下载文档原格式
管理工作中的不确定性和变化在现代的商业环境中，管理者面临着许多挑战，其中最重要的是不确定性和变化。
随着市场条件的不断变化，技术的快速发展以及公司内部外部因素的影响，管理者必须学会适应和应对不确定性和变化。
本文将探讨管理工作中的不确定性和变化，并提供一些建议来应对这些挑战。
一、不确定性的出现在管理工作中，不确定性是不可避免的。
它可以来自不同的方面，如市场变化、政策调整、竞争压力、人员变动等。
不确定性的出现可能会对组织的运营和发展产生负面影响，因此管理者需要首先了解和认识不确定性的原因和影响。
1.市场变化：市场的需求和趋势是不断变化的，管理者必须密切关注市场动态，及时调整业务战略和运营模式，以保持竞争力。
2.技术发展：科技的快速进步给企业带来了新的机遇和挑战。
管理者需要关注新技术的应用，及时更新企业的技术设备和管理方式，以适应市场的变化。
3.政策调整：政府的政策和法规调整可能会对企业的运营和发展产生重大影响。
管理者需要及时了解政策的变化，做好与政府的沟通和合规工作。
4.人员变动：人员的离职、晋升、调整等变动也会给组织带来不确定性。
管理者需要做好人才培养和绩效管理，以确保组织的稳定运营。
二、应对不确定性的策略面对不确定性，管理者需要采取一系列相应的策略来应对和适应变化。
1.灵活性：管理者应该培养自己的灵活性和适应能力，及时调整战略和计划，以适应市场的变化。
同时，要鼓励员工具备灵活性和创新思维，以增强组织的应变能力。
2.信息获取和分析：管理者需要建立完善的信息收集和分析系统，及时了解市场动态、竞争对手的动向等重要信息，以便做出准确的决策。
3.团队合作：建立一个高效的团队合作机制，鼓励员工之间的沟通和合作，共同应对不确定性和变化。
团队合作的精神和协同工作能力可以帮助组织更好地应对挑战。
4.风险管理：管理者应该制定风险管理计划，尽量减少潜在风险的影响。
这包括制定适当的政策和规范、建立紧密的供应链关系、保持财务稳定等。
有效管理工作中的变化与不确定性在当今快速变化和不确定性的环境下，有效管理工作中的变化与不确定性成为组织成功的关键因素。
管理者需要灵活应对变化，制定适应性战略，同时建立一个稳定的工作团队来应对不确定性。
一、变化管理变化是不可避免的，特别是在当今全球化和科技发展的背景下。
管理者应重视变化管理，以确保组织不会因变化而失去竞争优势。
1.审视变化原因：管理者应对变化进行深入的分析和了解，找出变化的原因和动机。
这有助于管理者确定变化的范围和影响，并为实施变化做好准备。
例如，公司面临客户需求的变化，管理者可以通过市场调研和客户反馈来了解变化的原因。
2. 制定变化策略：管理者应根据变化的性质和规模来制定变化策略。
变化策略应该明确目标和行动计划，并涵盖组织结构、流程和文化等方面。
确保变化策略与组织的长期战略一致，并获得员工的支持和参与。
例如，如果公司决定实施数字化转型，管理者可以制定一个详细的转型计划，包括培训员工、引入新技术等。
3. 沟通与参与：管理者应与员工进行积极的沟通和参与。
沟通可以增加变化的透明度，减少员工的不确定性和抵抗情绪。
参与员工可以提供宝贵的意见和建议，并增加他们对变化的接受度。
例如，管理者可以定期组织员工大会、工作坊或意见征集活动来促进沟通和参与。
二、不确定性管理不确定性是管理工作中的常态，特别是在日益复杂和多变的环境中。
管理者应通过适当的方法和技巧来处理不确定性，保持组织的灵活性和竞争力。
1. 情景规划：管理者可以通过情景规划来处理不确定性。
情景规划是一种未来预测的方法，可以帮助管理者了解不同的情景和可能的发展趋势。
管理者可以制定应对不同情景的策略，并在发生变化时进行调整。
2. 灵活的组织结构：管理者应建立灵活的组织结构，以适应不确定性和变化。
灵活的组织结构可以促进快速决策和灵活资源配置。
管理者可以采用横向组织结构、团队合作和跨部门协作等方式来提高组织的灵活性。
3. 学习与创新：管理者应鼓励员工学习和创新。
管理的本质是决策管理是组织中至关重要的一个功能，它涉及到规划、指导、协调和控制组织的资源以实现既定目标。
而管理的核心则是决策。
决策是管理者在不同场景下做出的选择，通过决策，管理者可以引导组织向着正确的方向发展。
在本文中，我们将探讨管理的本质是决策这一主题。
决策的重要性决策在管理中占据着重要的地位。
管理者需要在复杂多变的环境中做出各种决策来解决问题、推动组织发展。
良好的决策能够提高组织的效率和绩效，而不良的决策则可能导致损失和失败。
因此，决策是管理者必备的核心技能之一。
西蒙的决策理论西蒙是20世纪著名的管理学家和行为经济学家，他对决策过程进行了深入的研究，提出了许多对管理实践有指导意义的理论。
西蒙认为，人的理性是有限的，在面对复杂的决策时，人们往往会采取简化的决策规则，这就是所谓的“有限理性”。
西蒙提出了“满意度”模型，即在决策时，人们往往不会寻求最优解，而是满足于找到一个可以接受的解决方案。
通过这种方式，人们可以在有限的时间和资源下做出相对合理的决策。
决策的类型决策可以分为多种类型，常见的包括：1.战略性决策：涉及组织长期发展方向和目标的重要决策，需要高层管理者进行。
2.战术性决策：涉及中期目标和计划的决策，通常由中层管理者负责。
3.操作性决策：涉及具体业务活动和日常运营的细节问题，由一线管理者或员工做出。
在实际管理中，管理者需要根据不同情况和需求做出适当类型的决策，以达到最佳的管理效果。
决策的步骤决策是一个复杂的过程，通常包括以下几个步骤：1.定义问题：明确问题的本质和需要解决的内容。
2.收集信息：获取相关信息和数据，为决策提供依据。
3.制定方案：根据信息和情况制定备选方案。
4.评估方案：对各个方案进行评估和比较，选择最优方案。
5.实施决策：将决策方案付诸实施，并监控执行过程。
6.反馈调整：根据执行情况进行评估和反馈，必要时调整决策方案。
通过以上步骤，管理者可以在决策过程中有效地权衡利弊，最终做出正确的选择。
不确定性说课稿引言概述：不确定性是指在决策过程中存在的信息不完全或者不确定的情况。
在现实生活中，我们经常会面临各种不确定性的情况，例如天气预报、股市波动、疾病治疗效果等。
本文将从不确定性的定义、不确定性的来源、不确定性的影响、不确定性的应对策略和不确定性的管理等五个部分，详细阐述不确定性的概念和相关内容。
一、不确定性的定义1.1 不确定性的概念：不确定性是指在决策过程中，人们面临的信息不完全或者不确定的情况。
1.2 不确定性的特点：不确定性具有不可预测性、不可控制性和不可归因性等特点。
1.3 不确定性的分类：不确定性可以分为结构性不确定性和随机性不确定性两种类型。
二、不确定性的来源2.1 外部环境的不确定性：外部环境的变化和不确定性因素是导致不确定性的主要来源。
2.2 内部决策的不确定性：决策者的主观判断和决策过程中的不确定性因素也会导致不确定性的产生。
2.3 不确定性的传播：不确定性在决策过程中会通过信息传递和决策者之间的交流而传播。
三、不确定性的影响3.1 决策效果的不确定性：不确定性会导致决策结果的不确定性，可能出现偏差或者错误的决策结果。
3.2 决策者的心理影响：不确定性会增加决策者的心理压力和焦虑感，降低决策者的决策质量。
3.3 组织绩效的不确定性：不确定性对组织绩效产生重要影响，可能导致组织的盈利能力下降或者市场竞争力的降低。
四、不确定性的应对策略4.1 信息收集和分析：通过收集和分析相关信息，提高决策的准确性和可靠性。
4.2 风险管理和控制：建立风险管理机制，对不确定性因素进行评估和控制，降低决策的风险。
4.3 制定灵活的决策方案：制定多个决策方案，并且在决策过程中保持灵活性，根据不同情况进行调整。
五、不确定性的管理5.1 决策者的能力提升：提高决策者的专业知识和决策能力，增强应对不确定性的能力。
5.2 组织文化的培育：营造积极向上的组织文化，鼓励员工主动面对不确定性，培养创新和适应能力。
卫生应急管理_哈尔滨医科大学中国大学mooc课后章节答案期末考试题库2023年1.关于卫生应急沟通媒体环境的重要组成部分描述正确的是答案:从传播客体看，“全媒体、大传播”格局下，组织可以实现传播对象的全覆盖，将信息传递到“地球村”里的每一个公民_从传播空间看，“全媒体、大传播”格局下，信息能够克服地理障碍和空间阻隔，跨越万水千山瞬间抵达每个“地球村”公民面前_从传播渠道看，除了传统的报纸、杂志、广播和电视外，基于互联网平台诞生的新兴媒介应用形态不断涌现，组织的传播渠道更加丰富、多元、立体，互动性得到增强2.疾病预防控制机构应急响应程序包括答案:紧急机动，现场核查_分析判断，报告情况_全面部署，转入处置_综合判断，提出预警3.突发公共卫生事件现场处置准备包括答案:技术_物资_后勤保障_人员4.下列回答是正确的是答案:突发事件分为四类5.下列哪项不属于突发公共卫生事件包括事件答案:重大心脑血管疾病6.下列不属于卫生应急管理定义内涵的表述是答案:研究对象只包括对重大传染病、群体不明原因、食物中毒等引发的突发公共卫生事件的管理7.突发公共卫生事件演化规律和综合防范策略研究不涵盖下列哪项内容答案:突发公共卫生事件性质、构成结构和要素、事件网络关联及演化研究8.国家层面的卫生应急指挥机构主要是在（）领导下，负责特别重大突发公共卫生事件的统一领导、统一指挥答案:国务院9.紧急医学救援队伍主要职责是答案:现场医疗卫生救援10.以下不属于突发急性传染病防控队伍主要职责的是答案:现场医疗救治11.卫生应急物资储备形式包括实物储备、计划储备、资金储备和（）答案:信息储备12.可以进行损耗处理的卫生应急物资是答案:不可回收的13.我国卫生应急资金来源主要包括（）、社会捐赠和保险资金三个渠道答案:政府14.我国卫生应急资金管理的责任主体主要是答案:政府15.突发事件的预警机制的子系统包括答案:突发事件监测_突发事件评估识别_突发事件预报16.卫生应急预警体系应具备的基本功能答案:预警处置和事件监控_咨询沟通_信息收集_预测预报17.突发公共卫生事件心理危机的预防、干预与控制主要包括以下哪些措施答案:加强公众的健康教育_专业性心理干预_心理咨询热线_加强信息监测及信息管理，建立健全社会心理预警系统18.以下对心理危机概念的描述错误的是答案:心理危机不包括群体性或社会性的心理恐慌现象19.以下对恐慌的描述错误的是答案:恐慌心理是人类自我保护的后天习得性反应20.风险管理的基本流程是：风险沟通与咨询、计划准备、风险评估、风险处置、监控与审核、记录风险管理的过程。
大学生自我管理的重要性和方法在大学校园里，每个人都有着自己独特的生活方式，但是有一个共性问题，那就是如何自我管理。
当我们步入大学，离开了父母的保护和管理，我们就要开始学会自我管理，学会独立生活和学习，否则将会影响到我们的成长和发展。
因此，本文将从重要性和方法两个方面探讨大学生自我管理的必要性与途径。
一、自我管理的重要性自我管理是指通过自己的努力和控制，使自己的生活和学习变得更为有效和有序。
在大学里，自我管理的好坏将会对整个人生产生深远的影响。
首先，自我管理能够锻炼我们的自控能力和自我约束力，使我们养成一种自觉的规律和秩序。
其次，自我管理可以降低随意性和不确定性，从而消除内心的焦虑和不安，更有利于我们保持心态稳定。
最后，自我管理的好坏也直接影响到我们的成绩和竞争力，只有自我管理得当，才能更好地发挥我们的潜力和优势，从而在学术成就和人生道路两方面顺利发展。
二、自我管理的方法自我管理的好坏，关键在于方法和策略。
具体而言，自我管理需要从时间、习惯和心理方面着手：1. 时间管理合理的时间管理能够使你更高效地完成任务，具体来说，可以按照以下方法执行：（1）制定详细的学习计划。
在每个学期开始时，制定适当的学习计划，目标明确、有计划的计划可行性高。
（2）充分利用碎片时间。
合理利用一些零散的时间，比如在排队等候、候车、等人时，随身携带笔记本或者手机学习。
（3）自我约束。
