Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Influence of differentiated roles on group forecasting accuracy

Contents:

Author Info

  • Önkal, Dilek
  • Lawrence, Michael
  • Zeynep SayIm, K.
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    While behavioral research on forecasting has mostly examined the individual forecaster, organizationally-based forecasting processes typically tend to rely on groups with members from different functional areas for arriving at 'consensus' forecasts. The forecasting performance could also vary depending on the particular group structuring utilized in reaching a final prediction. The current study compares the forecasting performance of modified consensus groups with that of staticized groups using formal role-playing. It is found that, when undistorted model forecasts are given, group forecasts (whether they are arrived at through averaging or by a detailed discussion of the forecasts) contribute positively to the forecasting accuracy. However, providing distorted initial forecasts affects the final accuracy with varying degrees of improvement over the initial forecasts. The results show a strong tendency to favor optimistic forecasts for both the staticized and modified consensus group forecasts. Overall, the role modifications are found to be successful in eliciting a differential adjustment behavior, effectively mimicking the disparities between different organizational roles. Current research suggests that group discussions may be an efficient method of displaying and resolving differential motivational contingencies, potentially leading to group forecasts that perform quite well.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6V92-501CFY8-1/2/3f65a172de5489091b505e572fb88904
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Journal of Forecasting.

    Volume (Year): 27 (2011)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 50-68

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:27:y::i:1:p:50-68

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijforecast

    Related research

    Keywords: Judgment Forecast Adjustment Group Role;

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Clemen, Robert T., 1989. "Combining forecasts: A review and annotated bibliography," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 559-583.
    2. Sinan Gönül & Dilek Önkal & Paul Goodwin, 2009. "Expectations, use and judgmental adjustment of external financial and economic forecasts: an empirical investigation," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 19-37.
    3. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & O'Connor, Marcus & Onkal, Dilek, 2006. "Judgmental forecasting: A review of progress over the last 25 years," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 493-518.
    4. McNees, Stephen K., 1990. "The role of judgment in macroeconomic forecasting accuracy," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 287-299, October.
    5. Armstrong, J. Scott, 2006. "Findings from evidence-based forecasting: Methods for reducing forecast error," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 583-598.
    6. Armstrong, J. Scott, 2002. "Assessing game theory, role playing, and unaided judgment," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 345-352.
    7. Albert E. Mannes, 2009. "Are We Wise About the Wisdom of Crowds? The Use of Group Judgments in Belief Revision," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(8), pages 1267-1279, August.
    8. Sniezek, Janet A., 1989. "An examination of group process in judgmental forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 171-178.
    9. Milch, Kerry F. & Weber, Elke U. & Appelt, Kirstin C. & Handgraaf, Michel J.J. & Krantz, David H., 2009. "From individual preference construction to group decisions: Framing effects and group processes," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 242-255, March.
    10. Robert C. Blattberg & Stephen J. Hoch, 1990. "Database Models and Managerial Intuition: 50% Model + 50% Manager," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(8), pages 887-899, August.
    11. Lim, Joa Sang & O'Connor, Marcus, 1996. "Judgmental forecasting with time series and causal information," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 139-153, March.
    12. Paul Goodwin, 2005. "How to Integrate Management Judgment with Statistical Forecasts," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 1, pages 8-12, June.
    13. Lawrence, Michael & Goodwin, Paul & Fildes, Robert, 2002. "Influence of user participation on DSS use and decision accuracy," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 381-392, October.
    14. Hill, N. Sharon & Bartol, Kathryn M. & Tesluk, Paul E. & Langa, Gosia A., 2009. "Organizational context and face-to-face interaction: Influences on the development of trust and collaborative behaviors in computer-mediated groups," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 187-201, March.
    15. Sniezek, Janet A. & Henry, Rebecca A., 1990. "Revision, Weighting, and commitment in consensus group judgment," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 66-84, February.
    16. Song, Fei, 2008. "Trust and reciprocity behavior and behavioral forecasts: Individuals versus group-representatives," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 675-696, March.
    17. Fildes, Robert & Goodwin, Paul & Lawrence, Michael & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2009. "Effective forecasting and judgmental adjustments: an empirical evaluation and strategies for improvement in supply-chain planning," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-23.
    18. Rowe, Gene & Wright, George, 1996. "The impact of task characteristics on the performance of structured group forecasting techniques," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 73-89, March.
    19. Sanders, NR, 1992. "Accuracy of judgmental forecasts: A comparison," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 353-364, May.
    20. Lawrence, Michael & O'Connor, Marcus & Edmundson, Bob, 2000. "A field study of sales forecasting accuracy and processes," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 151-160, April.
    21. Dilek Onkal & M. Sinan Gonul, 2005. "Judgmental Adjustment: A Challenge for Providers and Users of Forecasts," Foresight: The International Journal of Applied Forecasting, International Institute of Forecasters, issue 1, pages 13-17, June.
    22. Wright, George & Goodwin, Paul, 2009. "Decision making and planning under low levels of predictability: Enhancing the scenario method," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 813-825, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as in new window

    Cited by:
    1. Goodwin, Paul & Sinan Gönül, M. & Önkal, Dilek, 2013. "Antecedents and effects of trust in forecasting advice," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 354-366.
    2. Wright, George & Rowe, Gene, 2011. "Group-based judgmental forecasting: An integration of extant knowledge and the development of priorities for a new research agenda," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-13, January.

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:intfor:v:27:y::i:1:p:50-68. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.