Analysis of Cognitive and Motivational Biases in Project Management

This report investigates cognitive and motivational biases that hinder effective decision-making in project management. It begins with an abstract highlighting the prevalence of biases, even among experts, and an introduction emphasizing the project manager's crucial role in decision-making. The report then details various cognitive biases, including optimism bias (planning fallacy), anchoring bias, confirmation bias, false consensus effect, and Déformation Professionnelle, explaining their impact and providing de-biasing techniques. Motivational biases, such as affect influence, the desire for positive outcomes, the undesirability of negative events, and the desire for certain choices are also discussed, along with strategies for mitigation. The report concludes by mentioning biases of lesser significance and emphasizes the importance of understanding and addressing these biases to enhance project success. The report provides practical advice for project managers seeking to improve their decision-making processes.

Running head: COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 1
Cognitive and Motivational Biases and their Remedies
Name
Institutional Affiliation

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 2
1. Abstract
Research on behavioral decision making has shown that decisions and judgements arrived at
by human beings are prone to endless biases. Even anti-bias experts find themselves entangled in
the same biases they are trying to help other people evade. This report, therefore, digs deeper
into the various motivational and cognitive biases that may hinder effective decision making in
project management. Several techniques have also been offered on how to tackle the two types of
biases.
2. Introduction
The lynchpin of a successful project is a project manager (Williams, 2017). During plan
generation and execution phases, a project manager is of significant importance in offering
guidance and leadership. Due to the vital and critical nature of decision making, project
managers ought to clearly understand how personal inclinations, as well as mental dispositions,
influence the decisions made by a project manager. Training sessions on effective management
should, therefore, seek to address the fore mentioned variables that are natural to human beings
(Kliem, 2013). Knowledge derived from such sessions is crucial in the enhancement of
traditional science of project management. This report, therefore, seeks to identify the various
cognitive and motivational biases. Various de-biasing methods will also be ventured into. After
identifying and documenting the aforementioned, any user of this report will be at liberty to
select and implement any technique to yield maximum results on eradication of biases in project
management.

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 3
3. Types of biases
3.1 cognitive biases
Cognitive biases are systematic patterns of deviating from rationality. They are results of
differences in the functionalities of cognitive systems amongst various individuals (Serfas,
2010). The first type of cognitive bias is the optimism bias that results in planning fallacy. It is
the tendency of underestimating the time frame within which a certain task will be completed
(ASHARI, 2016). On most occasions, this bias arises during the planning stage when the
personnel mandated with the actual performance of the task underestimates the time they are
going to spend in undertaking the task to completion. This bias results from intense pressure
from the sponsors of a project who call upon the project manager to complete the task as soon as
possible (Hatfield, 2012). Subsequently, such pressure and optimism from the top management
results to marking of unattainable deadlines that consequently results to schedule delays.
Several techniques are available for de-biasing optimism bias. First, as a project manager,
it would be advisable to conduct a research on similar past projects and acquire objective
information. To achieve the for mentioned, the first step would be to identify a reference class.
Statistics of the identified reference class would then be identified and used for generating
baseline predictions (Keren & Wu, 2016).
Anchoring bias is another type of cognitive biases. During decision-making processes,
people always tend to cling tight and rely mostly on the first available information, commonly
known as ‘Anchor.’ Upon establishment of an anchor, subsequent negotiations and decisions
arrived at henceforth will be informed and centered to the initial suggestion (Raydugin & Yuri,
2012). For instance, during negotiations for the price of a certain service or product, the initial
price that will be suggested by either of the parties sets the foundation of the whole negotiation

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 4
process. With this in mind, it is always recommended for a project manager to set the starting
point that will be of benefit to the project in any kind of negotiations.
The most effective way to avoid anchoring bias is to avoid anchors. This can be easily
achieved by avoiding over-relying on the first available information prior to conducting relevant
tests to ascertain it. Multiple counter-anchors could also be provided (Harrin, 2015). Upon
evaluation of them all, the most suitable anchor can now be placed at the baseline of decision
making. Lastly, the opinions of different experts who use different anchors could be sought.
In many situations, project managers have a tendency of interpreting or searching for
information in ways that will confirm their own pre-conception of such information (Virine &
Michael Trumper, 2007). This is referred to as confirmation bias. It is by human nature that
people are constantly in search of data and/or information that confirms what they already
believe and are blinded by information that is inconsistent with their preconceived
understandings. Consequently, any information presented and is contrary to their views is
dismissed primarily. For example, if an investor receives and believes negative information
about a project, he will definitely develop negative perceptions regarding the project before the
main ideas are presented to him. By the time formal presentations are made to him, the highest
probability is that he will not accord it a fair evaluation.
Confirmation bias can be countered effectively by consulting with various experts who
will definitely present different points of view about a certain scenario. Project managers can
also use counterfactuals with probability assessments (Trautmann, 2008). Lastly, evidence to
justify alternative hypotheses should be sought before landing on the most appropriate decisions.