和自己做一个约束，比如:晚上10点之前必须滚进被窝，不能够熬夜看电影。
2. 培养好习惯好的习惯能够一定程度上提高我们的生活质量，为我们的成长与发展创造更加良好的环境。
具体而言包括：（1）养成良好的作息习惯。
不论是大学生还是上班族, 保持规律作息，制定时间表，有助于我们养成规律的生活节奏。
（2）注意衣着搭配。
舒适、简约的着装，注意清洁卫生能给人留下良好的印象，同时也能舒缓我们的心情。
3. 心理管理对于大学生来说，保持良好的心态是至关重要的，但是，我们也经常面临着升学压力、人际关系等问题。
组织行为学问题答疑材料1、以媒介划分，信息沟通可以分为什么？以媒介划分，信息沟通可以分为：书面沟通、口头沟通、非语言沟通。
2、工作压力是什么？怎样正确认识和正确对待工作压力？工作压力是指人在工作中对付那些自己认为很难对付的情况时，所产生的情绪上的和身体上的异常反应。
它是一种机体内部状态，是人和环境相互作用的结果。
压力产生的后果有积极和消极两种，但通常更多的是表现在消极方面。
压力的消极作用集中表现在对健康和工作绩效的损害方面，这种损害程度同控制能力及个人对压力的态度有密切关系。
工作压力是客观存在的，但同样的压力在不同人的身上却可以产生不同的后果。
低于中等水平的压力感有助于员工提高工作绩效。
但经受的压力感水平过高，或中等水平压力感持续的时间过长，都会使员工绩效降低．这时就需要管理人员采取行动。
其实压力感对于员工满意度的影响并不直接，虽然低于中等水平的压力感有助于员工提高绩效，但他们仍然以为这种压力感令人不快．对付压力的方法很多，一般有以下几条措施：（1）通过组织途径来改变行为方式以减轻和抵消压力。
（2）通过员工个人的解决途径来减轻和抵消压力。
在组织途径方面，管理者要善于识别压力和帮助下属正确对待压力，如重新设计组织结构、改善工作环境等。
在个人途径方面，可以参加体育活动，进行工作之余的放松。
还可以通过时间管理、扩大社会支持网络等来减轻和抵消压力。
3、领导行为及其有效性的理论研究，一般包括什么？领导行为及其有效性的理论研究，一般包括：领导素质理论、领导行为理论、领导权变理论。
4、分配谈判的策略有哪些？分配谈判的策略有哪些：狮子大开口、软硬兼施、最后通牒、时间陷阱。
5、领导规范模式(领导参与理论)提出了选择领导方式的原则是什么？领导规范模式(领导参与理论)提出了选择领导方式的原则是：信息的原则；接受型原则；冲突的原则；合理的原则；目标合适的原则。
6、一个人在组织内的职业生涯变动，一般是向什么方向变动？一个人在组织内的职业生涯变动，一般是向：纵向变动、横向变动、核心变动。
管理心理学知识点总结一、概述管理心理学是一门研究人力资源管理和组织行为的学科，旨在通过对人的行为、态度和心理过程的研究，解决组织管理中的问题，提高组织绩效和员工幸福感。
本文将对管理心理学的主要知识点进行总结。
二、领导力与管理1. 领导风格：包括权威型、民主型和激励型等不同领导风格，不同风格适用于不同情境和员工特点。
2. 调整型领导：根据员工个性和背景，采用不同的领导方式和行为，以提高员工表现和满意度。
3. 变革型领导：通过设定愿景、激励员工，促进组织创新和变革。
4. 人际影响力：指领导者通过交往、说服和建立良好关系来影响他人的能力，包括权威、吸引力和专家力量。
三、决策与问题解决1. 决策类型：包括程序化决策和非程序化决策，前者适用于结构化问题，后者适用于复杂和不确定性较高的问题。
2. 决策风格：涵盖理性决策、直觉决策和政治决策等不同决策方式，取决于领导者的个人特点和情境需求。
3. 择时决策：指在合适的时间做出决策，避免因紧迫感或不确定性影响判断。
四、激励与动机1. 需求理论：包括马斯洛的需求层次理论和赫茨伯格的双因素理论，解释了员工需求对激励的影响。
2. 动机理论：包括期望理论和公平理论，强调员工对工作结果的期望和对待遇的公平感。
3. 激励方法：包括奖励、赞扬、晋升和培训等手段，以激励和满足员工的需求。
五、团队与协作1. 团队建设：包括明确目标、建立互补能力和促进团队凝聚力等，以提高团队绩效和合作关系。
2. 组织文化：指组织共同的价值观、信念和行为规范，对团队凝聚力和员工行为产生影响。
3. 冲突管理：包括竞争式冲突、合作式冲突和妥协式冲突等不同冲突处理方式，依据情境和目标选择适当方式。
六、组织发展与变革1. 变革管理：指组织对内、外环境变化做出的策略性调整和变革。
2. 增量变革：以小幅度调整、渐进方式逐步改进组织绩效和管理方式。
3. 革命性变革：大幅度调整组织结构、管理方式和文化等，以应对重大变革和严峻挑战。
如何管理工作中的不确定性不确定性是工作中经常遇到的一种情况。
不论是项目计划、市场变化还是团队合作，都存在着一定的不确定性。
如何有效地管理工作中的不确定性，不仅能够减少风险，还能够提高工作效率和个人能力。
本文将就如何管理工作中的不确定性进行探讨，并提供一些实用的方法和技巧。
一、接受不确定性的存在首先，我们需要明确一点，不确定性是工作中的常态。
没有任何一个项目或计划能够百分之百地事先确定所有的变量和结果。
因此，接受不确定性的存在是管理工作中不确定性的第一步。
我们应该从心理上建立起对不确定性的适应性，不为不确定性而过分焦虑或恐惧，而是要保持积极、乐观的态度去面对。
二、提前做好准备工作面对工作中的不确定性，提前做好准备工作是必不可少的。
首先，我们需要对工作进行充分的调研和了解，掌握相关的信息和数据。
这样可以帮助我们更好地预测可能出现的不确定性，从而能够做出更明智的决策和规划。
其次，制定详细的计划和时间表。
这些计划可以作为我们面对不确定性时的参考和指导。
在制定计划和时间表时，需要考虑到工作中可能出现的不确定性因素，并设置相应的应对措施。
三、灵活应对不确定性变化在工作中，不确定性是随时可能发生变化的。
因此，我们需要具备灵活应对不确定性变化的能力。
首先，我们要时刻保持警觉，及时关注工作中出现的不确定性迹象，并快速做出调整和反应。
其次，我们需要培养自己的忍耐力和适应性。
在不确定性环境下，有时候我们需要忍耐一段时间，等待一些事情的发展和结果的呈现。
同时，我们也要学会适应变化，及时调整自己的计划和行动，以适应工作中的不确定性变化。
四、有效沟通和协作工作中的不确定性往往需要通过团队的努力来应对和解决。
因此，有效的沟通和协作是管理工作中不确定性的关键。
首先，我们需要与团队成员和其他相关人员进行充分的沟通，确保大家对工作中的不确定性有清晰的认识，并达成共识。
其次，我们要积极参与团队协作，共同面对和解决工作中的不确定性问题。
管理学十大效应01—蝴蝶效应蝴蝶效应:上个世纪70年代，美国一个名叫洛伦兹的气象学家在解释空气系统理论时说，亚马逊雨林一只蝴蝶翅膀偶尔振动，也许两周后就会引起美国得克萨斯州的一场龙卷风.蝴蝶效应是说，初始条件十分微小的变化经过不断放大,对其未来状态会造成极其巨大的差别。
有些小事可以糊涂，有些小事如经系统放大，则对一个组织、一个国家来说是很重要的,就不能糊涂。
02-青蛙现象青蛙现象：把一只青蛙直接放进热水锅里,由于它对不良环境的反应十分敏感，就会迅速跳出锅外。
如果把一个青蛙放进冷水锅里，慢慢地加温,青蛙并不会立即跳出锅外，水温逐渐提高的最终结局是青蛙被煮死了，因为等水温高到青蛙无法忍受时,它已经来不及、或者说是没有能力跳出锅外了。
青蛙现象告诉我们，一些突变事件，往往容易引起人们的警觉，而易致人于死地的却是在自我感觉良好的情况下，对实际情况的逐渐恶化，没有清醒的察觉.03—鳄鱼法则鳄鱼法则:其原意是假定一只鳄鱼咬住你的脚，如果你用手去试图挣脱你的脚，鳄鱼便会同时咬住你的脚与手。
你愈挣扎,就被咬住得越多。
所以，万一鳄鱼咬住你的脚，你唯一的办法就是牺牲一只脚。
譬如在股市中,鳄鱼法则就是：当你发现自己的交易背离了市场的方向，必须立即止损，不得有任何延误，不得存有任何侥幸。
04—鲇鱼效应：以前，沙丁鱼在运输过程中成活率很低.后有人发现，若在沙丁鱼中放一条鲇鱼，情况却有所改观，成活率会大大提高。
这是何故呢？原来鲇鱼在到了一个陌生的环境后，就会“性情急躁”，四处乱游，这对于大量好静的沙丁鱼来说，无疑起到了搅拌作用；而沙丁鱼发现多了这样一个“异已分子”，自然也很紧张，加速游动。
这样沙丁鱼缺氧的问题就迎刃而解了，沙丁鱼也就不会死了。
05—羊群效应羊群效应：头羊往哪里走，后面的羊就跟着往哪里走。
羊群效应最早是股票投资中的一个术语，主要是指投资者在交易过程中存在学习与模仿现象,“有样学样”，盲目效仿别人，从而导致他们在某段时期内买卖相同的股票.在一群羊前面横放一根木棍，第一只羊跳了过去，第二只、第三只也会跟着跳过去；这时，把那根棍子撤走,后面的羊，走到这里，仍然像前面的羊一样，向上跳一下，尽管拦路的棍子已经不在了，这就是所谓的“羊群效应"也称“从众心理”。
Journal of Marketing Research V ol. XLV (June 2008), 320–336320©2008, American Marketing AssociationISSN: 0022-2437 (print), 1547-7193 (electronic)*Raquel Castaño is Professor of Marketing, EGADE, Tecnológico de Monterrey, México (e-mail: rcastano@itesm.mx). Mita Sujan is Wolden-berg Professor of Marketing (e-mail: msujan@), Manish Kacker is Assistant Professor of Marketing (e-mail: mkacker@), and Harish Sujan is Professor of Marketing (e-mail: hsujan@), A.B.Freeman School of Business, Tulane University. The article is based on the first author’s doctoral dissertation. Dilip Soman served as associate editor for this article.RAQUEL CASTAÑO, MITA SUJAN, MANISH KACKER, and HARISH SUJAN*Drawing on theories of new product adoption and intertemporal choice,the authors show in cross-sectional and longitudinal investigations (Study 1) that when adoption is in the distant future, people are more concerned about performance- and symbolic-benefit uncertainties.In contrast, in the near future, the concerns are more about switching- and affective-cost uncertainties.In Studies 2 and 2a, using theories of mental simulation, the authors show that in the distant-future adoption scenario,communication strategies that promote outcome simulations are more effective in reducing performance uncertainty, bolstering positive