Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Guiding Principles
- Chapter 1 The Rise and Fall of the Planning Fallacy
- Chapter 2 Unveiling the Hiding Hand
- Chapter 3 Voyages of Discovery
- Chapter 4 Temporal Structuring and Project Behavior
- Chapter 5 Managing Project Complexity and Uncertainty through Dynamic and Systemic Stakeholder Modeling
- Part II Deviating from Plans
- Part III Practical Tips
- Index
- References
Chapter 1 - The Rise and Fall of the Planning Fallacy
From the Impulsion to the Compulsion to Theorize
from Part I - Guiding Principles
Published online by Cambridge University Press: aN Invalid Date NaN
Book contents
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Guiding Principles
- Chapter 1 The Rise and Fall of the Planning Fallacy
- Chapter 2 Unveiling the Hiding Hand
- Chapter 3 Voyages of Discovery
- Chapter 4 Temporal Structuring and Project Behavior
- Chapter 5 Managing Project Complexity and Uncertainty through Dynamic and Systemic Stakeholder Modeling
- Part II Deviating from Plans
- Part III Practical Tips
- Index
- References
Summary
The Planning Fallacy principle, a prominent account of project behavior and particularly the causes of cost overruns and benefit shortfalls, stems from the belief that bias outweighs error. Its very popularity begs for an inquiry on its theoretical appeal and whether it remains a viable argument to explain cost overrun and benefit shortfall behavior. This chapter argues that the Planning Fallacy is in danger of danger of being debunked, suggesting that while its rise can be attributed to an impulsion to theorize, its subsequent fall may be due to a companion compulsion to theorize. The chapter focuses on three questions: Is the Planning Fallacy principle a theory anyway and, if yes, is the theory complete? Is the theory too narrow in scope or does it cater to complexity and uncertainty? Will it lose support from the scientific community? The chapter demonstrates that the fall may be due to the incomplete nature of the theory and its limited scope. The chapter contends that the popular appeal of the Planning Fallacy has vastly overstepped its ultimate viability and suggests that the Planning Fallacy principle is itself a form of Planning Fallacy as it overestimates its own theoretical power.
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Cambridge Handbook of Project Behavior , pp. 27 - 45Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Adelman, J. (2014). Worldly philosopher: The odyssey of Albert O. Hirschman. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Alacevich, M. (2020). Albert O. Hirschman: An intellectual biography. Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anheier, H. K. (2017). Infrastructure and the principle of the Hiding Hand (pp. 1–20). In Wegrich, K., Kostka, G., and Hammerschmid, G. (eds.). The governance of infrastructure. Oxford University Scholarship Online.Google Scholar
Bacharach, S. B. (1989). Organizational theories: Some criteria for evaluation. Academy of Management Review, 14, 496–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baerenbold, R. (2023). Reducing risks in megaprojects: The potential of reference class forecasting. Project Leadership and Society, 100103.10.1016/j.plas.2023.100103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben-David, J., and Sullivan, T. A. (1975). Sociology of science. Annual Review of Sociology, 1, 203–222.10.1146/annurev.so.01.080175.001223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blum, A.F. (1970). Theorizing (pp. 301–319). In Douglas, J. D. (ed.). Everyday life: Reconstruction of social knowledge. Routledge.Google Scholar
Bromiley, P., and Rau, D. (2022). Some problems in using prospect theory to explain strategic management issues. Academy of Management Perspectives, 36(1), 125–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buehler, R., Griffin, D., and Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the “planning fallacy”: Why people underestimate their task completion times. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 366.10.1037/0022-3514.67.3.366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chapman, P. (2024). Revisiting project delivery performance: Evidence from Swedish transport infrastructure. Project Management Journal, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/87569728241257391.Google Scholar
Chen, Y., Ahiaga-Dagbui, D. D., Thaheem, M. J., and Shrestha, A. (2023). Toward a deeper understanding of optimism bias and transport project cost overrun. Project Management Journal, 54(5), 561–578.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornelissen, J., Höllerer, M. A., and Seidl, D. (2021). What theory is and can be: Forms of theorizing in organizational scholarship. Organization Theory, 2(3), https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/26317877211020328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Wit, A. (1988). Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 6(3), 164–170.10.1016/0263-7863(88)90043-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, J. D. (1970). Preface (pp. vii–xii). In Douglas, J. D. (ed.). Everyday life: Reconstruction of social knowledge. Routledge.Google Scholar
