The success of a business project often relies on the accuracy of its project duration estimates. Inaccurate and overoptimistic project schedules can result in significant project failures. In this paper, we explore whether the presence of anchors, such as relatively uninformed suggestions or expectations of the duration of project tasks, play a role in the project estimating and planning process. We conduct a controlled laboratory experiment to test the effect of anchors on task duration estimates. We find strong anchoring effects and systematic estimation biases that do not vanish even after the task is repeatedly estimated and performed. We also find that such persisting biases can be caused by not only externally provided anchors, but also by the planner's own initial task duration estimate.

Complex permanently sustainable area development is not possible without the application of effective developmental policy. It is necessary to supply the optimization of environmental, social, economic and spatial aspects of the area development, of which cumulative and synergistic effects and impacts are seen especially in spatial planning. The main task of the spatial planning is to create the conditions for the application of environmental management aiming to use the potential of the area for permanently sustainable development too. Environmental management is market-oriented, developmental, aim-oriented process covering various sectional interests, plans and strategies with the aim to make an integrated concept of permanently sustainable area development. The aim of the research was the assessment of potential risks within the implementation of selected environmental management instruments and their impact on permanently sustainable development of urban settlement as well as to develop the recommendations in order to make this action more effective. We used an examination of environmental management individual instruments' effectiveness to supply permanent sustainable area development in this process. Based on the analysis, we concluded that environmental management individual instruments are clearly overlapped with pursued aims, principles as well as in procedural and institutional aspects. By analyzing and evaluating their effectiveness, we concluded that their functionality is not sufficient.

The success of a business project often relies on the accuracy of its project duration estimates. Inaccurate and overoptimistic project schedules can result in significant project failures. In this paper, we explore whether the presence of anchors, such as relatively uninformed suggestions or expectations of the duration of project tasks, play a role in the project estimating and planning process. We conduct a controlled laboratory experiment to test the effect of anchors on task duration estimates. We find strong anchoring effects and systematic estimation biases that do not vanish even after the task is repeatedly estimated and performed. We also find that such persisting biases can be caused by not only externally provided anchors, but also by the planner's own initial task duration estimate.

How to avoid project failures driven by overoptimistic schedules? Managers often attempt to mitigate the duration underestimation and improve the accuracy of project schedules by providing their planners with excessively detailed project specifications. While this traditional approach may be intuitive, solely providing more detailed information has proven to have a limited effect on eliminating behavioral biases. We experimentally test the effectiveness of providing detailed specification and compare it to an alternative intervention of providing historical information about the average duration of similar projects in the past. We find that both interventions mitigate the underestimation bias. However, since providing detailed project specification results in high variance of estimation errors due to sizable over-and underestimates, only the provision of historical information leads to more accurate project duration estimates. We also test whether it is more effective to anchor planners by providing historical information simultaneously with the project specification or to provide the historical information only after beliefs regarding the project duration are formed, in which case planners can regress their initial estimates towards the historical average. We find that the timing of disclosing information does not play a role as the estimation bias is mitigated and the accuracy is improved in both conditions. Finally, we observe that the subjective confidence in the accuracy of duration estimates does not vary across the interventions, suggesting that the confidence is neither a function of the amount nor the detail of available information.