RANKING MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE PROJECTS: THE ROLE OF DURATION

This paper develops a new measure of cash-flow timing called “return duration.” Numerically quite close to Macaulay duration, return duration is a straightforward function of a project's net present value (NPV) and internal rate of return (IRR). When comparing mutually exclusive projects, differences in return duration can explain ranking conflicts between NPV and IRR. The paper also clarifies the conditions under which a manager should consider duration or generalized NPV before making investment decisions when faced with such ranking conflicts.     

Average Internal Rate of Return and Investment Decisions: A New Perspective

The internal rate of return (IRR) is often used by managers and practitioners for investment decisions. Unfortunately, it has serious flaws: (1) multiple real-valued IRRs may arise; (2) complex-valued IRRs may arise; (3) the IRR is, in general, incompatible with the net present value (NPV) in accept/reject decisions; (4) the IRR ranking is, in general, different from the NPV ranking; (5) the IRR criterion is not applicable with variable costs of capital. The efforts of economists and management scientists in providing a reliable project rate of return have generated over the decades an immense bulk of contributions aiming to solve these shortcomings. This article offers a complete solution to this long-standing unresolved issue by changing the usual perspective: the IRR equation is dismissed and the evaluator is allowed to describe the project as an investment or a borrowing at his discretion. This permits showing that any arithmetic mean of the one-period return rates implicit in a project reliably informs about a project's profitability and correctly ranks competing projects. With such a measure, which we call average internal rate of return, complex-valued numbers disappear and all the above-mentioned problems are wiped out. The economic meaning is compelling: it is the project return rate implicitly determined by the market. The traditional IRR notion may be found as a particular case.     

The IRR of a project with many potential outcomes

This article shows that the internal rate of return (IRR) of a project's expected cash flow stream is a weighted average of the IRRs offered by the project's (many) possible future outcomes, where the weights are calculated using the outcome probabilities and invested capital balances. Because the invested capital associated with a particular realization is a function of the Macaulay duration of the cash flows in that outcome, the weights depend on the outcome probabilities and the effective length of each cash flow stream.     

Double vision: Insights about the origin and interpretation of multiple IRRs

The ability of a project's internal rate of return (IRR) to quantify its economic return has been questioned by many scholars over the past 60 years, most recently by Magni (2010 Magni, C.A. (2010) Average internal rate of return and investment decisions: a new perspective. The Engineering Economist, 55(2), 150–180. [Google Scholar], 2013 Magni, C.A. (2013) The internal rate of return approach and the AIRR paradigm: a refutation and a corroboration. The Engineering Economist, 58(2), 73–111. [Google Scholar]). Although IRR is a plausible—albeit imperfect—measure of a project's economic return when the cash flow stream is conventional, IRR can be an untenable measure of an unconventional project's economic return. The goal of this article is to identify a simple, intuitive explanation of IRR, one that can be applied to any cash flow pattern. To do this, the article shows how a project's IRR systematically changes when it first crosses from the conventional into the unconventional realm (i.e., a small cash outflow is appended to a conventional cash flow stream) and then as it becomes progressively more unconventional. This process reveals that the most robust economic interpretation of IRR—for both conventional and unconventional projects—is that a project's IRRs are external benchmarks that divide the set of all plausible discount rates into positive and negative net present value (NPV) ranges, rather than internally generated returns. Because it can be difficult to estimate a project's cost of capital with precision, this information can help guide the sensitivity analysis of a project.     

PERPETUITY RATE OF RETURN ANALYSIS

This paper introduces a new method of capital project analysis called the perpetuity rate of return (PRR). As implied by its name, the PRR is found by transforming a project's cash flow stream into a perpetuity and then relating this value to the required investment outlay. The PRR method is essentially a compromise between the NPV and IRR techniques. Like the NPV, the PRR correctly values a project's cashflows by using the market-determined cost of capital as the discount rate; like the IRR, the PRR is a rate of return that is appropriately compared to the cost of capital to determine a project's acceptability. The new yield-based method fares well in comparison with the IRR on a conceptual level and appears to have practical potential.     

