Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Retrievability bias in explaining the hurdle rate premium puzzle

Retrievability bias in explaining the hurdle rate premium puzzle PurposeMaking rational and undistorted corporate investment decisions is critically important to organisations. “Scientific” investment appraisal can play a central role, particularly setting the hurdle rate. Empirical research reveals that actual rates generally exceed organisations’ cost of capital – the so-called hurdle rate premium (HRP) puzzle. Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the purpose of this paper is to mobilise the retrievability cognitive bias as one explanation of this paradox.Design/methodology/approachA 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.FindingsDecision 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.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings have still to be explored in more depth by fieldwork and experimental research.Practical implicationsThe policy implications of this study are that corporate success could be enhanced by making executives aware of the HRP 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.Originality/valueThe 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. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Applied Accounting Research Emerald Publishing

Retrievability bias in explaining the hurdle rate premium puzzle

Download PDF
16 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/retrievability-bias-in-explaining-the-hurdle-rate-premium-puzzle-lx0HLxJsFb

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
0967-5426
DOI
10.1108/JAAR-08-2015-0065
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

PurposeMaking rational and undistorted corporate investment decisions is critically important to organisations. “Scientific” investment appraisal can play a central role, particularly setting the hurdle rate. Empirical research reveals that actual rates generally exceed organisations’ cost of capital – the so-called hurdle rate premium (HRP) puzzle. Allowing for bounded rationality of corporate decision-makers, the purpose of this paper is to mobilise the retrievability cognitive bias as one explanation of this paradox.Design/methodology/approachA 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.FindingsDecision 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.Research limitations/implicationsThe findings have still to be explored in more depth by fieldwork and experimental research.Practical implicationsThe policy implications of this study are that corporate success could be enhanced by making executives aware of the HRP 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.Originality/valueThe 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.

Journal

Journal of Applied Accounting Research – Emerald Publishing

Published: Nov 14, 2016

There are no references for this article.