Counterfactual reflection (CFR)—thinking about “what might have been if”—can enhance learning from experience, but only if the CFR is high-quality. Yet, what shapes differences in CFR quality remains largely unknown. Because managers typically reflect on experiences by concomitantly considering relevant factors and their collective interdependencies, we suggest that CFR quality is causally complex. To investigate this possibility, we interviewed 129 managers. In these interviews, they reflected on recently concluded business-to-business negotiations. Using fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, we find three equifinal configurations of negotiation factors associated with high-quality CFR and eight associated with low-quality CFR. Drawing on the interviews, we identify managers’ ability to disentangle causal linkages in their past negotiation and their motivation for high-quality CFR in the present as plausible mechanisms underlying differences in CFR quality. We find high-quality CFR only following experiences where managers possess high levels of both situation-specific ability and motivation. In contrast, experiences that leave managers feeling unable or unmotivated due to high satisfaction, indifference, or defensiveness, are linked to low-quality CFR. Overall, our study advances understanding of why there are differences in CFR quality by linking past experiences with managers’ abilities and motivation. From a managerial perspective, we suggest that organizations avoid “one size fits all” approaches to CFR. Instead, we recommend actionable measures for both reflecting managers and their supervisors to address the specific reasons that prevent managers from engaging in high-quality CFR after their negotiation experiences.

中文翻译：

---

关于管理者反事实反思质量的配置视角


反事实反思（CFR）——思考“如果会发生什么”——可以增强从经验中学习，但前提是 CFR 是高质量的。然而，造成 CFR 质量差异的因素仍然很大程度上未知。由于管理者通常通过同时考虑相关因素及其集体相互依赖性来反思经验，因此我们认为 CFR 质量具有因果复杂性。为了调查这种可能性，我们采访了 129 名经理。在这些采访中，他们回顾了最近结束的企业对企业谈判。通过模糊集定性比较分析，我们发现了与高质量 CFR 相关的三种最终谈判因素配置和与低质量 CFR 相关的八种谈判因素。根据访谈，我们确定了管理者在过去的谈判中理清因果关系的能力，以及他们目前追求高质量 CFR 的动机，这是 CFR 质量差异背后的合理机制。我们发现，只有当管理者拥有高水平的针对具体情况的能力和动机时，才能获得高质量的 CFR。相比之下，如果管理者因高满意度、冷漠或防御性而感到无能为力或没有动力，则与低质量的 CFR 相关。总体而言，我们的研究通过将过去的经验与管理者的能力和动机联系起来，加深了对 CFR 质量差异原因的理解。从管理角度来看，我们建议组织避免采用“一刀切”的 CFR 方法。相反，我们建议管理者及其主管采取可行的措施，以解决阻碍管理者在获得谈判经验后参与高质量 CFR 的具体原因。