A review of: “APPLIED ECONOMIC ANALYSIS FOR TECHNOLOGISTS,ENGINEERS, AND MANAGERS ” BY MICHAEL S. BOWMAN Prentice-Hall,Inc., Upper Saddle River,New Jersey, 1999, xii + 561 pp., ISBN: 0-13-375932-6, List: $76.75.

In their recent paper Tang and Tang (2003 Tang, S. L. and Tang, H. J. 2003. The variable financial indicator IRR and the constant economic indicator NPV.. The Engineering Economist, Vol. 48(No. 1): pp. 69–78. [Taylor &; Francis Online] , [Google Scholar], pp. 69–78) revive a longstanding controversy—net present value (NPV) versus internal rate of return (IRR)—by characterizing the NPV as an economic indicator and the IRR as a financial one. The paper implies that this distinction justifies ranking financial alternatives by ranking their IRRs. In the current article, it is argued that the direct IRR ranking does not necessarily provide the same evaluation environment—and therefore a fair comparison—for each alternative involved, and that the incremental ranking approach is needed to remedy this shortcoming. The article also points out that Tang and Tang's numerical examples of simple projects with one sign change in their cash flow patterns do not address the problem of multiple IRRs, which consequently renders Tang and Tang's ranking approach dysfunctional. It is demonstrated that the concept of a true rate of return, substituting for the non-performing IRR and applied in conjunction with the incremental approach, provides an adequate tool for ranking mutually exclusive projects or a project's technical or financial alternatives.     

Nominal and Real Required Returns in Present Value Analysis

Present value analysis is complicated by uncertainty about future inflation. If it so happened that real cash flows did not depend on inflation and real required returns were close to zero, then inflation and required returns could be omitted from present value analysis. Unfortunately, they cannot. This paper shows that real cash flows are typically sensitive to inflation and that, outside of the 1950s and 1960s, real interest rates, have not been very stable or close to zero. There have consequently been many years when a neglect of inflation and interest rates would have caused substantial present-value errors. It is also argued that interest rates on Treasury and Corporate AAA bonds are only appropriate for virtually risk-free projects. An engineering project normally commands a substantial risk premium and the neglect of such premia can cause a large overestimate of a project's present value.     

TECHNICAL NOTE : THE VARIABLE FINANCIAL INDICATOR IRR AND THE CONSTANT ECONOMIC INDICATOR NPV

The IRR (internal rate of return) and the NPV (net present value) are the two most common and important indicators in investment decisions. These two indicators, however, have intrinsic differences between one another. The IRR is a financial indicator and the NPV an economic indicator of a capital investment. The former gives the private investor's point of view and the latter the society's point of view. The value of ERR varies with the change of Financial arrangement of an investment. The NPV, however, does not but remains constant no matter how the financial arrangement changes. This paper uses an illustrative example to show their intrinsic differences and then describes a mathematical proof to substantiate the different natures of IRR and NPV.     

A Companion For NPV: The Generalized Relative Rate of Return

We show how to determine a unique rate, for a particular cash flow stream, that is used only whenever a project demands outside resources to compound the rates of the existing term structure precisely at those times. The net present value of the cash flow stream when discounted with the thus-modified term structure becomes zero. We therefore determine a vector of rates that belongs to the induced space of internal rates of return for that cash flow stream. The rate is applicable under discrete stochastic interest rate representations and provides maximum loan rates that may be contracted only when needed thus keeping a project financially autonomous. (Any investments required may be fully repaid by the project's own cash outflows).     

