Relevance: a framework to address preconceptions that limit perceptions of what is relevant

Purpose – Erroneous perceptions of relevance contribute to business projects not being successful. Although the importance of relevance is recognized in the project management literature, thus far there has not been a formal framework for addressing erroneous perceptions of relevance. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a framework for identifying and counteracting erroneous perceptions of relevance. Design/methodology/approach – The research comprised review of the literature relating to factors that contribute to, and methods that counteract, erroneous perceptions of relevance. Findings – Contributory factors to erroneous perceptions of relevance include cultural cognition, path dependencies, lock-ins, fads, and hype. Mediating factors include priming and questioning, counterfactual reasoning, and optimal stopping. Research limitations/implications – A classification of erroneous perceptions of relevance is introduced Type III (inept positive) errors, Type II (false negative) errors, and Type I (false positive) errors. This terminology has the advantage of already being known to academics through statistical hypothesis testing, and to practitioners through process capability studies. Practical implications – The introduction of a framework for identifying and counteracting erroneous perceptions of relevance can better enable practitioners to make the selection of relevant concepts and technologies for projects – a capable process. Originality/value – The originality of this research note is that it provides a framework that can be applied to increase objectivity in perceptions of relevance. The value of this research note is that it introduces a framework for identifying and counteracting erroneous perceptions of relevance before the application of methods such as cost-benefit analysis.