LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hornung, M.; Luther, R.; Schuster, P. (2016)
Publisher: Emerald
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Purpose\ud Making rational and undistorted corporate investment decisions is critically important to organizations. ‘Scientific’ investment appraisal can play a central role, particularly setting the hurdle rate. Empirical research reveals that actual rates generally exceed organizations’ cost of capital − the so-called Hurdle Rate Premium Puzzle. Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, this paper mobilizes the retrievability cognitive bias as one explanation of this paradox.\ud \ud Design/methodology/approach\ud A systematic structuring and investigation of the legacy of eight scenarios, representing ‘correct’ and ‘incorrect’ decisions on 'good' and 'bad' proposals, is used to explain the inconsistency between normative capital investment theory and actual practice.\ud \ud Findings\ud Decision makers' cognitive processes based on informal perceptions, strengthened by the scope of formal post-audit routines, provide a plausible explanation why investment decision makers tend to systematically set hurdle rates too high.\ud \ud Research limitations\ud The findings have yet to be explored in more depth by fieldwork and experimental research.\ud \ud Practical implications\ud The policy implications of this study are that corporate success could be enhanced by making executives aware of the hurdle rate premium phenomenon and of its behavioural causes; also by including significant rejected investment proposals in the post-audit programme and communicating the opportunity cost of ‘false negative’ decisions on proposals not adopted.\ud \ud Originality/value\ud The paper provides a new explanation for a recognised phenomenon: Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the paper applies research on a cognitive bias to the setting of the hurdle rate in investment appraisal.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article