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 5
The tendency of overestimating the magnitude to which other people are likely to concur
with one’s opinions or beliefs is a cognitive bias known as the False Consensus Effect (Saris &
Sniderman, 2018). When conducting a project, for example, one may develop a feeling that the
project is of great value and presents exciting opportunities. The false consensus, however, will
result in a perception that even other people will develop the same enthusiasm towards the
project. If project managers are not aware of this type of bias, they may end up overlooking or
not taking sufficient time to evaluate the actual sentiments and attitudes of other stakeholders in
regards to the project. By being aware of this tendency, managers will always check to confirm
that people are in line with their views rather than just making assumptions. Subsequently, such
project managers will secure buy-in from the chief stakeholders resulting in the smooth running
of the project (Cooke-Davies, 2011).
To cope the false consensus effect, it would be advisable for project managers to call for
and encourage buy-ins from crew affiliates as well as stakeholders when laying down the plans
as well as during the execution stage of plans (Serfas, 2010). This will ensure that opinions from
all members are considered and implemented if relevant. Collaborative project sites, workshops,
and meetings are also effective mitigations.
Déformation Professionnelle is a bias whereby individuals tend to view things/situations
based on their own expertise or profession (Blais, 2011). During the planning stage, for instance,
it is of great significance to consider inputs from various team players in order to weigh opinions
from experts in various fields. By doing so, balanced views, as well as ultimate conclusions, will
be arrived at easily. To mitigate Déformation Professionnelle, it is of great significance for a
project manager to understand that successful completion of a project requires contributions from
various experts and professionals. Upon understanding this, opinions from various experts will

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 6
be sought during crucial decision-making processes to ensure input from all relevant fields
(Serfas, 2010).
3.2 Motivational biases
Motivational biases occur as a result of judgements being influenced by the desire or
undesirability of choices, outcomes or events to occur in certain ways (Bayney & Chakravarti,
2012). It is, however, worth noting that motivational biases do not always occur consciously. For
example, even with no pressure from outside, estimations of time required to complete a certain
project is always done in an optimistic manner. in such a case, the motivating factor would be the
desire to complete the project at hand in the minimum time frame possible. Outlined henceforth
are various motivational biases that commonly occur in project management.
Affect influenced is a bias that occurs when there is a predisposition of emotions against
or towards certain outcomes views or opinions (Chang & Isoda, 2015). It is by human nature that
people will tend to develop emotional attractions towards events, opinions, and/or circumstances
that are appealing to them. Such individuals could also develop emotional repulsions against
events, opinions and/or circumstances that do not concur with their emotions. Such
predispositions that are merely based on facts often taints the decision making process during
project management as people will always arrive at their final decisions in favor of their
emotions. As a way of de-biasing Affect influenced bias, encumbered descriptions of
consequences should be avoided when presenting attributes. When eliciting value weights,
functions and probabilities, project managers should cross-check judgements with alternative
elicitation conventions (Kliem, 2013).

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 7
Another motivational bias is the desire for positive events to occur or untold craving for
positive outcomes in indulged activities. In project management, this bias arises when the desire
for certain outcomes and subsequent fear of failure dominates the minds of decision makers
(Hatfield, 2012). Consequently, the aforementioned results in an increase of the extent to which
the desired outcomes are expected to happen. When predicting results in sports project
management, for example, this bias has significant impacts on expert foresight when estimating
the probability of outcomes in the future, cost estimations, the duration that a certain project will
take to complete and sport tournament results. To de-bias this odd, it is essential for a manager to
seek opinions from various experts. Scoring rules could also be used as well as placing
imaginary bets in contradiction of the desired outcomes or events (Hatfield, 2012). Lastly,
disintegration and realistic valuation of fractional likelihoods could be implemented.
People also tend to be biased based on their undesirability of occurrence of negative
events, attainment of negative results as well as negative consequences to activities undertaken
(Keren & Wu, 2016). This bias arises when project stakeholders involved in decision making are
driven by the desire to be prudent, cautious or even conservative when making decisions with
possibilities of accruing negative consequences. Decisions arrived at in such situations will
always have ignored factors that are believed to result in negative results without giving fair
evaluations. Such factors could possibly bring positive results if monitored closely and
implemented in the right way rather than avoiding them. As an attempt to mitigate this bias,
different points of view could be sought from various experts. Scoring rules could also be
implemented followed by placing hypothetical bets to favor the undesired consequences or
events (Chang & Isoda, 2015).

