Confounding changes in averages with marginal effects: How anchoring can destroy economic value in strategic investment assessments

Profit maximization requires that decision makers assess marginal profits. We demonstrate that decision makers often confound marginal profits with changes in average profits (e.g., changes in return-on-investment). This results in systematic deviations from profit maximization where decision makers forgo profit-enhancing investments that reduce average profits or engage in loss-enhancing investments that decrease average losses. In other words, average profit becomes an anchor by which new investments are assessed. We conduct two decision-making experiments that show this bias and demonstrate it is pronounced when average profit data are accessible or task-relevant. Moreover, we find within-subject effects across experiments, which helps demonstrate the mechanism that invokes the bias.

[1]  Lu Yao,et al.  Capital Budgeting Practices: A Comparative Study of the Netherlands and China , 2005 .

[2]  N. Epley,et al.  The Anchoring-and-Adjustment Heuristic , 2006, Psychological science.

[3]  Andrew V. Shipilov,et al.  DANCING WITH STRANGERS: ASPIRATION PERFORMANCE AND THE SEARCH FOR UNDERWRITING SYNDICATE PARTNERS. , 2004 .

[4]  David F. Scott,et al.  The Capital Expenditure Decision-Making Process of Large Corporations , 1975 .

[5]  R. Thaler,et al.  Does the Stock Market Overreact , 1985 .

[6]  Amos Tversky The Psychology of Decision Making , 1995 .

[7]  Itzhak Venezia,et al.  On the Preference for Full-Coverage Policies: Why do People Buy Too Much Insurance? , 2008 .

[8]  Zur Shapira,et al.  Managerial reasoning about aspirations and expectations , 2008 .

[9]  James C. T. Mao,et al.  SURVEY OF CAPITAL BUDGETING: THEORY AND PRACTICE , 1970 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[11]  Harry H. Lynch Financial performance of conglomerates , 1971 .

[12]  Henrich R. Greve,et al.  Sticky Aspirations: Organizational Time Perspective and Competitiveness , 2002, Organ. Sci..

[13]  J. Papastavrou,et al.  Accounting for Endogeneity When Assessing Strategy Performance: Does Entry Mode Choice Affect Fdi Survival , 1998 .

[14]  A. Galinsky,et al.  First offers as anchors: the role of perspective-taking and negotiator focus. , 2001, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[15]  Laura O. Taylor,et al.  Do Economists Recognize an Opportunity Cost When They See One? A Dismal Performance from the Dismal Science , 2005 .

[16]  Neil Stewart The Cost of Anchoring on Credit-Card Minimum Repayments , 2009, Psychological science.

[17]  Adam D. Galinsky,et al.  The Dissatisfaction of Having Your First Offer Accepted: The Role of Counterfactual Thinking in Negotiations , 2002 .

[18]  W. Edwards The theory of decision making. , 1954, Psychological bulletin.

[19]  G. Northcraft,et al.  Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions , 1987 .

[20]  L. Hickson,et al.  The Psychology of Decision Making , 2014 .

[21]  John G. Matsusaka,et al.  Takeover Motives During the Conglomerate Merger Wave , 1993 .