2. Cognition

In the Egfjord and Sund (2020) articles, discussions of business model innovation (BMI) occur along with the ideas of cognitive differentiation and cognitive integration. For the first section of your paper, describe your best definition of these two concepts. Note that the 2020 "Do You See" article includes these two concepts in its abstract, but the concept terminology does not appear in either article.

3. Business Model Innovation

On page 7 of the "Do You See" version of their articles, the authors ask these questions:

• "...design changes seem to be the inevitable outcome of adding business models to the organization. If this is the case, should organizational redesign actually precede BMI?"
• "Is an organization already designed to accommodate a future BMI more likely to be successful at implementing radical BMI ideas emerging from an innovation department?"
• Did you feel that either or both of their articles provided you with a solid answer to either of these questions? If yes, answer one or both of the questions and provide support to your answer.
• If no, what other information might you want or need to know to answer the questions?

1. What assumptions do you feel you might need to make in order to answer the questions above? Would those be necessary, sufficient, or flawed assumptions? Explain your answer.
2. Should organizational redesign precede BMI?
3. Is an organization already designed to accommodate a future BMI more likely to be successful at implementing radical BMI ideas?

4. Ontological Humility

. Provide your opinion, based on your interpretation of the APA guidelines, as to whether the APA would feel that these authors have appropriately followed these guidelines for multiple publications of the same data. How has this double-publication lent credence to the authors' ontological humility? Would you have considered double-publishing in this same say? If yes, why? If no, why not?

In the Ontological Humility media, think back to your thoughts on the Dueling Managers scenario. In that assessment, you were asked to consider three assumptions and journal about your reactions to the scenario and assumptions. In this section of your paper, answer the following questions:

1. Did you feel that the way the scenario was structured was designed to create false assumptions? Or, do you feel that the falsity of the assumptions was simply a result of the facts and how they were presented? In other words, would the same assumptions have been accurate if different facts had existed? Why or why not?
2. Explicit bias is a bias that is an open and obvious prejudice. For example, a person who has allergic reactions to dogs may have a bias against going to people's homes with dogs. In fact, that person may allow that bias to become implicit, where they consider homes where dogs live to be dirtier than non-dog homes, or may even decide not to be friends with dog owners so that they can avoid potential allergic reactions.

Less obvious biases can be more difficult to recognize in oneself. Think about some ways that you could start to recognize your own explicit or implicit biases. You do not need to list the biases here. Instead, provide at least two ways that you could start to identify and reflect on those biases. In what way might doing so lead to better decision-making as a businessperson in the future?

Resources

• Egfjord, K. F.-H., & Sund, K. J. (2020). Do you see what I see? How differing perceptions of the environment can hinder radical business model innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 150, 1-10.
• Egfjord, K. F.-H., & Sund, K. J. (2020). A modified Delphi method to elicit and compare perceptions of industry trends. MethodsX, 7, 1-10.