How to Improve the Accuracy of Project Schedules? The Effect of Project Specification and Historical Information on Duration Estimates

Lorko, Matej and Servátka, Maroš and Zhang, Le (2019): How to Improve the Accuracy of Project Schedules? The Effect of Project Specification and Historical Information on Duration Estimates.

Abstract

The success of a business project often depends on the accuracy of project estimates. Inaccurate, often overoptimistic schedules can lead to significant project failures. In this paper, we experimentally investigate the effectiveness of two interventions designed to mitigate the pervasive underestimation bias and improve the accuracy of project duration estimates: (1) increasing the quantity of available information prior to estimation by providing historical information regarding the average duration of similar projects in the past and (2) increasing the quality of available information prior to estimation by providing a more detailed project specification. In addition, we also test whether it is more effective to provide historical information together with the project specification or only after the initial beliefs regarding the project duration are formed. We find that increasing both the quantity and quality of project relevant information successfully mitigates the underestimation bias. However, only the provision of historical information is also associated with significant improvement in absolute estimation accuracy. The timing at which such information is disclosed to planners does not seem to influence the effectiveness of the intervention. We also find that subjective confidence in the accuracy of duration estimates does not vary across experimental treatments, suggesting that the confidence in estimates is neither a function of the quantity nor the quality of available information prior to estimation.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: project management, project planning, time management, duration estimation, historical information, project specification
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C9 - Design of Experiments > C91 - Laboratory, Individual Behavior; D - Microeconomics > D8 - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty > D83 - Search ; Learning ; Information and Knowledge ; Communication ; Belief ; Unawareness; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O21 - Planning Models ; Planning Policy; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O2 - Development Planning and Policy > O22 - Project Analysis

References

Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & MacDonald, H. (1997). The Role of Motivated Reasoning in Optimistic Time Predictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297233003

Buehler, Roger, & Griffin, D. (2015). The planning fallacy: When plans lead to optimistic forecasts. In The psychology of planning in organizations: Research and applications (pp. 31–57). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203105894

Buehler, Roger, Griffin, D., & MacDonald, H. (1997). The role of motivated reasoning in optimistic time predictions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167297233003

Buehler, Roger, Griffin, D., & Peetz, J. (2010). The Planning Fallacy. Cognitive, Motivational, and Social Origins. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 43(C), 1–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)43001-4

Buehler, Roger, Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the “planning fallacy”: Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366–381. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366

Cox, J. C., & Sadiraj, V. (2018). Incentives. In A. Schram & A. Ule (Eds.), Handbook of Research Methods and Applications in Experimental Economics. Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd.

Cox, J. C., Sadiraj, V., & Schmidt, U. (2015). Paradoxes and mechanisms for choice under risk. Experimental Economics, 18(2), 215–250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-014-9398-8

Engerman, S., & Sokoloff, K. (2006). Digging the Dirt at Public Expense Governance in the Building of the Erie Canal and Other Public Works. In Corruption and Reform: Lessons from America’s Economic History.

Fischbacher, U. (2007). Z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10683-006-9159-4

Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). From Nobel Prize to Project Management: Getting Risk Right. Project Management Journal, 37(3), 18–19. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.476

Flyvbjerg, B. (2008). Curbing Optimism Bias and Strategic Misrepresentation in Planning: Reference Class Forecasting in Practice. European Planning Studies, 16(1), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654310701747936

Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. S., & Buhl, S. (2002). Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie? Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), 279–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360208976273

Flyvbjerg, B., Skamris Holm, M. K., & Buhl, S. L. (2005). How (In)accurate are demand forecasts in public works projects?: The case of transportation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976688

Galton, F. (1907). Vox populi (The wisdom of crowds). Nature, 75(7), 450–451.