Epton, S. R. (1972). The underestimation of project duration: An explanation in terms of a time‐horizon. R&D Management, 2(3), 141–142.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). From Nobel Prize to project management: Getting risks right. Project Management Journal, 37(3), 5–15.10.1177/875697280603700302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2014). What you should know about megaprojects and why: An overview. Project Management Journal, 45(2), 6–19.10.1002/pmj.21409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2016). The fallacy of beneficial ignorance: A test of Hirschman’s Hiding Hand. World Development, 84, 176–189.10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.03.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2017). The Oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198732242.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B. (2021). Top ten behavioral biases in project management: An overview. Project Management Journal, 52(6), 531–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., and Gardner, D. (2023). How big things get done: The surprising factors that determine the fate of every project, from home renovations to space exploration and everything in between. Signal.Google Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., Garbiou, M., and Lovallo, D. (2009). Delusion and deception in large infrastructure projects: Two models for explaining and preventing executive disaster. California Management Review, 51(2), pp. 170–193.10.2307/41166485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. K. S., and Buhl, S. L. (2002). Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie. Journal of the American Planning Association, 68(3), pp.279–295.10.1080/01944360208976273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flyvbjerg, B., Ansar, A., Budzier, A., Buhl, S., Cantarelli, C., Garbuio, M., Lavallo, D., Lunn, D., Molin, E., Ronnest, A., Stewart, A., and van Wee, B. (2018). Five things you should know about cost overruns. Transportation Research A: Policy and Practice, 118, 174–190.Google Scholar
Fox, J. (2014). Instinct can beat analytical thinking. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2014/06/ instinct-can-beat-analytical-thinking. Accessed on: April 17, 2024.Google Scholar
Gil, N., and Fu, Y. (2022). Megaproject performance, value creation and value distribution: An organizational governance perspective. Academy of Management Discoveries, 8(2), 224–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hambrick, D. C. (2007). The field of management’s devotion to theory: Too much of a good thing? Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1346–1352.10.5465/amj.2007.28166119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschman, A. O. (1970). The search for paradigms as a hindrance to understanding. World Politics, 22(3), 329–343.10.2307/2009600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A. (2018). Beneficial or detrimental ignorance: The straw man Fallacy of Flyvbjerg’s test of Hirschman’s Hiding Hand. World Development, 103, 369–382.10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., and Feeny, S. (2022). Optimism bias and World Bank project performance. The Journal of Development Studies, 58(12), 2604–2623.10.1080/00220388.2022.2102901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., Love, P. E. D., and Pinto, J. K. (2022). Moving beyond the Planning Fallacy: The emergence of a new principle of project behavior. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 3310–3325.10.1109/TEM.2020.3040526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., and Pinto, J. K. (2022). The “re-meaning” of project success: Updating and recalibrating for a modern project management. International Journal of Project Management, 40(7), 835–848.10.1016/j.ijproman.2022.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., Pinto, J. K., Love, P. E., and Pache, G. (2023). Bias versus error: Why projects fall short. Journal of Business Strategy, 44(2), 67–75.10.1108/JBS-11-2021-0190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ika, L. A., and Saint-Macary, J. (2023). Managing fuzzy projects in 3D: A proven, multi-faceted blueprint for overseeing complex projects. McGraw-Hill Education.Google Scholar
Ika, L. A., and Söderlund, J. (2016). Rethinking revisited: Insights from an early rethinker. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 9(4), 931–954.10.1108/IJMPB-05-2016-0041CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, L. R., and Euske, K. J. (1991). Strategic misrepresentation in budgeting. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 1(4), 437–460.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1977). Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA047747.pdf.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292.10.2307/1914185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahneman, D., and Tversky, A. (1982). Intuitive prediction: Biases and corrective procedures (pp. 414–421). In Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., and Tversky, A. (eds.). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511809477.031CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keynes, J. M. (1953). The general theory of employment, interest and money. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Kreiner, K. (2020). Conflicting notions of a project: The battle between Albert O. Hirschman and Bent Flyvbjerg. Project Management Journal, 51(1), 400–410.10.1177/8756972820930535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovallo, D., Cristofaro, M., and Flyvbjerg, B. (2023). Governing large projects: A three-stage process to get it right. Academy of Management Perspectives, 37(2), 138–156.10.5465/amp.2021.0129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lovallo, D., and Kahneman, D. (2003). Delusions of success: How optimism undermines executives’ decisions. Harvard Business Review, July, pp. 56–63.Google Scholar
Love, P. E. D., and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D. D. (2018). De-bunking “fake news” in a post-truth era: The plausible untruths of cost underestimation in transport infrastructure projects. Transportation Research A: Policy and Practice, 113, 357–368.Google Scholar
Love, P. E. D., Ika, L. A., and Ahiaga-Dagbui, D. (2019a). On de-bunking “fake news” in a post-truth area: Why does the Planning Fallacy explanation for cost overruns fall short? Transportation Research A: Policy and Practice, 126, 397–408.Google Scholar
Love, P. E. D., Sing, M. C. P., Ika, L. A., and Newton, S. (2019b). The cost performance of transportation projects: The fallacy of the Planning Fallacy account. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 122(1), 1–20.Google Scholar
