzer and Selten, 2002).

In general, a complex problem can provide potential lessons in organizations for contingency planning

and training for future crises. To put it differently, critical decisions provide vital material and

information for a process of learning for future turbulent situations. Nevertheless, lesson drawing is

one of the most underdeveloped aspects of critical decision process for crisis management. In fact,

there can be cognitive and organizational barriers to learning, associated with routines of human

resources involved in the decision making process of organizations. Moreover, critical decisions are

part of collective memory within and between organizations and a source for historical analogies useful

to leaders and organizations in future complex situations (cf., Seeger et al., 1998; Shrivastava et al.,

1988; Bundy et al., 2017). Overall, then, critical decisions deal with problems that are choice situations

in which what is done makes a significant difference to those who make the choice (Ackoff and Rovin,

2003, p. 9). In short, a complex problem can be treated in different ways but the most effective

approaches for critical decisions to cope with consequential environmental threats can be, using

previous strategies: resolution, solution and dissolution (Ackoff and Rovin, 2003, pp. 9-10). In

particular,

- Resolution is when management employs behavior previously used in similar situations, adapted
if necessary, so to obtain an outcome that is good enough. This approach for critical decisions
is based on past experience, trial and error, and a common sense.
- Solution means to discover or create a behavior that yields the best, or approximately the best
possible outcome, one that optimizes. However, change in environment and new information
can cause solutions to deteriorate. In general, solutions do not exist in isolation from other
problems.
11

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

- Dissolution means to redesign either the organization that has the problems or the environment
in such way as to eliminate the problem or the conditions that caused it, thus enabling the
organization to do better in the future than the best it can do today. Moreover, stakeholders
might seize upon the lessons of crises to advocate measures and policy and organizational
reforms to improve overall efficiency of organization (cf., Bundy et al., 2017).

To conclude, the approach of dissolution of a complex problem requires design of a critical decision

that may incorporate research and trial and error. This may be one of the most effective way of treating

systemic and complex problems by private and public organizations operating in, more and more,

turbulent markets and volatile environments.

References

Ackoff R. L., Rovin S. 2003. Redesigning Society, Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA.
Allais M. 1953. Le Comportement de l'Homme Rationnel devant le Risque: Critique des Postulats et Axiomes de
l'Ecole Americaine. Econometrica. 21 (4): 503–546. doi:10.2307/1907921.
Bouchet M. H., Fishkin C. A., Goguel A. 2018. Managing Country Risk in an Age of Globalization. A Practical
Guide to Overcoming Challenges in a Complex World, Palgrave Macmillan, Chamhttps://doi.org/10.1007/978-
3-319-89752-3
Bundy J., Pfarrer M. D., Short C. E., Coombs W. T. 2017. Crises and Crisis Management: Integration,
Interpretation, and Research Development. Journal of Management, 43 (6): 1661–1692.
doi:10.1177/0149206316680030.
Calabrese G., Coccia M., Rolfo S. 2005. Strategy and market management of new product development: evidence
from Italian SMEs. International Journal of Product Development, vol. 2, n. 1-2, pp. 170-189.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2005.006675
Chagpar A. B., Coccia M. 2019. Factors associated with breast cancer mortality-per-incident case in low-to-middle
income countries (LMICs). Journal of Clinical Oncology, vol. 37, no. 15, suppl. pp. 1566-1566, DOI:
10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15
Coccia M. 1999. Trasferimento tecnologico ed autofinanziamento, Working Paper Ceris del Consiglio Nazionale
delle Ricerche, vol. 1, n. 2. ISSN (Print): 1591-0709
Coccia M. 2003. Metrics of R&D performance and management of public research institute, Proceedings of
IEEE- IEMC 03, Piscataway, pp. 231-236 – ISBN: 0-7803-8150-5
Coccia M. 2004. Spatial metrics of the technological transfer: analysis and strategic management, Technology
Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 16, n. 1, pp. 31-52. https://doi.org/10.1080/0953732032000175490
Coccia M. 2005. Countrymetrics: valutazione della performance economica e tecnologica dei paesi e
posizionamento dell’Italia, Rivista Internazionale di Scienze Sociali, vol. CXIII, n. 3, pp. 377-412. Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/41624216
Coccia M. 2005a. Technometrics: Origins, historical evolution and new direction, Technological Forecasting &
Social Change, vol. 72, n. 8, pp. 944-979. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2005.05.011
Coccia M. 2005b. A taxonomy of public research bodies: a systemic approach, Prometheus, vol. 23, n. 1, pp. 63-
82. DOI:10.1080/0810902042000331322

