Bias versus error: why projects fall short

Ika, Lavagnon A.; Pinto, Jeffrey K.; Love, Peter; Paché, Gilles

doi:10.1108/jbs-11-2021-0190

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Volden (2018) referred to this problem as perverse incentives and claimed that the risk is greatest when projects are fully funded by the government, with concentrated benefits and no liabilities for the recipients. Others have argued that over-optimism in appraisals can best be explained by a combination of deliberate bias and unintentional error, where the latter also has a crucial role (Ika et al. , 2023).…”

Section: What the Literature Says About Early Project Appraisal And T...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do nothing, do minimum or do something? Why public project appraisals “always” recommend large projects

Volden,

Welde,

Engebø

et al. 2024

IJMPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeIn the project initiation phase, an appraisal is needed to clarify the strategic problem and alternative solutions. Full-scale construction projects and simple solutions (do-minimum alternatives) should be assessed. The do-nothing alternative is the baseline for the appraisal and an option in itself. The paper explores the role of do-nothing and do-minimum alternatives in public project appraisal, which may significantly impact the attractiveness of a construction project.Design/methodology/approachThe paper presents an empirical study from Norway, which requires external quality assurance (QA) of early project appraisals. The data include an extensive document review of 112 projects and interviews with 41 experts involved in the appraisal processes.FindingsOf 112 appraisals, 110 recommended a major construction project, including cases where the benefits and value were low or uncertain. The do-nothing alternative was generally included as a reference but not treated as a viable option. Do-minimum alternatives were often not explored. By contrast, the external QA reports recommended do-nothing or do-minimum in 28 cases. Interestingly, although political decision-makers rarely reject projects, they may put them on hold indefinitely, implying that the actual outcome in many cases is still do-nothing.Originality/valueThe paper addresses a topic that has been understudied in the literature. The findings contribute to the broader literature on project initiation processes, project appraisal and how to reduce the risk of bias and manipulation in appraisals.

show abstract

Section: What the Literature Says About Early Project Appraisal And T...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Do nothing, do minimum or do something? Why public project appraisals “always” recommend large projects

Volden,

Welde,

Engebø

et al. 2024

IJMPB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Breaking the Sisyphean loop: reconceptualizing the treatment of risk and uncertainty in transport projects

Love,

Matthews,

Ika

2024

Production Planning & Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigating ground-related design deficiencies as potential triggers to cost overruns in highway projects

Amadi

2023

JFMPC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study aims to investigate ground-related design deficiencies as potential avenues of avoidable cost overruns, discernible from the geotechnical practices of highway agencies in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria. Design/methodology/approach The study deploys an interpretivist qualitative methodology to provide a detailed descriptive analysis of the design-related geotechnical practices of highway agencies during the pre-contract phase of highway projects. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with in-house professionals, consultants and contractors affiliated with the three highway agencies in the Niger Delta and thematically analysed to identify significant deviations from geotechnical best practices. Findings The study outcome shows that during the pre-contract phase, a chain of design-related geotechnical shortcomings has plagued highway projects executed in the Niger Delta. This view of practice uncovered in this study demonstrates a culture of significant deviation from best practice recommendations, which could plausibly contribute to the history of significant project cost overruns recorded in the region. Originality/value The study qualitatively spotlights gaps in the practice of highway agencies and reinforces the need for a re-orientation of the attitude to risk management, to give geotechnical concerns a priority in the financial management of highway projects executed in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria.

show abstract

Bias versus error: why projects fall short

Cited by 5 publications

References 16 publications

Do nothing, do minimum or do something? Why public project appraisals “always” recommend large projects

Do nothing, do minimum or do something? Why public project appraisals “always” recommend large projects

Breaking the Sisyphean loop: reconceptualizing the treatment of risk and uncertainty in transport projects

Investigating ground-related design deficiencies as potential triggers to cost overruns in highway projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About