Love, P. E. D., Pinto, J. K., and Ika, L. A. (2022a). Hundreds of years of pain, with minimal gain: Capital project cost overruns, the past, present, and optimistic future. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 50(4), 56–70.10.1109/EMR.2022.3219362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Love, P. E. D., Ika, L. A., and Sing, M. C. (2022b). Does the planning fallacy prevail in social infrastructure projects? Empirical evidence and competing explanations. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 69(6), 2588–2602.10.1109/TEM.2019.2944161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Love, P. E. D., Ika, L. A., and Pinto, J. K. (2024). Homo heuristicus: From risk management to managing uncertainty in large-scale infrastructure projects. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 71(1), 1940–1949.10.1109/TEM.2022.3170474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDonald, K. M., Graham, I. D., and Grimshaw, J. (2004). Toward a theoretic basis for quality improvement interventions (pp. 27–37). In Shojania, K. G., McDonald, K. M., Wachter, K. R., and Owens, D. (eds.). Closing the quality gap: A critical analysis of quality improvement strategies. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. p. 27–37.Google Scholar
Malisoff, W. M. (1934). Editorial: What is philosophy of science? Philosophy of Science, 1, 3–4
Google Scholar
Meredith, J. (2022). Holey moley, the poppycock syndrome, and academic drift. International Journal of Project Management, 40(1), 15–18.10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.08.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merewitz, L. (1973). Cost overruns in public works (pp. 277–295). In Niskanen, W., Hansen, A., Havermann, R., Turvey, R., and Zeckhauser, R. (eds.). Benefit cost and policy analysis. Aldine.Google Scholar
Merrow, E. W., Chapel, S. W., and Worthing, C. (1979). A review of cost estimation in new technologies: Implications for energy process plants. A report prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, RAND Corp., R-2481- DOE, p. 132. Available: www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/6002293.Google Scholar
Merton, R. K. (1973). The sociology of science: Theoretical and empirical investigations. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Morris, P. W., and Hough, G. H. (1987). The anatomy of major projects: A study of the reality of project management. John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Olasehinde-Williams, G., and Jenkins, G. P. (2023). A test of Hirschman’s hiding hand principle in World bank-financed hydropower projects. Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis, 14, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, J. E. (2021). Curbing cost overruns in infrastructure investment. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 21(2), 120–136.10.18757/ejtir.2021.21.2.5504CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedhazur, E. J., and Schmelkin, L. P. (2013). Measurement, design, and analysis: An integrated approach. Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pinto, J. (2023). Is this how big things get done? International Journal of Project Management, 41(1), 102484.10.1016/j.ijproman.2023.102484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., and Podsakoff, N. P. (2016). Recommendations for creating better concept definitions in the organizational, behavioral, and social sciences. Organizational Research Methods, 19, 159–203.10.1177/1094428115624965CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seibert, S. E., Kacmar, K. M., Kraimer, M. L., Downes, P. E., and Noble, D. (2017). The role of research strategies and professional networks in management scholars’ productivity. Journal of Management, 43(4), 1103–1130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, G. B. (1903). Man and superman: A comedy and a philosophy. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Shenkar, O., and Ellis, S. (2022). The rise and fall of structural contingency theory: A theory’s “autopsy.” Journal of Management Studies, 59(3), 782–818.10.1111/joms.12772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunstein, C. R. (2015). Albert Hirschman’s hiding hand: Foreword. In Hirschman, A. O. (ed.). Development projects observed. Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
Svejvig, P. (2021). A meta-theoretical framework for theory building in project management. International Journal of Project Management, 39(8), 849–872.10.1016/j.ijproman.2021.09.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swedberg, R. (2016). Before theory comes theorizing or how to make social science more interesting. British Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 5–22.10.1111/1468-4446.12184CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Themsen, T. N. (2019). The processes of public megaproject cost estimation: The inaccuracy of reference class forecasting. Financial Accountability & Management, 35(4), 337–352.10.1111/faam.12210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wachs, M. (1989). When planners lie with numbers. Journal of the American Planning Association, 55(4), 476–479.Google Scholar
Whetten, D. A. (1989). What constitutes a theoretical contribution? Academy of Management Review, 14(4), 490–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
World Bank. (1992). Effective implementation: Key to development impact (Report No. 11536). World Bank.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The PDF of this book
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visualised data also available as non-graphical data
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
You can access graphs or charts in a text or tabular format, so you are not excluded if you cannot process visual displays.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.