feelings, and enhancing behavioral intentions.In contrast, in the near-future adoption scenario, communication strategies that promote process simulations are better at reducing switching cost and affective uncertainties, assuaging anxiety, and increasing behavioral intentions.The authors also find positive effects of these communication strategies on actual adoption rates and postconsumption satisfaction (Study 2) and on delayed behavioral intentions (Study 2a).In addition, these communication strategies are more efficacious in increasing behavioral intentions when uncertainty levels are higher (Study 3).The key managerial implications are that communication strategies for new products need to reduce uncertainties about costs and benefits and account for temporal distance to adoption.Keywords :new products, temporal distance, mental simulation,postconsumption satisfaction, communication strategiesManaging Consumer Uncertainty in the Adoption of New Products:T emporal Distance and Mental SimulationMichelin (the company that invented the radial tire) has now developed the Tweel, a no-air combination tire and wheel technology (Mayersohn 2005). The Tweel has a flex-ible central wheel hub and an outer rubber rim that are con-nected by flexible rubber spokes. It delivers a ride as com-fortable as an air-filled tire and performs well on uneven terrain by buckling when it goes over bumps and obstacles and rapidly recovering its original shape. Prototypes havebeen tested with the Audi A4. Automobile enthusiasts are excited by the performance potential of the Tweel and look forward to the opportunity to purchase cars equipped with Tweels. However, when the time to make a purchase deci-sion approaches, several of these consumers might become concerned with the uncertainties of using Tweels and will choose cars equipped with traditional pneumatic tires.Consumers are frequently confronted with innovations that require them to adopt new behaviors and/or discontinue past behaviors. The high rate of failure of innovative new products has led to calls for more research focused on them (Lehmann 1994; Urban, Weinberg, and Hauser 1996; Wind and Mahajan 1997). A reasonable conjecture is that these products initially test well with consumers, encouraging marketers to move forward, but as the time to adopt nears,consumers change their decision processes, likely weight-ing the uncertain costs inherent in switching to unfamiliarConsumer Uncertainty in the Adoption of New Products321technologies more than the expected performance gains. Hoeffler (2003) specifically argues that the newness of such discontinuous innovations creates uncertainties that sepa-rate these adoption decisions from other types of decision making. In this article, we develop a temporal model for managing consumer perceptions of uncertainty during the introduction and launch of new products.In Study 1, we build on new product research on uncer-tainties (Hoeffler 2003) and delineate how temporal dis-tance to adoption influences consumers’concerns about the different types of uncertainties that surround new prod-ucts. Using temporal distance theories (e.g., Trope and Liberman 2003; Wright and Weitz 1977), we hypothesize and find evidence that over time, consumers’concerns shift from a consideration of benefit-related uncertainties (per-formance and symbolic uncertainties) to a consideration of cost-related uncertainties (switching-cost and affective uncertainties).In Studies 2 and 2a, we draw on theories of mental simu-lation to reduce the different types of uncertainties associ-ated with new products. We distinguish between outcome and process simulation (Taylor et al. 1998) and, on the basis of this distinction, suggest communication strategies for new products. We show that communication strategies for new products that promote adoption in the distant future should guide consumers to engage in outcome simulation to reduce performance uncertainty, bolster positive feelings, and enhance behavioral intentions. In contrast, communica-tion strategies for new products that promote adoption in the near future should encourage process simulation to reduce switching-cost and affective-cost uncertainties, alle-viate anxiety, and increase behavioral intentions.In Study 3, we consider how the newness of innovations affects communication needs. On the basis of research on innovations, we argue that at a high level of product new-ness, understanding and managing uncertainty are critical to adoption (Hoeffler 2003). We find empirical support for the contention that the efficacy of uncertainty reduction strategies depends on product newness. Thus, the salutary impact of communication strategies from Study 2 on behav-ioral intentions is contingent on product newness and the initial levels of uncertainty.We draw empirical support for our framework by con-ducting experiments at a Mexican University. In Studies 1 and 2, we examine adoption of a newly introduced virtual course. In Studies 2a and 3, we examine reactions to car concepts. The