12

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Coccia M. 2005c. Measuring Intensity of technological change: The seismic approach, Technological Forecasting
& Social Change, vol. 72, n. 2, pp. 117-144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2004.01.004
Coccia M. 2005d Metrics to measure the technology transfer absorption: analysis of the relationship between
institutes and adopters in northern Italy. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialization, vol.
4, n. 4, pp. 462-486, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTTC.2005.006699
Coccia M. 2006. Classifications of innovations: survey and future directions. Working Paper Ceris del Consiglio
Nazionale delle Ricerche, Ceris-Cnr Working Paper, vol. 8, n. 2 - ISSN (Print): 1591-0709, Available at arXiv
Open access e-prints: http://arxiv.org/abs/1705.08955.
Coccia M. 2006a. Analysis and classification of public research institutes, World Review of Science, Technology
and Sustainable Development, vol. 3, n. 1, pp.1-16, https://doi.org/10.1504/WRSTSD.2006.008759
Coccia M. 2007. A new taxonomy of country performance and risk based on economic and technological
indicators, Journal of Applied Economics, vol. 10, n. 1, pp. 29-42.
Coccia M. 2007a. Macchine, lavoro e accrescimento della ricchezza: Riflessioni sul progresso tecnico, occupazione
e sviluppo economico nel pensiero economico del Settecento ed Ottocento. Working Paper Ceris del Consiglio
Nazionale delle Ricerche, vol. 9, n. 1 - ISSN (Print): 1591-0709
Coccia M. 2008. Spatial mobility of knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity: analysis and measurement of the
impact within the geoeconomic space, The Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 33, n. 1, pp. 105-122,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-007-9032-4
Coccia M. 2008a. Science, funding and economic growth: analysis and science policy implications. World Review
of Science, Technology and Sustainable Development, vol. 5, n. 1, pp.1-27. DOI: 10.1504/WRSTSD.2008.01781.
Coccia M. 2009. What is the optimal rate of R&D investment to maximize productivity growth? Technological
Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 76, n. 3, pp. 433-446.
Coccia M. 2009a. A new approach for measuring and analyzing patterns of regional economic growth: empirical
analysis in Italy, Italian Journal of Regional Science- Scienze Regionali, vol. 8, n. 2, pp. 71-95.
DOI: 10.3280/SCRE2009-002004
Coccia M. 2009b. Research performance and bureaucracy within public research labs, Scientometrics, vol. 79, n. 1,
pp. 93-107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0406-2
Coccia M. 2010. Energy metrics for driving competitiveness of countries: Energy weakness magnitude, GDP per
barrel and barrels per capita, Energy Policy, vol. 38, n. 3, pp. 1330-1339, DOI: 10.1016/j.enpol.2009.11.011.
Coccia M. 2010a. Spatial patterns of technology transfer and measurement of its friction in the geo-economic
space. International Journal of Technology Transfer and Commercialisation, vol. 9, n. 3, pp. 255-267.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTTC.2010.030214
Coccia M. 2010b. The asymmetric path of economic long waves, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol.
77, n. 5, pp. 730-738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.02.003
Coccia M. 2010c. Democratization is the driving force for technological and economic change, Technological
Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 77, n. 2, pp. 248-264, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2009.06.007.
Coccia M. 2011. The interaction between public and private R&D expenditure and national productivity,
Prometheus-Critical Studies in Innovation, vol.29, n. 2, pp.121-130.
Coccia M. 2012. Political economy of R&D to support the modern competitiveness of nations and determinants
of economic optimization and inertia. Technovation, vol. 32, n. 6, pp. 370–379, DOI:
10.1016/j.technovation.2012.03.005
Coccia M. 2012a. Driving forces of technological change in medicine: Radical innovations induced by side effects
and their impact on society and healthcare, Technology in Society, vol. 34, n. 4, pp. 271-283,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2012.06.002
Coccia M. 2012b. Evolutionary growth of knowledge in path-breaking targeted therapies for lung cancer: radical
innovations and structure of the new technological paradigm, International Journal of Behavioural and Healthcare
Research, vol. 3, nos. 3-4, pp. 273-290, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBHR.2012.051406
13

