The planning fallacy in oil and gas decision-making
The ‘planning fallacy’ describes the tendency of people to underestimate costs and times required for the completion of complex projects. Psychological research has demonstrated that a key component of this results from the packing/unpacking bias—where options or problems that are not specifically stated tend to be ignored by people when making estimates or assigning probabilities to events. We have investigated this effect as it relates to oil and gas decision making, highlighted by experimental results comparing estimates of drilling times made by both student and industry participants. Specifically, participants were provided with a drilling scenario and asked to estimate the time required to drill the well—including drilling, tripping, rigging and all potential problems. In the packed condition the options were given as just stated while, in the unpacked condition the ‘all potential problems’ category was divided into a list of specific problems. The packing effect was shown to markedly alter the time estimates made by all groups of participants—altering estimates of problem times by more than 100 hours on average. Additional analyses assessed the interactions between the packing/unpacking effect and personal traits such as optimism, tendency to procrastinate and industry experience. These findings are discussed in terms of their import for oil and gas decision makers desiring to improve prediction accuracy and, thus, economic outcomes by avoiding, or limiting, the impact of the planning fallacy.