questions addressed by the three studies appear in Figure 1.STUDY 1: TEMPORAL DISTANCE AND THE ADOPTION PROCESS FOR NEW PRODUCTS Consumers are faced with uncertainty when predicting the value of new products. Such risk and uncertainty have been widely documented as barriers to innovation adoption. Recent work (Hoeffler 2003) has examined the attributes or dimensions along which uncertainty lies and, more impor-tant, has separated uncertainties associated with the benefits of adoption from those associated with the drawbacks of adoption.The primary reasons for adopting a new product are that it confers functional and symbolic value, but there is uncer-tainty that surrounds these value estimates. Hoeffler (2003) identifies performance uncertainty—the uncertainty related to estimating the expected utility of the product (e.g., How useful will the product be?)—as the main uncertainty asso-ciated with the benefits of adoption. Symbolic uncertainty (e.g., How socially desirable and appropriate will the prod-uct be perceived?), particularly the symbolic values of self-esteem and status conferred by adopting something “new,”is also related to the benefits of adoption (Fournier 1998). The principal deterrents to new product adoption are the costs, especially the learning costs, associated with moving to the new product and the psychological pain of forgoing the familiar. Hoeffler (2003) identifies switching-cost uncertainty as the uncertainty associated with learning the steps to use the innovation effectively (e.g., How difficult will it be to switch from using the current product to the new product?) and argues that switching-cost uncertainty is the primary deterrent to the adoption of new products. Research has also suggested that affective uncertainty, par-ticularly the component related to the emotional attachment to old technology and to traditional products (e.g., How will I feel if I forgo the old?), can be a severe cost in the process of new product adoption (Fournier 1998).Recent research on new products has documented differ-ent types of uncertainties related to their adoption. Drawing on theories that address intertemporal choice (e.g., Trope and Liberman 2003; Wright and Weitz 1977), we argue that temporal distance to the adoption will affect the relative importance of these different types of uncertainties. Wright and Weitz (1977) examine time horizon effects on product evaluation strategies and conclude that as the time to deci-sion draws near, people become more concerned with the negative aspects of choice options. Temporal construal-level theory (e.g., Trope and Liberman 2003) proposes that as psychological distance to events decreases, two types of shifts occur: People shift toward using concrete mental models to construe or represent options, and they concern themselves with costs rather than benefits. People tend to construe the distant future by understanding the benefits of the option in terms of abstract goals. Thoughts in the near future pertain to the concrete means for achieving these goals. Feasibility (e.g., the amount of time and effort a per-son must invest in the option) is likely to play a more sig-nificant role in near-future preferences, and desirability (e.g., improved performance or psychological gains from the option) is likely to play a more significant role in distant-future preferences (Lynch and Zauberman 2006; Soman 1998).The research on temporal construal from which we draw has conceptualized the probability (uncertainty) of a gam-ble as a feasibility or cost consideration important in the near future and the payoff (outcome) of a gamble as a bene-fit or desirability consideration important in the distant future (Sagristano, Trope, and Liberman 2002). Similarly, early work by Wright and Weitz (1977) showed that women were more concerned about the modest uncertainties of negative side effects in the imminent than in the distant future. We suggest that both costs and benefits are uncertain for new products relative to established products. Thus, whereas previous research on intertemporal choice has con-sidered the costs and benefits of options, we extend this322JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, JUNE 2008Figure 1SUMMARY OF KEY QUESTIONS AND RESEARCH DESIGNresearch to examine how the uncertainties surrounding both costs and benefits shift with time.Consistent with intertemporal choice predictions, we pro-pose that managing uncertainties about costs is important for near-future adoption decisions, whereas managing uncertainties about benefits is important in distant-future adoption decisions for new products. Furthermore, we posit more precise predictions of the nature of the cost and bene-fit uncertainties that are likely to assume salience over time.We predict that in the near future, consumers will have an increased uncertainty about the time, effort, financial, and other risks associated with switching to the new product and greater uncertainty about forgoing the affective attach-ment to the