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Coccia M. 2012c. Cartilage tissue engineering with chondrogenic cells versus artificial joint replacement: the
insurgence of new technological paradigms, Health and Technology, vol. 2, n. 4, pp. 235-247, DOI:
10.1007/s12553-012-0032-5
Coccia M. 2013. What are the likely interactions among innovation, government debt, and employment?
Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, vol. 26, n. 4, pp. 456-471.
Coccia M. 2014. Driving forces of technological change: The relation between population growth and
technological innovation-Analysis of the optimal interaction across countries, Technological Forecasting & Social
Change, vol. 82, n. 2, pp. 52-65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.06.001
Coccia M. 2014a. Path-breaking target therapies for lung cancer and a far-sighted health policy to support clinical
and cost effectiveness, Health Policy and Technology, vol. 1, n. 3, pp. 74-82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2013.09.007
Coccia M. 2014b. Socio-cultural origins of the patterns of technological innovation: What is the likely interaction
among religious culture, religious plurality and innovation? Towards a theory of socio-cultural drivers of the
patterns of technological innovation, Technology in Society, 36(1): 13-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2013.11.002
Coccia M. 2014c. Steel market and global trends of leading geo-economic players. International Journal of trade
and global markets, vol. 7, n.1, pp. 36-52, http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTGM.2014.058714
Coccia M. 2014d. Structure and organisational behaviour of public research institutions under unstable growth of
human resources. Int. J. Services Technology and Management, vol. 20, nos. 4/5/6, pp. 251–266.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSTM.2014.068857
Coccia M. 2014e. Driving forces of technological change: The relation between population growth and
technological innovation-Analysis of the optimal interaction across countries, Technological Forecasting & Social
Change, vol. 82, n. 2, pp. 52-65, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.06.001
Coccia M. 2014f. Religious culture, democratisation and patterns of technological innovation. International Journal
of sustainable society, vol. 6, n.4, pp. 397-418, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJSSOC.2014.066771.
Coccia M. 2014g. Emerging technological trajectories of tissue engineering and the critical directions in cartilage
regenerative medicine. Int. J. Healthcare Technology and Management, vol. 14, n. 3, pp. 194-
208. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJHTM.2014.064247
Coccia M. 2015. General sources of general purpose technologies in complex societies: Theory of global
leadership-driven innovation, warfare and human development, Technology in Society, vol. 42, August, pp. 199-
226, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.05.008
Coccia M. 2015a. Technological paradigms and trajectories as determinants of the R&D corporate change in drug
discovery industry. Int. J. Knowledge and Learning, vol. 10, n. 1, pp. 29–
43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJKL.2015.071052
Coccia M. 2015b. Spatial relation between geo-climate zones and technological outputs to explain the evolution of
technology. Int. J. Transitions and Innovation Systems, vol. 4, nos. 1-2, pp. 5-21,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJTIS.2015.074642
Coccia M. 2015c. The Nexus between technological performances of countries and incidence of cancers in society,
Technology in Society, vol. 42, August, pp. 61-70, http://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2015.02.003
Coccia M. 2015d. Patterns of innovative outputs across climate zones: the geography of innovation, Prometheus.
Critical Studies in Innovation, 33(2): 165-186.
Coccia M. 2016. The relation between price setting in markets and asymmetries of systems of measurement of
goods, The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, vol. 14, part B, November, pp. 168-178,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2016.06.001
Coccia M. 2016a. Radical innovations as drivers of breakthroughs: characteristics and properties of the
management of technology leading to superior organizational performance in the discovery process of R&D labs,
Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 28, n. 4, pp. 381-395,
https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2015.1095287
14

