Abstract
Researchers exploring the adoption of decision aids by managers have noted an apparent reluctance on the part of managers to use decision aids such as linear programming and mathematical forecasting models. In this study, the leader's attributions were explored as a possible explanation for this reluctance. Specifically, the effects of the subordinate's use of a decision aid on the supervisor's attributions of the causes of that performance were examined in a vignette to which 154 students who were employed full time as managers responded. Four conditions were explored: success while using decision aids, failure while using decision aids, success without using decision aids, and failure without using decision aids. Analysis suggests that for successful outcomes the use of a decision aid did not significantly affect the supervisor's attributions, but with failure, supervisors were more likely to attribute the cause of the failure to some quality of the subordinate (lack of ability or effort) when decision aids were used than when they were not. Such results imply that managers who use decision aids incur greater risk in the event of failure, as the cause of that failure is attributed more often to them rather than the situation when decision aids were not used.