familiar. Conversely, in the distant future, con-sumers will have a heightened need to determine the uncer-tainties about the performance and symbolic value of the new product. Thus, we propose the following hypotheses:H 1: Compared with when consumers are considering adoptinga new product in the distant future, when they are consider-ing adopting a new product in the near future, they will focus more on the constraints than on the benefits of adop-tion, such that they will have (a) higher switching-costuncertainty, (b) higher affective-attachment uncertainty, (c)lower performance uncertainty, and (d) lower symbolic uncertainty.Adoption Intentions and EmotionsConsumer evaluations (and subsequent adoption) of innovations result in emotional responses that must be con-sidered in the development of product launch strategies (Wood and Moreau 2006). Adoption of a new product is a future event with uncertain outcomes. Thus, the emotions associated with uncertainty—the negative emotions of anxi-ety and fear on the one hand and the positive emotions of hope and optimism on the other hand (Lazarus 1991)—are the likely emotional accompaniments of new product deci-sions. Consistent with this reasoning, Mick and Fournier (1998) suggest that negative emotions are common within the domain of technological consumer products. The poten-tial and promise of new products may also produce opti-mism. We posit that the hope associated with the uncertain benefits of adoption may be especially strong when con-sumers perceive adoption as a distant goal. However, as temporal distance to adoption decreases, people may moveConsumer Uncertainty in the Adoption of New Products323from feelings of optimism to feelings of anxiety associated with the uncertain costs of adoption. Intentions to adopt new products may also decline as time to adoption nears. Thus, we predict the following:H2: Compared with when consumers are considering adoptinga new product in the distant future, when they are consider-ing adopting a new product in the near future, their emo-tions will shift, such that they will have (a) greater feelingsof anxiety, (b) reduced feelings of optimism, and (c) low-ered intentions to adopt.Although research on intertemporal choice has experi-mentally demonstrated the shift from a focus on benefits to a focus on costs over time, the purpose of Study 1 was to test hypotheses related to shifting uncertainties and affects associated with product benefits and costs with both experi-mental and longitudinal studies. We investigated the adop-tion of a newly offered virtual class in a Mexican univer-sity. Following the work of Hoeffler (2003), we conducted a pretest to measure perceived newness. For the participat-ing students, the average of the newness measure for a vir-tual course was high (8.56 on a ten-point scale), and none had previously taken a virtual course.Study 1: Experimental StudyEighty undergraduate students at a university in northern Mexico participated. They were presented with a 300-word written description of a virtual course, which explained the satellite transmission process and the formation of virtual teams and briefly described the benefits and challenges of the new technology. Participants were randomly assigned to one of the two experimental conditions. They were told to imagine themselves in a situation in which they needed to make the decision to register either tomorrow (in the near time frame) or a year from now (in the distant time frame). Then, they completed a questionnaire and were debriefed. The procedure lasted approximately 25 minutes. We detail the measures subsequently in the order in which they were collected. We assessed all scale measures on nine-point scales.Cognitive responses. An open-ended question asked,“What comes to mind when you think about the benefits and drawbacks of enrolling tomorrow/a year from now in a virtual course?” Cognitive responses were separated into individual thoughts. Two judges, blind to the hypotheses and to the experimental conditions, used Hoeffler’s (2003) definitions of uncertainty to code thoughts. Thoughts were classified into those related to switching-cost uncertainty, affective-cost uncertainty, performance-benefit uncertainty, and symbolic-benefit uncertainty. The interjudge agreement was 90%. