Exploring decision-making: experimental observations on project selection and the impact of justification pressure

Abstract In this experimental investigation, we explore the impact of justification on project choices. Introducing a novel element, we implement asymmetric payoff schemes commonly employed in business, signifying distinct payoff distributions for the firm (principal) and the manager (agent). The agent has to choose one project from two options that differ in their risk-return profiles. The outcomes of our experiment substantiate our hypothesis, indicating that a mandate for justification decreases the probability of agents selecting the project with higher risk and return. The degree of this reduction appears to hinge on the nature of justification. Increased profit shares for the agent or a project recommendation from the principal can partially counterbalance the distortion in the project choice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Management & Governance
Published
2024-09-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10997-024-09717-9
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Exploring decision-making: experimental observations on project selection and the impact of justification pressure

Max‐Frederik Neubert, Christian Lukas, Jens Robert Schöndube
Journal of Management & Governance
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

Exploring decision-making: experimental observations on project selection and the impact of justification pressure

Max‐Frederik Neubert, Christian Lukas, Jens Robert Schöndube
article en

Abstract

Abstract In this experimental investigation, we explore the impact of justification on project choices. Introducing a novel element, we implement asymmetric payoff schemes commonly employed in business, signifying distinct payoff distributions for the firm (principal) and the manager (agent). The agent has to choose one project from two options that differ in their risk-return profiles. The outcomes of our experiment substantiate our hypothesis, indicating that a mandate for justification decreases the probability of agents selecting the project with higher risk and return. The degree of this reduction appears to hinge on the nature of justification. Increased profit shares for the agent or a project recommendation from the principal can partially counterbalance the distortion in the project choice.

Journal of Management & GovernanceVol. 29(3)
Leibniz University Hannover (DE), Carl Zeiss (Germany) (DE), Friedrich Schiller University Jena (DE), Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg (DE)
Friedrich-Schiller-Universität Jena, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Universität Hannover, Leibniz-Gemeinschaft
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 82%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.