TY  - CONF
TI  - Magical vs Methodical: Choosing by Advantages as Antidote to the Planning Fallacy
C1  - Auckland, New Zealand
C3  - Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 32)
SP  - 1099
EP  - 1110
PY  - 2024
DO  - 10.24928/2024/0115
AU  - Haronian, Eran
AU  - Korb, Samuel
AD  - Lecturer, Department of Civil Engineering, Ariel University, Ariel, 40700, Israel, eranha@ariel.ac.il
AD  - PhD, Graduate of the Faculty of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel, m1uwv6junqzd@opayq.com
AB  - Cost and schedule overruns are the bane of construction projects, in part due to overly optimistic predictions of project progression. This “optimism bias” is called the planning fallacy, a form of “magical thinking” where planners convince themselves that their project will be different (and better) than others. “Choosing by Advantages” (CBA) is a methodical approach for decision-making. By engaging “slow thinking” at the organizational level, CBA can help counteract the tendency to default to best-case scenarios when selecting among designs and production methods, even in the middle of a project. In this paper, a case study of a Pumped Hydroelectric Energy Storage facility that had to choose between a bottom-up raise boring and a top-down shaft sinking construction method for the vertical shaft connecting the reservoirs is presented. The paper then examines how CBA helped shift the thinking of the project team away from fallacious planning and overcome the sunk-cost fallacy.
KW  - Choosing by Advantages
KW  - Optimism Bias
KW  - Planning Fallacy
KW  - Risk Management
KW  - Monte Carlo
PB  - 
T2  - Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Conference of the International Group for Lean Construction (IGLC 32)
DA  - 2024/07/01
CY  - Auckland, New Zealand
L1  - http://iglc.net/Papers/Details/2262/pdf
L2  - http://iglc.net/Papers/Details/2262
N1  - Export Date: 03 April 2025
DB  - IGLC.net
DP  - IGLC
LA  - English
ER  -