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. On average, participants produced 2.24 codable thoughts, and there were no significant differences in number of thoughts between the two temporal conditions.S cale measures. Participants indicated how anxious (nervous, worried, and tense; coefficient α= .88) and opti-mistic (optimistic, encouraged, and hopeful; coefficient α= .78) the idea of enrolling in a virtual course tomorrow (a year from now) made them feel. We measured behavioral intentions with three items (“Would you like to try the experience of enrolling in a virtual course?” “Would you enroll in a virtual course?” and “Would you actively seek out a virtual course in order to enroll in it?”; coefficient α= .95). We averaged two scales to assess the degree to which participants perceived the time for taking the course as being in the near or distant future (“The time frame for tak-ing the course was in the near/distant future; close at hand/ far away”; r= .89).ResultsWe used a one-way analysis of variance (ANOV A) (time frame: near versus distant) between-subjects design. We report the thought analyses and checks in Table 1underTable 1TEMPORAL DISTANCE:STUDY 1 MEANS AND SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES FOR UNCERT AINTIES, EMOTIONS, AND INTENTIONSExperimental Study Results Longitudinal Study ResultsTemporal Frames Near Future Distant Future Near Future Distant FutureUncertainty ThoughtsTotal thoughts 2.10 2.38 1.89 2.17Number (proportion) of drawback-oriented uncertainties 1.55 (.68)*.70 (.29) 1.40 (.77)*.89 (.41)Switching-cost uncertainty 1.20 (.52)*.60 (.24).86 (.45).65 (.30)Affective-cost uncertainty.35 (.17)*.10 (.04).54 (.32)*.24 (.11)Number (proportion) of benefit-oriented uncertainties.55 (.32)* 1.68 (.71).49 (.23)* 1.29 (.59)Performance-benefit uncertainty.53 (.28)* 1.60 (.69).43 (.18)*.98 (.47)Symbolic-benefit uncertainty.02 (.01).08 (.03).01 (.05)*.30 (.12)Emotions and IntentionsFeelings of anxiety 5.70* 3.83 6.00* 4.99Feelings of optimism 4.74* 6.53 5.22 5.56Behavioral intentions 4.69* 5.97 3.70* 5.43ChecksTemporal distance 1.96* 6.46 2.02* 4.63Newness (ten-point scale)8.938.208.498.33Sample Size40 40 63 63 *Within-study comparison of means, significant at p< .05.Notes: The proportions reported here were arcsine transformed before the analysis. All scales are nine-point scales, unless indicated otherwise.324JOURNAL OF MARKETING RESEARCH, JUNE 2008“Experimental Study Results.” We conducted the tests of significance with 79 degrees of freedom. The manipulation had the intended effect. Participants in the near-future con-dition perceived the adoption decision as closer at hand than participants in the distant-future condition (1.96 versus 6.46, p< .05).H1: temporal horizon and adoption uncertainties. The data revealed a significant effect of temporal orientation on the number of thoughts related to switching-cost uncer-tainty, affective-cost uncertainty, and performance-benefit uncertainty. The number was higher for participants in the near-future condition than for participants in the distant-future condition for switching-cost uncertainty (1.20 versus .60, p< .05) and affective-cost uncertainty (.35 versus .10, p< .05) and lower for performance-benefit uncertainty (.53 versus 1.60, p< .05). The results were nonsignificant for the number of symbolic-benefit-uncertainty thoughts, which were close to zero in both temporal conditions. H1d was not supported, but evidence for H1a–H1c indicated that for new products, the relative importance of different uncer-tainties varies with changes in the temporal distance to adoption.H2: decision emotions and behavioral intentions.As we expected, feelings of anxiety were higher for participants in the near-future condition than for participants in the distant-future condition (5.70 versus 3.83, p< .05). Feelings of optimism were higher for participants in the distant-future condition than for participants in the near-future condition (6.53 versus 4.74, p< .05). B ehavioral intentions were higher for participants in the distant-future condition than for participants in the near-future condition (5.97 versus 4.69, p< .05). Thus, hypotheses related to the impact of temporal distance on emotions and intentions for new prod-ucts were supported.Study 1: Longitudinal Study of AdoptionTo provide converging evidence for the results of the experimental study, we tracked students in the process of making the decision of whether to enroll in a virtual course in the next semester. One hundred three undergraduate stu-dents at a Mexican university participated in the first wave of the study. Sixty-three respondents (61%) participated in the second wave of the study. A comparison of data from the first wave for respondents who dropped out and those who stayed in the study showed no significant differences between these groups (all p s> .10). In both waves, partici-pants were presented with a description of the virtual course that was being offered the next semester and were told that the decision of whether to enroll needed to be made by the registration deadline. We collected Wave 1 data three months before the registration date and Wave 2 data during the week of registration. Participants completed the same questionnaire at both periods. The alphas for the measured variables were all equal to or greater than .75. We analyzed the results with a one-way ANOV A (tempo-ral distance: near versus distant) repeated measures design and tested the means and significant differences with 62 degrees of freedom (see Table 1, “Longitudinal Study Results”). When people were three months from registra-tion, their thoughts about enrolling were more evenly split between benefit uncertainties (41%) and cost uncertainties (59%). Uncertainties