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Coccia M. 2016b. Problem-driven innovations in drug discovery: co-evolution of the patterns of radical innovation
with the evolution of problems, Health Policy and Technology, vol. 5, n. 2, pp. 143-155.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hlpt.2016.02.003
Coccia M. 2017. Disruptive firms and industrial change, Journal of Economic and Social Thought, vol. 4, n. 4,
pp. 437-450, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jest.v4i4.1511,
Coccia M. 2017a. Sources of disruptive technologies for industrial change. L’industria –Rivista di economia e
politica industriale, vol. 38, n. 1, pp. 97-120, DOI: 10.1430/87140
Coccia M. 2017b. Asymmetric paths of public debts and of general government deficits across countries within
and outside the European monetary unification and economic policy of debt dissolution, The Journal of
Economic Asymmetries, vol. 15, June, pp. 17-31, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.02.003
Coccia M. 2017c. Varieties of capitalism’s theory of innovation and a conceptual integration with leadership-
oriented executives: the relation between typologies of executive, technological and socioeconomic
performances. Int. J. Public Sector Performance Management, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 148–168.
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPSPM.2017.084672
Coccia M. 2017d. A Theory of general causes of violent crime: Homicides. Income inequality and deficiencies of
the heat hypothesis and of the model of CLASH, Aggression and Violent Behavior, vol. 37, November-
December, pp. 190-200, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.10.005
Coccia M. 2017e. The source and nature of general purpose technologies for supporting next K-waves: Global
leadership and the case study of the U.S. Navy's Mobile User Objective System, Technological Forecasting &
Social Change, vol. 116 (March), pp. 331-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.05.019
Coccia M. 2017f. Sources of technological innovation: Radical and incremental innovation problem-driven to
support competitive advantage of firms, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 29, n. 9, pp. 1048-
1061, DOI: 10.1080/09537325.2016.1268682
Coccia M. 2017g. The Fishbone diagram to identify, systematize and analyze the sources of general purpose
technologies. Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, vol. 4, n. 4, pp. 291-303,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jsas.v4i4.1518
Coccia M. 2017h. Theorem of Not Independence of Any Technological Innovation - Philosophical and
Theoretical Foundations of the Evolution of Technology, Working Paper CocciaLab n. 22 Arizona State
University (USA). Available at: Electronic Library SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2971691
Coccia M. 2018. A theory of general causes of terrorism: high population growth. Income inequality and relative
deprivation, Archives of Psychology, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 22-47 https://doi.org/10.31296/aop.v2i4.32
Coccia M. 2018a. Terrorism Driven by High Population Growth. Contemporary Voices: St Andrews Journal of
International Relations. 1 (1), pp. 1–13. https://cvir.st-andrews.ac.uk/131/volume/1/issue/1/
Coccia M. 2018b. The relation between terrorism and high population growth, Journal of Economics and
Political Economy, vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 84-104, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jepe.v5i1.1575
Coccia M. 2018c. Growth rate of population associated with high terrorism incidents in society, Journal of
Economics Bibliography, vol. 5, n. 3, pp. 142-158. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jeb.v5i3.1743
Coccia M. 2018d. The origins of the economics of Innovation, Journal of Economic and Social Thought, vol. 5, n.
1, pp. 9-28, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jest.v5i1.1574
Coccia M. 2018e. Disruptive firms and technological change, Quaderni IRCrES-CNR, vol., 3, n. 1, pp. 3-18, DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.23760/2499-6661.2018.001
Coccia M. 2018f A Theory of the General Causes of Long Waves: War, General Purpose Technologies, and
Economic Change. Technological Forecasting & Social Change, vol. 128, March, pp. 287-295,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.0131
Coccia M. 2018g. Optimization in R&D intensity and tax on corporate profits for supporting labor productivity of
nations, The Journal of Technology Transfer, vol. 43, n. 3, pp. 792-814, DOI: 10.1007/s10961-017-9572-1