Geman, S., Bienenstock, E., & Doursat, R. (1992). Neural Networks and the Bias/Variance Dilemma. Neural Computation, 4(1), 1–58. https://doi.org/10.1162/neco.1992.4.1.1

Greiner, B. (2015). Subject pool recruitment procedures: organizing experiments with ORSEE. Journal of the Economic Science Association, 1(1), 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40881-015-0004-4

Halkjelsvik, T., & Jørgensen, M. (2012). From origami to software development: A review of studies on judgment-based predictions of performance time. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 238–271. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025996

Hertwig, R., & Ortmann, A. (2001). Experimental practices in economics: a methodological challenge for psychologists? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(3), 383–403; discussion 403-451. https://doi.org/10.1037/e683322011-032

Holt, C. A. (1986). Preference reversals and the independence axiom. The American Economic Review, 76(3), 508–515.

Holt, C. A., & Laury, S. K. (2002). Risk aversion and incentive effects. American Economic Review, 92(5), 1644–1655. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282802762024700 IPMA. (2015). IPMA Competence Baseline (ICB), Version 4.0. International Project Management Association. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejoc.201200111

Jørgensen, M. (2004). Top-down and bottom-up expert estimation of software development effort. Information and Software Technology, 46(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0950-5849(03)00093-4

Jørgensen, M. (2010). Selection of strategies in judgment-based effort estimation. Journal of Systems and Software, 83(6), 1039–1050. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2009.12.028

Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking , Fast and Slow (Abstract). Book. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-014-0173-7.2

Kahneman, D., & Lovallo, D. (1993). Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking. Management Science, 39(1), 17–31. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.39.1.17

Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). INTUITIVE PREDICTION: BIASES AND CORRECTIVE PROCEDURES. TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, 12, 313–327. https://doi.org/citeulike-article-id:3614496

Klein, G. (1999). Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions. Personnel Psychology (Vol. 52). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-6748(2001)1:1(21)

König, C. J. (2005). Anchors distort estimates of expected duration. Psychological Reports, 96(2), 253–256. https://doi.org/10.2466/PR0.96.2.253-256

Lorko, M., Servátka, M., & Zhang, L. (2019). Anchoring in project duration estimation. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 162, 49–65.

Lovallo, D., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Delusions of Success: How Optimism Undermines Executives’ Decisions. Harvard Business Review. https://doi.org/10.1225/R0307D

Mazar, N., Amir, O., & Ariely, D. (2008). The Dishonesty of Honest People: A Theory of Self-Concept Maintenance. Journal of Marketing Research, 45(6), 633–644. https://doi.org/10.1509/jmkr.45.6.633

Nesselroade, J. R., Stigler, S. M., & Baltes, P. B. (1980). Regression toward the mean and the study of change. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.622

Parkinson, C. N. (1955). Parkinson’s Law. The Economist, 1–5.

Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK ® guide). Project Management Institute. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.20125

Project Management Institute. (2019). PMI’s Pulse of the Profession 2019.

Roy, M. M., Christenfeld, N. J. S., & McKenzie, C. R. M. (2005). Underestimating the Duration of Future Events: Memory Incorrectly Used or Memory Bias? Psychological Bulletin, 131(5), 738–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.131.5.738

Roy, M. M., Mitten, S. T., & Christenfeld, N. J. S. (2008). Correcting memory improves accuracy of predicted task duration. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Applied, 14(3), 266–275. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898X.14.3.266

Rush, C., & Roy, R. (2001). Expert Judgement in Cost Estimating: Modelling the Reasoning Process. Concurrent Engineering, 9(4), 271–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/1063293X0100900404

Shmueli, O., Pliskin, N., & Fink, L. (2016). Can the outside-view approach improve planning decisions in software development projects? Information Systems Journal, 26(4), 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12091

Thomas, K. E., & Handley, S. J. (2008). Anchoring in time estimation. Acta Psychologica, 127(1), 24–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.12.004

Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgments under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124

Woods, D., & Servátka, M. (2016). Testing psychological forward induction and the updating of beliefs in the lost wallet game. Journal of Economic Psychology, 56, 116–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2016.06.006