about performance benefits continued to be relevant in the distant time frame, but the uncertainty of the symbolic value of enrolling in a virtual course also accounted for a sizable proportion of thoughts in the longi-tudinal study. During the week of registration, respondents were significantly more anxious—they were more than twice as concerned about cost uncertainties (77%) than benefits uncertainties (23%)—and reported lower intentions to enroll. Switching-cost uncertainties continued to be important in the near time frame, and the uncertainty asso-ciated with forgoing traditional classes loomed larger in the longitudinal study than in the experiment.DiscussionThe purpose of Study 1 was to examine the uncertainties that impinge on the adoption of new products. Study 1 demonstrates that the uncertainties of concern in the adop-tion of a new product shift from performance and symbolic uncertainties in the distant future to switching-cost and affective uncertainties and anxiety in the near future. Fur-thermore, behavioral intentions decline as the time to make an adoption decision approaches. The converging evidence from the experimental and longitudinal studies adds to pre-vious experimental work on intertemporal choice and vali-dates the view that people are able to simulate adopting an unfamiliar product or service in the near and distant futures. The primary purpose of Study 2 was to ascertain whether uncertainties could be managed and whether adoption intentions could be enhanced. Specifically, the objective was to test experimentally communication strategies that were likely to reduce the different types of uncertainties associated with new product adoption at different temporal distances to adoption. In addition, whereas the protocols from Study 1 provided a different measure of intertemporal shifts in decision making from previous research, Study 2 reverted to scales to isolate and measure uncertainties more effectively.STUDY 2: MENTAL SIMULATION AND TEMPORALDISTANCEStudy 2 addresses two key questions, the answers to which could increase consumers’adoption of new products. First, how can consumers heighten their initial feelings of optimism associated with the uncertain promise of better performance and the symbolic value conferred through the adoption of a new product? Second, how can consumers alleviate the growing anxieties and uncertainties of switch-ing to the new and giving up the comfort of the old that intensify as the time to make a buying decision for a new product nears?A way that consumers make decisions about future con-sumption is through autobiographical anticipations or con-sumption visions of the future that visualize the self enact-ing with the new product or service (Bettman 1992). Mental simulations of a product that has not yet been experienced can be prompted by product cues and used as decision tools as much as retrospections about a product (Krishnamurthy and Sujan 1999). Mental simulations make events concrete and increase perceived likelihoods of occurrence (Taylor et al. 1998). Because they make events real, simulations pro-vide a means to deal with uncertain futures.Whereas most research to date on mental simulation has focused on its presence and the amount or degree of imagery (e.g., MacInnis and Price 1990), we distinguishConsumer Uncertainty in the Adoption of New Products325between two types of mental simulations that have been recently investigated—outcome-focused simulations, or why-thinking, and process-focused simulations, or how-thinking (Escalas and Luce 2004; Taylor et al. 1998; Zhao, Hoeffler, and Zauberman 2007). We hypothesize that these two forms of mental simulation concretize separate aspects of the decision and are differentially effective in helping consumers cope with the various kinds of uncertainty asso-ciated with new products.Outcome Simulation, or Why-Thinking, Versus Process Simulation, or How-ThinkingMental simulation is the imitative mental representation of some event or series of events. Taylor and colleagues (1998) argue that the most successful type of mental simu-lation for goal attainment focuses on the process of reach-ing a goal (the steps and how-to procedures for goal attain-ment) rather than on the beneficial outcomes or the reasons goal attainment is valuable. They find evidence that process simulation improves performance by two routes. First, it reduces anxiety and thus, through emotional regulation, enhances performance. Second, it facilitates the planning of detailed steps that aid problem solving.Whereas research supports the beneficial effects of how-thinking on action, the value of outcome simulation, or why-thinking, lies in its ability to motivate choice during the initial phases of decision making. In early research on the value of outcome simulation, Larry, Cialdini, and Car-penter (1982) showed that subscription to cable television was enhanced by having consumers imagine the upside benefits of owning cable.We posit that process and outcome simulation target dif-ferent