15

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Coccia M. 2018h. An introduction to the theories of institutional change, Journal of Economics Library, vol. 5, n.
4, pp. 337-344, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v5i4.1788
Coccia M. 2018i. Superpowers and conflict development: Is it a possible relation for supporting human progress?,
Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences , vol. 5, n. 4, pp. 274-281, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jsas.v5i4.1791
Coccia M. 2018l. What are the characteristics of revolution and evolution? Journal of Economic and Social
Thought, vol. 5, n. 4, pp. 288-294, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jest.v5i4.1789
Coccia M. 2018m. World-System Theory: A sociopolitical approach to explain World economic development in a
capitalistic economy, Journal of Economics and Political Economy, vol. 5, n. 4, pp. 459-465,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jepe.v5i4.1787
Coccia M. 2018n. General properties of the evolution of research fields: a scientometric study of human
microbiome, evolutionary robotics and astrobiology, Scientometrics, vol. 117, n. 2, pp. 1265-1283,
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2902-8
Coccia M. 2018o. Theorem of not independence of any technological innovation, Journal of Economics
Bibliography, vol. 5, n. 1, pp. 29-35, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jeb.v5i1.1578
Coccia M. 2018p. Classification of innovation considering technological interaction, Journal of Economics
Bibliography, vol. 5, n. 2, pp. 76-93, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jeb.v5i2.1650
Coccia M. 2018q. Competition between basic and applied research in the organizational behaviour of public
research labs, Journal of Economics Library, vol. 5, n. 2, pp. 118-133, I http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v5i2.1652.
Coccia M. 2018r. Motivation and theory of self-determination: Some management implications in organizations,
Journal of Economics Bibliography, vol. 5, n. 4, pp. 223-230, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jeb.v5i4.1792
Coccia M. 2019. Comparative Theories of the Evolution of Technology. In: Farazmand A. (eds) Global
Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance. Springer, Cham, Springer Nature
Switzerland AG, ISBN: 978-3-319-20927-2, online ISBN 978-3-319-31816-5. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
319-31816-5_3841-1
Coccia M. 2019a. Revolutions and Evolutions. A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public
Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, ISBN: 978-3-319-20927-2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3708-1
Coccia M. 2019b. Theories of Revolution. A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration,
Public Policy, and Governance, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, ISBN: 978-3-319-20927-2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3707-1
Coccia M. 2019c. Comparative Institutional Changes. A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public
Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, ISBN: 978-3-319-20927-2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1277-1
Coccia M. 2019d. Killer Technologies: the destructive creation in the technical change. ArXiv.org e-Print archive,
Cornell University, USA. Permanent arXiv available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.12406
Coccia M. 2019e. A theory of the evolution of technology: technological parasitism and the implications for
innovation management, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, S0923-4748(18)30421-
1,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2019.11.003
Coccia M. 2019f. Comparative World-Systems Theories. A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public
Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Springer Nature Switzerland AG, ISBN: 978-3-319-20927-2,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3705-1
Coccia M. 2019g. Metabolism of public research organizations: how do laboratories consume state subsidies?:
Public Organization Review: A Global Journal,
19(4), 473-491, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11115-018-0421-y
Coccia M. 2019h. Revolution: Characteristics, taxonomies and situational causes, Journal of Economic and Social
Thought, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 48-56, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jest.v6i1.1790

16

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Coccia M. 2019i. Theories of the evolution of technology based on processes of competitive substitution and
multi-mode interaction between technologies. Journal of Economics Bibliography, vol. 6, n. 2, pp. 99-
109, http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jeb.v6i2.1889
Coccia M. 2019l. What is technology and technology change? A new conception with systemic-purposeful
perspective for technology analysis, Journal of Social and Administrative Sciences, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 145-169,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jsas.v6i3.1957
Coccia M. 2019m. Why do nations produce science advances and new technology? Technology in society, vol. 59,
November, 101124, pp. 1-9, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.03.007
Coccia M. 2019n. A Theory of classification and evolution of technologies within a Generalized Darwinism,
Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, vol. 31, n. 5, pp. 517-531,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2018.1523385
Coccia M. 2019o. The theory of technological parasitism for the measurement of the evolution of technology and
technological forecasting, Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.12.012
Coccia M. 2019p. The Role of Superpowers in Conflict Development and Resolutions. A. Farazmand (ed.), Global
Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Springer Nature Switzerland
AG, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_3709-1
Coccia M. 2020. Deep learning technology for improving cancer care in society: New directions in cancer imaging
driven by artificial intelligence. Technology in Society, vol. 60, February, pp. 1-11,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2019.101198
Coccia M., Benati I. 2018. Comparative Models of Inquiry, A. Farazmand (ed.), Global Encyclopedia of Public
Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31816-5_1199-1
Coccia M., Cadario E. 2014. Organisational (un)learning of public research labs in turbulent context. International
Journal of Innovation and Learning, vol. 15, n. 2, pp.115-129, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJIL.2014.059756
Coccia M., Finardi U. 2012. Emerging nanotechnological research for future pathway of biomedicine.
International Journal of Biomedical nanoscience and nanotechnology, vol. 2, nos. 3-4, pp. 299-317.
DOI: 10.1504/IJBNN.2012.051223
Coccia M., Rolfo S. 2002. Technology transfer analysis in the Italian national research council, Technovation, vol.
22, n. 5, pp. 291-299, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4972(01)00018-9
Coccia M., Rolfo S. 2008. Strategic change of public research units in their scientific activity, Technovation, vol.
28, n. 8, pp. 485-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2008.02.005
Coccia M., Rolfo S. 2009. Project management in public research organization: strategic change in complex
scenarios. International Journal of Project Organisation and Management, vol. 1, n. 3, pp. 235-252,
https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPOM.2009.027537
Coccia M., Rolfo S. 2013. Human Resource Management and Organizational Behavior of Public Research
Institutions. International Journal of Public Administration, vol. 36, n. 4, pp. 256-268,
https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2012.756889
Coccia M., Wang L. 2015. Path-breaking directions of nanotechnology-based chemotherapy and molecular cancer
therapy, Technological Forecasting & Social Change, 94(May):155–169.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2014.09.007
Coccia M., Wang L. 2016. Evolution and convergence of the patterns of international scientific collaboration,
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 113, n. 8, pp. 2057-2061.
www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1510820113.
Coccia M., Watts J. 2020. A theory of the evolution of technology: technological parasitism and the implications
for innovation management, vol. 55, 101552, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jengtecman.2019.11.003
Crenshaw M. 1981. The Causes of Terrorism. Comparative Politics, vol. 13, n. 4, pp. 379-399.

