Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Exploring the Machinery for Calibrating Optimism and Realism in Transformation Programs: A Practical Toolkit

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Behavioral Operational Research

  • 841 Accesses

Abstract

Optimism is essential when initiating transformation programs. Without it, they lack vision and momentum. Yet when left unchecked, optimism bias leads to divergence of ambition and reality. Transformation programs are doomed to disappoint the stakeholders and operators. Calibrating optimism and realism is critical. Stakeholders must first understand and recognize optimism bias in themselves and the system they are seeing to change. Failure to do so is failure to learn and evolve, leading to stagnation and transformation failure. As all transformation has a fundamental element of culture/behavior change, developing a people and leadership strategy that underpins the transformation is essential. The author will offer a practical toolkit for developing the strategy and ensuring successful implementation. This chapter will examine the causes and impact of optimism bias in megaprojects context and establish the application of the theory in the transformation program context. It will then set out a toolkit for strategic change that draws upon behavioral insights to de-risk the operational phase. Thus enabling senior stakeholders and operators to ensure the transformation drifts toward a mutually satisfactory conclusion.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ashby, W. R. (1958). An Introduction to Cybernetics (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bazeman, M. (2014). The Power of Noticing: What Best Leaders See. New York: Simon & Schuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beer, S. (1972). Brain of the Firm: The Managerial Cybernetics of Organization. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bochman, D. J., & Kroth, M. (2010). Immunity to transformational learning and change. Learning Organization, 17(4), 328–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brower, J., & Gilbert, C. (2007). How managers’ everyday decisions create—Or destroy—Your company’s strategy. Harvard Business Review, 85, 72–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualiitative Research, 6(1), 97–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Peetz, J. (2010). The planning fallacy: Cognitive, motivational and social origins. Advances in Experimental Psychology, 43, 1–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buehler, R., Griffin, D., & Ross, M. (1994). Exploring the planning fallacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(3), 336–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, S., Clubb, C., Hopwood, A., & Hughes, J. (1980). The roles of accounting in organizations and society. Accounting Organisations and Society, 5(1), 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burrow, L. V. (2015). Calibrating optimism and realism in major programme culture; the role of ex post reviews in improving ICT project performance nd their vulnerability to delusions and deception. A mixed method case study (Masters dissertation). University of Oxford, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacciatori, E. (2008). Memory objects in project environments: Storing, retrieving and adapting learning in project-based firms. Research Policy, 37, 1591–1601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carson, R. C. (1969). Interaction Concepts of Personality. Chicago: Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke-Davies, T. (2002). The “real” success factors on projects. International Journal of Project Management, 20, 185–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cornelissen, J. P., Kafouras, M., & Lock, A. (2005). Metaphorical images of organization: How organizational researchers develop and select organizational metaphors. Human Relations, 58, 1545–1578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, R. F., Issa, R. R. A., & Aherns, D. (2003). Management’s perception of key performance indicators for construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 129(2), 142–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Designing and Constructing Mixed Methods Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Denzin, N. (2006). Socialogical Methods: A Sourcebook (5th ed.). Oxon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Englich, B., Mussweiler, T., & Strack, F. (2006). Playing dice with criminal sentences: The influence of irrelevant anchors on experts’ judicial decision making. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(2), 188–200.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fenton-O’Creevy, M., Nicholson, N., Soane, E., & Willman, P. (2003). Trading on illusions: Unrealistic perceptions of control and trading performance. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 53–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flyvbjerg, B. (2005). Machiavellian megaprojects. Antipode, 37(3), 5–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gouillart, F. J., & Sturdivant, F. D. (1994). Spend a day in the life of your customers. Harvard Business Review, 72(1), 116–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hoffmann, D. A. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee productivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54(3), 528–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gua, K., Yolles, M., Fink, G., & Iles, P. (2016). The Changing Organisation: Agency Theory in a Cross-Cultural Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Heimans, J., & Timms, H. (2014). Understanding “new power”. Harvard Business Review, 92(12), 48–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henke, N., Bughin, J., Chui, M., Manyika, J., Saleh, T., Wiseman, B., & Sethupathy, G. (2016). The age of analytics: Competing in a data-driven world. McKinsey Global Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman, A. O. (1967). The principle of the hiding hand. The Public Interest, 6(Winter), 10–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Olympic Committee. (2011). Learning from the past, getting ready for the future. Available at https://www.olympic.org/news/learning-from-the-past-getting-ready-for-the-future. Accessed 20 October 2018.

