The Past, Present, and Future of Professional Ethics in Planning

Wachs, Martín

doi:10.1002/9781119084679.ch23

Cited by 10 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We see the theory of strategic misrepresentation fits the data well. Explanations of project outcomes in terms of strategic misrepresentation have been set forth by Wachs (1989Wachs ( , 1990Wachs ( , 2013, Kain (1990), Pickrell (1992), Flyvbjerg et al (2002Flyvbjerg et al ( , 2004Flyvbjerg et al ( , 2005Flyvbjerg et al ( , 2009, and Feynman (2007aFeynman ( , 2007b among others.…”

Section: Strategic Misrepresentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Political bias is particularly important for big, consequential decisions and projects, which are often subject to high political-organizational pressures. In fact, for very large projectsso-called megaprojects-the most significant behavioral bias is arguably political bias, more specifically, strategic misrepresentation (Flyvbjerg et al, 2002;Flyvbjerg et al, 2018;Wachs, 2013). Cognitive bias may account well for outcomes in the simple lab experiments done by behavioral scientists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Top Ten Behavioral Biases in Project Management: An Overview

Flyvbjerg

2021

Project Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral science has witnessed an explosion in the number of biases identified by behavioral scientists, to more than 200 at present. This article identifies the 10 most important behavioral biases for project management. First, we argue it is a mistake to equate behavioral bias with cognitive bias, as is common. Cognitive bias is half the story; political bias the other half. Second, we list the top 10 behavioral biases in project management: (1) strategic misrepresentation, (2) optimism bias, (3) uniqueness bias, (4) the planning fallacy, (5) overconfidence bias, (6) hindsight bias, (7) availability bias, (8) the base rate fallacy, (9) anchoring, and (10) escalation of commitment. Each bias is defined, and its impacts on project management are explained, with examples. Third, base rate neglect is identified as a primary reason that projects underperform. This is supported by presentation of the most comprehensive set of base rates that exist in project management scholarship, from 2,062 projects. Finally, recent findings of power law outcomes in project performance are identified as a possible first stage in discovering a general theory of project management, with more fundamental and more scientific explanations of project outcomes than found in conventional theory.

show abstract

Section: Strategic Misrepresentationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Top Ten Behavioral Biases in Project Management: An Overview

Flyvbjerg

2021

Project Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, independent audits are needed to ensure that points one and two abovebetter methods and better incentives for more accurate forecastswork according to intention, and to adjust them when they do not. Auditing must be effectively separated from political motivations, to avoid the type of political distortion of costbenefit forecasts described in detail by Wachs (1986Wachs ( , 1989Wachs ( , 1990Wachs ( , 2013, Harrington et al (2000), Flyvbjerg et al (2002Flyvbjerg et al ( , 2004, Harrington (2006), andWorld Bank (2010). If this does not happen, audits will not and cannot serve their purpose.…”

Section: Four Steps To Cost-benefit Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It

Flyvbjerg

Bester

2021

J. Benefit Cost Anal.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most cost-benefit analyses assume that the estimates of costs and benefits are more or less accurate and unbiased. But what if, in reality, estimates are highly inaccurate and biased? Then the assumption that cost-benefit analysis is a rational way to improve resource allocation would be a fallacy. Based on the largest dataset of its kind, we test the assumption that cost and benefit estimates of public investments are accurate and unbiased. We find this is not the case with overwhelming statistical significance. We document the extent of cost overruns, benefit shortfalls, and forecasting bias in public investments. We further assess whether such inaccuracies seriously distort effective resource allocation, which is found to be the case. We explain our findings in behavioral terms and explore their policy implications. Finally, we conclude that cost-benefit analysis of public investments stands in need of reform and we outline four steps to such reform.

show abstract

“…While Marty respected technical methods, forecasts, and models, he recognized that technical analysis was a fundamentally human enterprise relying on often subjective choices about confidence intervals, future growth assumptions, and other factors. He pushed for transparency in modeling, so that misleading or incomplete forecasts would not be mistaken for objective analysis (Wachs 1989, 2015).…”

Section: Branches Of Scholarshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

ACSP Distinguished Educator, 2006: Martin Wachs

Agrawal

Sciara

2021

Journal of Planning Education and Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For people who knew Martin Wachs, California's stately coast redwood tree may seem an unlikely metaphor to describe the man and his career. Marty, as he was known, grew up in the heart of New York City and leaned more toward watching Dodgers games than long forest hikes. (Nor was he particularly tall.) However, we can think of no more fitting metaphor to describe Marty's scholarship, advocacy, teaching, and mentorship. Like a redwood, Marty grew to be a giant in the research community. He was a prolific scholar and steadfast advocate in the pursuit of social equity in transportation. His students and others he mentored revered Marty as a pillar in their professional development and adored him for his profound kindness, playful sense of humor, and warm chuckle.

show abstract

The Past, Present, and Future of Professional Ethics in Planning

Cited by 10 publications

References 9 publications

Top Ten Behavioral Biases in Project Management: An Overview

Top Ten Behavioral Biases in Project Management: An Overview

The Cost-Benefit Fallacy: Why Cost-Benefit Analysis Is Broken and How to Fix It

ACSP Distinguished Educator, 2006: Martin Wachs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About