Accounting & Analytics · Managerial Accounting

Rationality Check — Catch the Bias Before the Board Votes

A four-round, advanced management-accounting simulation set inside Hellwig Antriebstechnik GmbH, a family-owned German Mittelstand maker of electric drive systems (EUR 540M revenue, 7.8% EBIT, 2,300 staff, three plants).

4 rounds Executive English, Español

Preview

About this simulation

A four-round, advanced management-accounting simulation set inside Hellwig Antriebstechnik GmbH, a family-owned German Mittelstand maker of electric drive systems (EUR 540M revenue, 7.8% EBIT, 2,300 staff, three plants).

On 12 March 2026 the COO — the founder's nephew and a board favourite — submits a EUR 24M proposal to fully automate the Plant 2 assembly line, claiming a 3.1-year payback and a positive NPV of +EUR 5.2M. The supervisory board votes in 9 working days.

The new CFO hands the dossier to controlling with one instruction: 'Tell me whether this number is real.' Playing the Head of Controlling, you must perform Jurgen Weber's rationality assurance: not merely recompute, but expose the decision pathologies embedded in the case. (1) Diagnose the biases before touching the model — anchoring on the vendor's EUR 7.6M savings deck, optimism in the 6% volume growth (the order book shows 1.5%), the EUR 1.4M sunk-cost plea, and motivated forecasting — naming each and tying it to a line in the NPV model. (2) Demand the right analysis: replace the growth anchor with a scenario range, strip the EUR 1.4M sunk cost out of the decision, model a realistic 9-14 month ramp, and decide whether to commission an independent EUR 40K / 3-day savings estimate that eats the 9-day clock. (3) Confront the powerful sponsor in the business-partner conversation, choosing a stance and using evidence rather than authority without either capitulating or detonating the relationship. (4) Escalate or endorse: decide what goes to the supervisory board under controlling's name — sign the original (a EUR 24M write-down lands near a 3.0x net-debt/EBITDA covenant test), sign a corrected/phased EUR 9M pilot, or formally escalate a dissent — and design the rationality safeguards for all future capex sign-offs.

The math rewards the textbook controlling sequence (detect before compute, independent verification, sunk-cost discipline, phased commitment, evidence-led escalation) and punishes the five classic errors: computing before critiquing, trusting the counterparty's numbers, importing the sunk-cost bias, capitulating to power, and escalating without evidence.

Final KPIs track Rationality Score, Decision Quality, Controlling Credibility, the 9-day clock and the verification budget.

Who it is for

An advanced simulation for participants used to working with the main frameworks and trade-offs of the subject, designed for executive education and experienced professionals.

How a session runs

  1. The instructor creates a session from the Eureka dashboard and invites the participants.
  2. Participants play 4 rounds. In each one they submit their decisions and the simulation calculates the results.
  3. The simulation can be run in English, Español.
  4. The instructor follows each participant's progress and results from the dashboard, and uses the class results for the debrief.

Decisions participants make

The decisions participants make during the simulation:

  • Where does controlling's work start on this dossier?
  • Which single bias does the most damage — the one that flips the case if uncaught?
  • How rigorously do you tie each flagged bias to a specific line in the NPV model? (%)
  • What do you do with the 6% volume-growth anchor?
  • How do you treat the €1.4M already spent on the feasibility study and pilot?
  • What do you do about the vendor-sourced €7.6M/yr savings figure?
  • How many months of ramp-up to steady state do you model? (vendor assumes month 1)
  • You face the COO. What stance do you take into the conversation?
  • When the COO pushes back, what do you lead with?
  • The COO plays the sunk-cost card: "we've already invested €1.4M." How do you handle it?

What participants track

What participants follow on screen as the rounds go by:

  • Rationality, Decision Quality & Credibility

Subjects covered

Designed for courses in Managerial Accounting.

Ready to use Rationality Check — Catch the Bias Before the Board Votes with your students?

Contact us and we'll set you up with a free trial session.

Contact us