IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ejores/v314y2024i2p540-551.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The bright side of the planning fallacy in distribution channels

Author

Listed:
  • Kopel, Michael
  • Ramani, Vinay

Abstract

The planning fallacy describes the tendency of people to underestimate the costs and to overestimate the benefits of investments. It is typically associated with cost overruns and decreased performance. In this paper, we demonstrate that in a simple distribution channel with an upstream manufacturer and a downstream retailer that both make demand-enhancing investments, there is a bright side of the planning fallacy: managerial optimism bias that results in underestimated investment costs can in fact lead to a win-win outcome which makes the manufacturer, the retailer, and consumers better off than without bias. Moreover, the total profit of the decentralized distribution channel can be even higher than the centralized channel’s profit. We find that our results are robust to changes in the sequencing of decisions and continue to hold under generalized Nash bargaining over the wholesale price as well as under upstream or downstream competition or consumer demand uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Kopel, Michael & Ramani, Vinay, 2024. "The bright side of the planning fallacy in distribution channels," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 314(2), pages 540-551.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:314:y:2024:i:2:p:540-551
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ejor.2023.10.040
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0377221723008160
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ejor.2023.10.040?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ejores:v:314:y:2024:i:2:p:540-551. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eor .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.