THEORYDiagnosis of Strategic ProblemsStrategic problems were defined as "environmental trends and possible events that may have a major and discontinuous impact on the company" and early research focused on identification and evaluation of these important phenomena (Ansoff, 1975, pages 24-25, 1980). Later scholars introduced the concept of strategic problem diagnosis: the evaluation and infusion of meaning from environmental data with the intent of generating organizational momentum to respond (Dutton & Duncan 1987b; Dutton et al., 1983; Dutton & Duncan Jackson, 1987), a process that involves the following steps (Julian & Ofori-Dankwa, 2008). Decision makers analyze the environment in an attempt to identify signals of potential importance to the firm, gathering and reifying a variety of related stimuli into a “strategic issue” (Dutton et al., 1983). This issue joins similar issues in the “strategic issue set,” the list of different strategic issues potentially under consideration at any given time (Dutton & Duncan, 1987a; Dutton, 1997). Based on their interests, beliefs, and inclinations, different individual executives and managers, as well as groups, attempt to sell, promote, and sustain the significance of a particular strategic issue through different diagnoses (Dutton & Ashford, 1993; McMullen et al., 2009 ). Through analysis and negotiation, the company's top management arrives at a more or less agreed upon diagnosis of the problem in question regarding its nature and possible effects (Dutton et al., 1983; Dutton, 1993, 1997). Once more or less established, the diagnosis of the strategic issue influences the formulation and implementation of a response, which can unfold over time and which in turn can lead to further altered diagnoses (Dutton, 1997; Chatto..... . mid article .. ....ely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult (Fiske, Gilbert, & Lindzey, 2009) Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They are generally thoughtful, kind, generous, trusting and reliable, helpful and willing to compromise their interests with others (Komarraju, Karau, Schmeck, & Avdic, 2011) Agreeable managers are friendly and prefer cooperation to competition (McCrae & Costa, 1987) focus more on what employees think of them than the results achieved and avoid conflicts at all costs (Nadkarni & Herrmann, 2010). On the other hand, unpleasant managers promote a climate of competition and fear ( Peterson et al., 2003). and ignore strategic alternatives suggested by other managers and employees (Lant et al., 1992).