**3. Concluding Remarks**

In total, this special issue covers the topic of managerial and entrepreneurial decisionmaking from a multitude of important perspectives that have flourished within the area. From the published papers it clearly emerges that the original concepts and theories, e.g., bounded rationality and the presence of cognitive biases in human decision-making processes, still play an important role in contemporary research (e.g., Shepherd and Rudd 2014; Artinger et al. 2015; Cristofaro 2017, 2020).

In this regard, from a systematic evaluation of the 7 published papers, the following can be stated: as to improve their decision-making process (i.e., by reducing biases and consequently improve related performance), executives and entrepreneurs should *contextualize their behavior*. Indeed, the works by Schettini et al. (2020) and Nuijten et al. (2020) demonstrate how decision-makers should be aware of the context in which they implement their actions; this is because the surrounding environment can drive to different biases for which the same preventive action cannot work. However, due to the strong influence of psychological factors for the elaboration of decisions, such as a high Core Self-Evaluation personality trait (see Cristofaro et al. 2020), executives and entrepreneurs should implement behavioral strategies, such as improving (through coaching and/or training) their own self-leadership (Goldsby et al. 2020) in order to adaptively act and react within organizations. In this regard, executives and entrepreneurs must be *ecologically rational*, thus be aware of the negative and positive effects that biases can have depending on the context and use them at their advantage (Gigerenzer et al. 1999).

In sum, it is here taken the position that behavior is the function of the strategies (e.g., heuristics) that individuals choose from the set of all possible ones (i.e., toolbox) according to the environment in which these strategies should be implemented (Todd and Brighton 2016). However, also planning and organizing activities—such as elaborating models that can prevent adverse organizational events (Splichalova et al. 2020) or defining activities that can help authority and control over the managemen<sup>t</sup> of data assets (Brous and Janssen 2020)—can also help anticipating/avoiding undesired decision outcomes. From that, managerial and entrepreneurial decision-making emerge, even more, as phenomena that cannot be detached from the environment in which executives and entrepreneurs are embedded, claiming to establish new approaches to research (Arend 2020) that looks at decision-making as an individual/group/organization-environment dialectical and multi-level phenomenon.

**Author Contributions:** All authors contributed equally to each section of this Editorial. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Not applicable.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Not applicable.

**Data Availability Statement:** Not applicable.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. # **References**


Bazerman, Max H., and Don Moore. 2013. *Judgment in Managerial Decision Making*, 5th ed. New York: Wiley.



