IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/jumsac/294921.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Hätte eine Pre-Mortem-Analyse den Tod von eLWIS verhindern können? – Verhaltensorientierte Ansätze für effektives Kostenmanagement in Großprojekten

Author

Listed:
  • Schattevoy, Sonja

Abstract

Im Juni 2018 gab der Discounter Lidl bekannt, dass er das in Kooperation mit SAP durchgeführte IT-Investitionsprojekt "eLWIS" mit sofortiger Wirkung einstellen würde. Die bis zu diesem Zeitpunkt angefallenen Kosten betrugen bereits rund 500 Mio. Euro. Damit reiht sich Lidl in eine durchaus beachtliche Liste jener Unternehmen ein, die ein geplantes IT-Großprojekt nicht im vorgesehenen Kosten- und Zeitrahmen abzuwickeln vermochten. Die enorme Verbreitung dieser Problematik über eine Vielzahl von Branchen hinweg gibt Anlass zu einer intensiven Analyse der Erfolgsfaktoren für effektives Kostenmanagement in Großprojekten. Einen vielversprechenden Ansatz stellt in diesem Kontext das verhaltensorientierte Controlling dar, das vor allem Maßnahmen gegen kognitive Fehlleistungen und Könnensdefizite der handelnden Akteure in den Mittelpunkt der Betrachtung rückt. Im Rahmen dieser Arbeit werden ausgewählte kognitive Verzerrungen dargestellt, die im Kontext von Investitionsprojekten zu dysfunktionalem Entscheidungsverhalten führen können. Darauf aufbauend sollen Lösungsmöglichkeiten dargelegt werden, mit deren Hilfe diese Verzerrungen aufgefangen und negative Konsequenzen für das Unternehmen vermieden werden können.

Suggested Citation

  • Schattevoy, Sonja, 2020. "Hätte eine Pre-Mortem-Analyse den Tod von eLWIS verhindern können? – Verhaltensorientierte Ansätze für effektives Kostenmanagement in Großprojekten," Junior Management Science (JUMS), Junior Management Science e. V., vol. 5(1), pages 19-34.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:jumsac:294921
    DOI: 10.5282/jums/v5i1pp19-34
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/294921/1/5062-3263.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5282/jums/v5i1pp19-34?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    2. Bent Flyvbjerg & Nils Bruzelius & Werner Rothengatter, 2013. "Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition," Papers 1303.7404, arXiv.org.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Bent Flyvbjerg, 2007. "Policy and Planning for Large-Infrastructure Projects: Problems, Causes, Cures," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 34(4), pages 578-597, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Servranckx, Tom & Vanhoucke, Mario & Aouam, Tarik, 2021. "Practical application of reference class forecasting for cost and time estimations: Identifying the properties of similarity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 295(3), pages 1161-1179.
    2. Daniel Fonseca Costa & Francisval Carvalho & Bruno César Moreira & José Willer Prado, 2017. "Bibliometric analysis on the association between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring effect and confirmation bias," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1775-1799, June.
    3. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    4. T. K. Das & Bing-Sheng Teng, 1998. "Time and Entrepreneurial Risk Behavior," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(2), pages 69-88, January.
    5. Uri Gneezy & Jan Potters, 1997. "An Experiment on Risk Taking and Evaluation Periods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 631-645.
    6. Elie Matta & Jean McGuire, 2008. "Too Risky to Hold? The Effect of Downside Risk, Accumulated Equity Wealth, and Firm Performance on CEO Equity Reduction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 567-580, August.
    7. Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), 2013. "International Handbook on Mega-Projects," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14791.
    8. Chantal C. Cantarelli & Bent Flybjerg & Eric J. E. Molin & Bert van Wee, 2013. "Cost overruns in Large-Scale Transportation Infrastructure Projects: Explanations and Their Theoretical Embeddedness," Papers 1307.2176, arXiv.org.
    9. Meissner, Philip & Wulf, Torsten, 2014. "Antecendents and effects of decision comprehensiveness: The role of decision quality and perceived uncertainty," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 32(4), pages 625-635.
    10. Barberis, Nicholas & Huang, Ming, 2009. "Preferences with frames: A new utility specification that allows for the framing of risks," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1555-1576, August.
    11. Steul, Martina, 2006. "Does the framing of investment portfolios influence risk-taking behavior? Some experimental results," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 557-570, August.
    12. Alexander K. Koch & Julia Nafziger, 2019. "Correlates of Narrow Bracketing," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1441-1472, October.
    13. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:4:p:361-379 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Rodney C. Shrader & Mark Simon & Steven Stanton, 2021. "Financial forecasting and risky decisions: an experimental study grounded in Prospect theory," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1827-1841, December.
    15. Chantal C. Cantarelli & Bent Flyvbjerg, 2013. "Mega-projects’ cost performance and lock-in: problems and solutions," Chapters, in: Hugo Priemus & Bert van Wee (ed.), International Handbook on Mega-Projects, chapter 15, pages 333-355, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Yan Li, 2011. "Emotions and new venture judgment in China," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 277-298, June.
    17. Luigi Guiso & Tullio Jappelli, 2008. "Financial Literacy and Portfolio Diversification," Economics Working Papers ECO2008/31, European University Institute.
    18. Thomas Langer & Martin Weber, 2001. "Prospect Theory, Mental Accounting, and Differences in Aggregated and Segregated Evaluation of Lottery Portfolios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 716-733, May.
    19. Chi, Yichun & Zheng, Jiakun & Zhuang, Shengchao, 2022. "S-shaped narrow framing, skewness and the demand for insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 279-292.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:5:p:424-440 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Alex S. L. Tse & Harry Zheng, 2023. "Speculative trading, prospect theory and transaction costs," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 49-96, January.
    22. Dew, Nicholas & Read, Stuart & Sarasvathy, Saras D. & Wiltbank, Robert, 2008. "Outlines of a behavioral theory of the entrepreneurial firm," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 37-59, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:jumsac:294921. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://jums.academy/en/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.