17

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245

Coccia M. 2020. Critical decision in crisis management: Rational strategies of decision
making. Journal of Economics Library, vol. 7., n. 2, pp. 81-
96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1453/jel.v7i2.2049

Emery F. E., Trist E. L. 1965. The causal texture of organizational environments. Human Relations, 18(1), 21–
32.
Gigerenzer G., Selten R. 2002. Bounded Rationality. MIT Press, Cambridge.
Gigerenzer G., Todd P. M. 1999. Ecological rationality: the normative study of heuristics. In Gigerenzer Gerd;
Todd Peter M. The ABC Research Group (eds.). Ecological Rationality: Intelligence in the World. New York:
Oxford University Press. pp. 487–497.
Gioia D. A., Chittipeddi K. 1991. Sensemaking and sensegiving in strategic change initiation. Strategic
Management Journal, 12(6), 433-448. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250120604
Groh M. 2014. Strategic Management in Times of Crisis. American Journal of Economics and Business
Administration. 6 (2): 49–57.
Johnson G., Scholes K. (1988), Exploring Corporate Strategy, Hemel Hempstead, England, Prentice Hall.
Kahneman D., Slovic P., Tversky A. 1982. Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge
University Press.
Krueger A. B. 2007. What Makes a Terrorist: Economics and the Roots of Terrorism. Princeton and Oxford:
Princeton University Press. (Chapter 1).
Linstone H. A 1999. Decision Making for technology executives. Using multiple perspectives to improve
performance. Artech House, Boston, USA.
Lloyd P. E., Dicken p. 1977. Location in Space: A Theoretical Approach to Economic Geography. SAGE
Publications Inc.
McDermott RI., Taylor M. J. 1982. Industrial Organisation and localization, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Miller K. 1992. A Framework for Integrated Risk Management in International Business. Journal of International
Business Studies, 23(2), 311-331. Retrieved from www.jstor.org/stable/154903
Newman E. 2006. Exploring the Root Causes of Terrorism. Studies in Conflict & Terrorism, vol. 29, n. 8, pp.
749-772.
Seeger M. W., Sellno T. L., Ulmer R. R. 1998. Communication, organization and crisis. Communication
Yearbook. 21: 231–275.
Shrivastava P., Mitroff I. I., Miller D., Miclani A. 1988. Understanding Industrial Crises. Journal of Management
Studies. 25 (4): 285–303. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1988.tb00038.x.
Simon H. A. 1947. Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-Making Processes in Administrative
Organization. The Free Press
Simon H. A. 1955. A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics. 69 (1): 99–118.
doi:10.2307/1884852.
Simon H. A. 1957. Models of Man. John Wiley.
Venette S. J. 2003. Risk communication in a High Reliability Organization: APHIS PPQ's inclusion of risk in
decision making. Ann Arbor, MI: UMI Proquest Information and Learning.

18

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3651245