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 8
The last motivational bias is the desire to go for certain choices/options. This bias occurs
when project decision makers overestimate or underestimate values, probabilities, weights and/or
consequences of actions to be undertaken in favor of the desired alternative where there are
possibilities of several results emerging (Saris & Sniderman, 2018). The final decision will be
arrived at based on the which alternative the project managers want to be accomplished. In many
cases, there is usually an unfair evaluation of courses of actions to take all in attempt to settle for
the one that derives the desired option amongst various possible outcomes. To de-bias this odd,
the most effective technique that a project manager could implement is to use analysis with
different stakeholders providing diverse value standpoints. Multiple experts could also be sought
to give varied opinions on the matter at hand. Lastly, sufficient levels of liability, as well as
incentives, could be used (Pashler, 2013).
4. Biases that are of lesser significance
There are certain biases that are rendered less significant because of their easiness in
rectifying them. Ambiguity aversion is one of them. This bias arises in project management
when decision makers go for gambles whose probabilities are explicitly stated rather than prefer
gambles with probabilities not specified (Trautmann, 2008). Base rate fallacy is another bias.
Here, decision makers develop a tendency of relying on information that is individual-specific
rather than considering base rates to make judgements regarding probability. Another bias of less
significance that can be easily collected is endowment effect (Keren & Wu, 2016). This occurs
when project managers develop a greater disutility for the losing side than the utility for the
gaining side when comparing same values/ amounts. People, for example, tend to ask for higher
payments for an item currently in their possession than they are willing to pay for the same item

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 9
if they were to purchase it. Lastly, the gambler’s fallacy is a bias that occurs when people use
inappropriate information from the past to forecast future events.
5. Conclusion
Cognitive biases have been identified as systematic patterns of deviating from rationality.
They are results of differences in the functionalities of cognitive systems amongst various
individuals. Motivational biases, on the other hand, are caused by the desire or undesirability to
achieve certain outcomes. To reduce the possibilities of biases occurring in project management,
various techniques of de-biasing have been provided. Other types of biases such as gamblers
fallacy have been identified as easy to correct. Upon implementation of the de-biasing techniques
provided, it is possible to eradicate biases in project management and hence improve the overall
productivity.

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 10
7.0 References
ASHARI, A. (2016, January 6). Cognitive Biases in Project Management. PROJECT
MANAGEMENT. Retrieved August 1, 2018, from
https://project-management.com/cognitive-biases-in-project-management/
Bayney, R., & Chakravarti, R. (2012). Enterprise Project Portfolio Management: Building
Competencies for R&D and IT Investment Success (illustrated ed.). J. Ross Publishing.
Blais, S. (2011). Déformation Professionnelle (illustrated ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Chang, S. W., & Isoda, M. (2015). Neural basis of social learning, social deciding, and other-
regarding preferences. Frontiers Media SA.
Cooke-Davies, T. (2011). Aspects of Complexity: Managing Projects in a Complex World.
Project Management Institute.
Harrin, E. (2015, May 25). OVERCOMING BIAS IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT. A GIRL'S
GUIDE TO PROJECT MANAGEMENT. Retrieved August 1, 2018, from
https://www.girlsguidetopm.com/overcoming-bias-in-project-management/
Hatfield, M. (2012). Game Theory in Management: Modelling Business Decisions and their
Consequences (revised ed.). Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Keren, G., & Wu, G. (2016). The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making,
2 Volume Set, Volume 1 (illustrated, reprint ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Kliem, R. L. (2013). Creative, Efficient, and Effective Project Management (CRC Press ed.).
CRC Press.

COGNITIVE AND MOTIVATIONAL BIASES 11
Pashler, H. (2013). Encyclopedia of the Mind, Volume 1 (illustrated ed.). SAGE.
Raydugin, R., & Yuri, M. (2012). Handbook of Research on Leveraging Risk and Uncertainties
for Effective Project Management. IGI Global.
Saris, W. E., & Sniderman, P. M. (2018). Studies in Public Opinion: Attitudes, Nonattitudes,
Measurement Error, and Change. Princeton University Press.
Serfas, S. (2010). Cognitive Biases in the Capital Investment Context: Theoretical
Considerations and Empirical Experiments on Violations of Normative Rationality
(illustrated ed.). Springer Science & Business Media.
Trautmann, S. T. (2008). Uncertainty in individual and social decisions. Rozenberg Publishers.
Virine, L., & Michael Trumper. (2007). Project Decisions: The Art and Science. Berrett-Koehler
Publishers.
Williams, T. C. (2017). Filling Execution Gaps: How Executives and Project Managers Turn
Corporate Strategy Into Successful Projects (illustrated ed.). Walter de Gruyter GmbH &
Co KG.