Cash flow at risk valuation of mining project using Monte Carlo simulations with stochastic processes calibrated on historical data

Mining projects are subject to multiple sources of market uncertainties such as metal price, exchange rates, and their volatilities. Assessing a mining project's exposure to market risk usually requires Monte Carlo simulations to capture a range of probable outcomes. The probability of a major loss is extracted from the probability density function of simulated prices at a given time into the future. This article proposes an approach to calibrate the stochastic process to be used in Monte Carlo simulations. The simulations are then used for measuring the cash flow at risk of a mining project. To assess the performance of the proposed approach, a case study is conducted on a mining project. The results show that the calibration approach is robust and apt at fitting various stochastic processes to historical observations.     

A Review of: “An Introduction to Mathematical Finance: Options and Other Topics By Sheldon M. Ross” Cambridge University Press,New York,New York, 1999, xv + 184 pp. ISBN ( 521-77043-2. List: $37.95. (hardback)

Surveys of businesses' capital budgeting practices reveal that the IRR is much preferred over the NPV as an investment decision making tool even though business scholars prescribe the NPV as theoretically optimal. Here practitioners' preference for the IRR is explained through ergonomics: the IRR is treated as a display method. As such it is more compatible with decision makers' expectations and therefore, is more cognitively efficient. Because the IRR is expressed as an interest rate, it more closely resembles an analog display, in which the IRR is simply compared to the required return. In contrast, the NPV is stated in dollars, resembling more a very precise digital display. Academicians should reorient their efforts from promoting the NPV to teaching methods to ameliorate the pitfalls of the IRR.     

A Review of: ADVANCED TECHNIQUES FOR STRATEGIC PLANNING by Ernest C. Miller

The Net Present Value (NPV) rule of financial theory gives management a decisive criterion for choosing between abandonment versus continuation of capital projects. There is extensive evidence, however, that management chooses to delay the abandonment of unprofitable projects. This paper attempts to explain management's reluctance to abide by the NPV criterion. The concept of a Reputation Adjusted Net Present Value is introduced in an environment where management knows more about the true value of a project than do stakeholders. The model indicates that, in such an environment, the continuation of a negative NPV project may maximize firm value.     

A review of: “PROJECT MANAGEMENT IN MANUFACTURING AND HIGH TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS” by Adedeji B. Badiru,John Wiley and Sons,Inc., New York, 1988, xxii + 319 pp., ISBN 0471-62892-1, List $44.95.

The conventional approach to considering working capital cash flows in capital budgeting is to omit them or include some ad hoc figures at the initiation and termination of the project. The authors argue for an endogenous system of estimating relevant working capital cash flows on a periodic basis. Otherwise, the present value of working capital cash flows is biased against the project's acceptance. Examples of calculating working capital cash flows as related to changes in annual sales are presented for three time patterns of sales and contrasted to the conventional method. An empirical study of the linear relationship of net working capital and sales revenue of 770 companies is reported, and an alternative cash flow model is offered thai includes working capilal cash flows.     

From Experience: Securing Sponsors and Funding for New Product Development Projects—The Human Side of Enterprise

Gaining approval for a project requires playing a role that may be unfamiliar for many new-product development (NPD) professionals—that of salesperson. The NPD professional must sell management on the market potential of the product concept, and persuade management to commit the resources needed for transforming the concept into a marketable product. Finding a well-placed sponsor within the company's management ranks can improve the chances of obtaining approval for a project, but securing sponsorship is, in many respects, yet another sales job. Gary Tighe offers guidance for NPD professionals who must sell their projects to potential sponsors. He describes the key steps in the process of securing a sponsor, he gives guidelines for choosing the right sponsor based on the nature of the project, and he provides practical advice for developing a presentation that will gain the support of a prospective sponsor and company management. He then presents a vignette that illustrates the principles he discusses. He identifies three elements that are necessary for securing a sponsor and obtaining funding for a proposed project: clearly defining the project, its scope, and its objective; specifying how the proposed project affects the prospective sponsor and that person's organization; and detailing the project's effects on revenue, profits, cost, or output. These elements forge a strong link between project outcomes and the interests of the sponsor, the sponsor's organization, and the company as a whole. