Igniting Fire: Kahneman as a Source of Creative Tension in Project Studies

Joana  Geraldi

doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736

Igniting Fire: Kahneman as a Source of Creative Tension in Project Studies

Joana Geraldi^*

^*Corresponding author for this work

Department of Organization

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

16 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This essay explores how Kahneman contributed to debates in project studies. I revisit three debates: Flyvbjerg vs. Hirschman on (over-)optimism, Kahneman vs. Klein on the trustworthiness of intuitive expertise, and Kahneman vs. Gigerenzer on nudging vs. boosting. These discussions illuminate four attributes of insightful debates: addressing practical challenges, confronting epistemological boundaries, building on rigorous research, and owning its ethical standpoint. Ultimately, Kahneman’s legacy inspires scholars in project studies to critically engage, challenge assumptions, and embrace debates as spaces of ethical and reflexive academic practice.

Original language	English
Article number	102736
Journal	International Journal of Project Management
Volume	43
Issue number	5
Number of pages	4
ISSN	0263-7863
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736
Publication status	Published - Jul 2025

Bibliographical note

Published online: 2 July 2025.

Keywords

Kahneman
Decision-making
Debates
Project studies
Expert intuition
Heuristics

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736Licence: CC BY

Full TextFinal published version, 423 KBLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{bf631573ad9245d7a82be09cfb9ba7f2,

title = "Igniting Fire: Kahneman as a Source of Creative Tension in Project Studies",

abstract = "This essay explores how Kahneman contributed to debates in project studies. I revisit three debates: Flyvbjerg vs. Hirschman on (over-)optimism, Kahneman vs. Klein on the trustworthiness of intuitive expertise, and Kahneman vs. Gigerenzer on nudging vs. boosting. These discussions illuminate four attributes of insightful debates: addressing practical challenges, confronting epistemological boundaries, building on rigorous research, and owning its ethical standpoint. Ultimately, Kahneman{\textquoteright}s legacy inspires scholars in project studies to critically engage, challenge assumptions, and embrace debates as spaces of ethical and reflexive academic practice.",

keywords = "Kahneman, Decision-making, Debates, Project studies, Expert intuition, Heuristics, Kahneman, Decision-making, Debates, Project studies, Expert intuition, Heuristics",

author = "Joana Geraldi",

note = "Published online: 2 July 2025.",

year = "2025",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736",

language = "English",

volume = "43",

journal = "International Journal of Project Management",

issn = "0263-7863",

publisher = "Elsevier",

number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Igniting Fire

T2 - Kahneman as a Source of Creative Tension in Project Studies

AU - Geraldi, Joana

N1 - Published online: 2 July 2025.

PY - 2025/7

Y1 - 2025/7

N2 - This essay explores how Kahneman contributed to debates in project studies. I revisit three debates: Flyvbjerg vs. Hirschman on (over-)optimism, Kahneman vs. Klein on the trustworthiness of intuitive expertise, and Kahneman vs. Gigerenzer on nudging vs. boosting. These discussions illuminate four attributes of insightful debates: addressing practical challenges, confronting epistemological boundaries, building on rigorous research, and owning its ethical standpoint. Ultimately, Kahneman’s legacy inspires scholars in project studies to critically engage, challenge assumptions, and embrace debates as spaces of ethical and reflexive academic practice.

AB - This essay explores how Kahneman contributed to debates in project studies. I revisit three debates: Flyvbjerg vs. Hirschman on (over-)optimism, Kahneman vs. Klein on the trustworthiness of intuitive expertise, and Kahneman vs. Gigerenzer on nudging vs. boosting. These discussions illuminate four attributes of insightful debates: addressing practical challenges, confronting epistemological boundaries, building on rigorous research, and owning its ethical standpoint. Ultimately, Kahneman’s legacy inspires scholars in project studies to critically engage, challenge assumptions, and embrace debates as spaces of ethical and reflexive academic practice.

KW - Kahneman

KW - Decision-making

KW - Debates

KW - Project studies

KW - Expert intuition

KW - Heuristics

KW - Kahneman

KW - Decision-making

KW - Debates

KW - Project studies

KW - Expert intuition

KW - Heuristics

U2 - 10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736

DO - 10.1016/j.ijproman.2025.102736

M3 - Journal article

SN - 0263-7863

VL - 43

JO - International Journal of Project Management

JF - International Journal of Project Management

IS - 5

M1 - 102736

ER -