types of uncertainty in the adoption of new products because mode and content of simulation are naturally related. When consumers are in the “how-to” mode, their thoughts are about the process of dealing with constraints. In contrast, when consumers are in the “why” mode, their thoughts are about the reasons for adoption. Thus, commu-nication strategies for new products can effectively reduce either the uncertainties associated with adoption constraints (by guiding consumers to engage in simulating the process of adoption) or the uncertainties associated with potential gains from adoption (by guiding consumers to engage in simulating the outcomes of adoption).On the basis of these arguments, we hypothesize that proactive communication strategies for new products that create a match between consumers’concerns and the mode of mental simulations will be efficacious for the adoption of new products. Guided process thinking—simulation that imagines the specific steps or procedures needed to solve the constraints of adoption successfully—will quiet the anxiety and reduce the uncertainty of switching to the new and forgoing the old and thus will be efficacious in the near future. Conversely, guided outcome thinking—simulation that visualizes successful outcomes and the reasons for adoption—will make the performance, symbolic, and other potential benefits of adoption feel more certain and will be advantageous when the decision is in the distant future.H3: When consumers are considering adopting a new product in the near future rather than the distant future, compared withoutcome simulation that alleviates their “why” uncertain-ties, process simulation that alleviates their “how-to” uncer-tainties will (a) decrease switching-cost uncertainty, (b)decrease affective-attachment uncertainty, (c) decrease feel-ings of anxiety, and (d) increase adoption intentions.H4: When consumers are considering adopting a new product in the distant future rather than the near future, compared withprocess simulation that alleviates their “how-to” uncertain-ties, outcome simulation that alleviates their “why” uncer-tainties will (a) decrease performance uncertainty, (b)decrease symbolic uncertainty, (c) increase feelings of opti-mism, and (d) increase adoption intentions.Finally, we assess whether these thought simulations affect actual adoption behaviors and carry through to post-purchase satisfaction emotions. Because all people must pass through the stage of overcoming constraints for goal attainment (Taylor et al. 1998), we hypothesize that process simulation will enhance actual adoption rates compared with outcome simulation, especially if people engage in process simulation when they are naturally concerned about constraints (i.e., when the decision is perceived as in the near rather than in the distant future). We hypothesize that the reduced levels of anxiety and uncertainty about costs that emanate from simulating how to deal with costs of adoption before adoption enhances postconsumption satis-faction with the adoption. Thus, we hypothesize the following:H5: For new products, when consumers are considering adopt-ing in the near future rather than in the distant future, com-pared with outcome simulation that alleviates their “why”uncertainties, process simulation that alleviates their “how-to” uncertainties will (a) increase adoption and (b) increasepostpurchase satisfaction emotions.ExperimentIn Study 2, we investigated the efficacy of outcome and process simulation on adoption of new products, depending on the compatibility of the directed simulation with tempo-ral distance to adoption, as we specified in H3and H4. We also measured actual adoption rates and postpurchase satis-faction with adoption to test H5. As in Study 1, adopting a newly offered virtual class in a Mexican university served as the context.Ninety-two undergraduate students at a Mexican univer-sity participated in the experiment in the last week of classes. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions. Participants in all groups were presented with the written description of the virtual course from Study 1 and imagined themselves making the decision of whether to enroll in the virtual course tomorrow (near-future condi-tion) or next year (distant-future condition). Half the par-ticipants engaged in outcome-oriented imaginations of the benefits of enrolling in a virtual course, and the other half engaged in process-oriented imaginations of working through the constraints of a virtual course. Then, they com-pleted the dependent measures and checks.Students had a two-week examination period and a ten-day break, followed by actual registration. Therefore, actual enrollment data were observed for all participants 25–28 days later. Postconsumption satisfaction was recorded two weeks after the start of classes. Thus, in this study, par-ticipants had previously considered adoption of the new product, believing that the decision was temporally close or distant and assuming either a process-oriented or an。
