| Abstract: | When managers make revisions to sales forecasts initially generated by a rational quantitative model it is important that the particular forecasts selected for adjustment are those which would benefit most from the adjustment process (i.e. realize high errors). This study reports an empirical investigation on this issue, spanning six quarterly forecasting periods and incorporating forecasting data on over 850 products. The results show that the errors of the forecasts chosen for revision are, in general, higher than those which were not chosen. In addition, it is shown that managesrs tend to revise forecasts which are initially low, hence possibily introducing some degree of bias into the overall forecasts. |
