We’ve all seen it. The shiny new system obviously won’t solve the problem it was meant to yet the funding continues - in some cases it’s even increased in a desperate effort to right the ship. Many excuses are offered but my personal favorite is the “we’ve already spent so much money - we can’t stop now.” As if throwing good money after bad is somehow a virtue.
I don’t know about you, but I think it’s pretty neat when two radically different bloggers comment on the same idea from different perspectives. Don’t get me wrong, I expected a lot of commentary on the new iPhone (yes, I want one) but last week both Ron Jeffries and the Freakonomics folks struck the same cord: staying the course. Inspired by recent events in Iraq strategy, Stephen Dubner compares Barack Obama’s recent comments at a Senate hearing to behavioral economics and the sunk cost fallacy. Jeffries goes a step further offering an explanation as to why leaders often prefer to stay the course:
“Staying the course gives you a chance to be a winner, and leaves you no worse off than any other action, which guarantees you will be a loser.”
Of course there is another reason why many managers can’t bear to kill a project - that would be admitting they were wrong about something. When finally backed into a corner (or presented with overwhelming evidence) they are more likely to practice a little revisionist history than concede they were ever mistaken about a project. Maybe more projects need a Zed Shaw to do a little analysis! It may not be pleasant, but more often than not, the best outcome for a project can be an early death.
