Ayman Jarrar

Excellence in strategic decision making is the driving force behind successful strategy adoption and implementation. However, it is becoming more and more complex as businesses emerge in unpredictable environments and conditions. The main objective of this study is to investigate the impact of cognitive bias and its dimensions (the illusion of control, prior hypothesis bias, escalating commitment bias and representativeness, and availability bias) on strategic decision making. In terms of methodology, the study used a random sampling technique. The study applied a survey as a research tool distributed among 138 bankers (employees at the managerial level) in managerial and administrative positions.
Further, descriptive analysis and regression analysis were used to analyze the data and test hypotheses. The results show a positive and significant effect of the illusion of control and representativeness. The results show that the illusion of control, prior hypothesis bias, escalating commitment bias and representativeness, and availability bias significantly impact the strategic decision-making in Jordanian banks. It is concluded that the null hypothesis will be accepted and, therefore, the alternative hypothesis will be rejected based on the significant levels for the primary and secondary hypotheses.
The factors of the escalating commitment bias, the availability bias, and the reasoning by analogy were not significant. Finally, the study recommends developing more literature on integrating psychology and discrimination and applying the research to different industries and managerial levels.

Disruption in the business environment imposes undeniable realities that require effective strategic management; therefore, the need to develop a particular type of force capable of achieving proactive strategies, influencing competitors’ behavior, and balancing competitive forces has arisen. This study aimed to examine the impact of absorptive capacity on achieving strategic supremacy and the mediating role of organizational ambidexterity within Jordan’s commercial banking industry. It employs 513 questionnaires from middle and upper management through proportionate stratified random sampling. It adopts a quantitative approach through partial least squares structural equation modeling to construct a research model comprising factors affecting strategic supremacy and the mediating role of organizational ambidexterity and validate the research hypotheses. The study revealed that absorptive capacity significantly impacts organization ambidexterity (β = 0.764, t = 33.939, p = 0.000) with explanation power (R2 = 0.584). Organizational ambidexterity has a significant positive impact on strategic supremacy (β = 0.561, t = 12.469, p = 0.000). Absorptive capacity has a significant positive impact on strategic supremacy through organizational ambidexterity (β = 0.334, t = 6.963, p = 0.000) with high explanation power (R2 = 0.712), which means that 71.2% of the variance in strategic supremacy has been explained by absorptive capacity and organizational ambidexterity. Moreover, organizational ambidexterity partially mediates their relationship. It also found that the model’s predictive power was moderate. The study concludes that Jordanian commercial banks have placed high importance on identifying and acquiring valuable external knowledge and balancing their short-term and long-term opportunities to achieve strategic supremacy, leading to sustainable competitive advantage.