  • Kapsali, M. (2001). Systems thinking in innovation project management: A match that works. International Journal of Project Management, 29, 396–407.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, S., & Price, C. (2011). Beyond Performance. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, R. B. (1983). The 1982 interpersonal circle: A taxonomy for complementarity in human transactions. Psychology Review, 90, 185–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landsberger, H. A. (1958). Hawthorne Revisited. Ithaca: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32(2), 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lovallo, D., & Kahneman, D. (2003). Delusions of success: How optimism undermines executives’ decisions. Harvard Business Review, 81(7), 56–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayo, E. (1933). The Human Problems of an Industrial Civilization. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milton, N. (2011). The Lessons Learned Handbook: Practical Approaches to Learning from Experience. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. (2007). IT management: Infamous failures, classic mistakes and best practices. MIS Quarterly Executive, 6(2), 67–77.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinto, J. K., & Slevin, D. P. (1988). Critical success factors across the project lifecycle. Project Management Journal, 19(3), 75–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prusak, L. (1997). Knowledge in Organizations. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words: Combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9, 627–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Royer, I. (2003). Why good projects are so hard to kill. Harvard Business Review, 81(20), 48–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russo, J. E., & Schoemaker, P. (2002). Winning Decisions. New York: Crown Business.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruth, D. (2014). Leaders as priest: Plucking the fruit of a flawed metaphor. Leadership, 10(2), 174–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schindler, M., & Eppler, M. J. (2003). Harvesting project knowledge: A review of project learning methods and success factors. International Journal of Project Management, 21(3), 219–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, E. (1997). Towards a holistic cybernetics. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 4(1), 17–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharot, T., Riccardi, A. M., Raio, C. M., & Phelps, E. A. (2007). Neural mechanisms mediating optimism bias. Nature, 450, 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shefrin, H. (2008). Ending the Management Illusion. New York: McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommerville, I., & Sawyer, P. (1997). Requirements Engineering: A good practice guide. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Star, S., & Griesemer, J. (1989). Institutional ecology, translations and boundary objects: Amateurs and professionals in Berkeley’s museum of vertebrate zoology. Social Studies of Science, 19, 1907–1939.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53(1), 81–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staw, M. B., & Ross, J. (1987). Behaviour in escalating situation: Antecedents, prototypes and solutions. Research in Organizational Behavior, 9, 39–78.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, J., Scarborough, H., & Newell, S. (2010). Why don’t (or do) organizations learn from projects? Management Learning, 41(3), 325–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taleb, N. N. (2010). The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable (2nd ed.). New York: Random House Trade Paperbacks.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler, R., & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trice, H. M., & Beyer, J. M. (1984). Studying organizational cultures through rites and ceremonials. Academic Management Review, 9, 653–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Dyne, L., & LePine, J. A. (1998). Helping and voice extra-role behaviours: Evidence of construct and predictive validy. Academy of Management Journal, 41, 108–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, P. C. (1960). On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12(3), 129–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winch, G. M., & Maytorena, E. (2011). Managing Risk and Uncertainty on Projects. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

    Leasil Burrow

Authors
  1. Leasil Burrow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leasil Burrow .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Warwick Business School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK

    Leroy White

  2. Southampton Business School, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

    Martin Kunc

  3. School of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    Katharina Burger

  4. Applied Research, BT, Martlesham Heath, UK

    Jonathan Malpass

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Burrow, L. (2020). Exploring the Machinery for Calibrating Optimism and Realism in Transformation Programs: A Practical Toolkit. In: White, L., Kunc, M., Burger, K., Malpass, J. (eds) Behavioral Operational Research. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25405-6_9

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation