Knee-Deep in the Big Muddy¶
Staw, B. M. (1976). Knee-Deep in the Big Muddy: A Study of Escalating Commitment to a Chosen Course of Action. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 5073(76), 27-44.
Cited by¶
8 citations across 8 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Adaptive Redirection
- Naming the third option as a structurally distinct thing, with its own entry conditions, converts an argument about character into a checkable question: does the evidence bear on the route or on the destination, and is there anything here that would still be worth something on a different route?
This sourceShows commitment to a chosen course rising after negative feedback, establishing the persist-versus-withdraw framing that dominates argument about a failing effort.
- Naming the third option as a structurally distinct thing, with its own entry conditions, converts an argument about character into a checkable question: does the evidence bear on the route or on the destination, and is there anything here that would still be worth something on a different route?
- Escalation of Commitment
- Sunk Cost and Irreversible Commitment
- These structures compress the complexity of emotional commitment by procedurally insulating forward-looking judgment from historical attachment, addressing the personal-responsibility and self-justification dynamics that Staw (1976) first documented in his "knee-deep in the big muddy" experiments.
This sourceOriginal "big muddy" experiment establishing personal-responsibility and self-justification dynamics; foundation for procedural separations (decision-forum independence, zero-based review) that decouple judgment from prior investment.
- These structures compress the complexity of emotional commitment by procedurally insulating forward-looking judgment from historical attachment, addressing the personal-responsibility and self-justification dynamics that Staw (1976) first documented in his "knee-deep in the big muddy" experiments.
Mechanisms¶
- De-Escalation Gate
- It is the structural antidote to escalation of commitment, in which each prior tightening becomes a reason to tighten further rather than to reconsider.
This sourceShows how responsibility for a prior decision can increase commitment after adverse results.
- It is the structural antidote to escalation of commitment, in which each prior tightening becomes a reason to tighten further rather than to reconsider.
- Escalation Stop Workflow
- Its strength is defeating the drift that lets a known plateau consume resource indefinitely — it is the structural answer to escalation of commitment, the tendency to pour more into a failing course precisely because so much is already sunk into it.
This sourceFinds that adverse results can increase resource commitment to a previously chosen course, especially under personal responsibility.
- Its strength is defeating the drift that lets a known plateau consume resource indefinitely — it is the structural answer to escalation of commitment, the tendency to pour more into a failing course precisely because so much is already sunk into it.
- Project Kill Criteria
- Pre-committed criteria are the standard antidote to escalation of commitment — the tendency to pour more resources into a failing course
This sourceShows that negative results can prompt greater resource commitment to an already chosen course, especially under personal responsibility.
- Pre-committed criteria are the standard antidote to escalation of commitment — the tendency to pour more resources into a failing course
- Stage-Gate Exploration
- Relatedly, the review is run backwards: the gate is convened to justify continued funding of a favoured line rather than to test it, which is exactly the sunk-cost escalation
This sourceShows escalation of commitment when decision makers allocate additional resources to a previously chosen course after negative consequences.
- Relatedly, the review is run backwards: the gate is convened to justify continued funding of a favoured line rather than to test it, which is exactly the sunk-cost escalation
- Trap-Sentinel Escalation
- And the repair budget can quietly become a sunk-cost sink — pouring good effort into rescuing a doomed path because so much is already committed, the escalation-of-commitment version of the trap it was meant to catch.
This sourceShows escalation in which decision makers add resources to a previously chosen investment after negative consequences, especially when responsible for the earlier choice.
- And the repair budget can quietly become a sunk-cost sink — pouring good effort into rescuing a doomed path because so much is already committed, the escalation-of-commitment version of the trap it was meant to catch.
Verification¶
This reference passed the adversarial substantiation pipeline: it was checked to exist and to support the claim it is attached to. See how references were verified.
Links previously used in the corpus¶
Before the registry existed this work was also linked 2 other ways.
- https://doi.org/10.1016/0030-5073%2876%2990005-2 ×1
- https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0030507376900052 ×1
Registry ID ref:644614d8919a · see in the full table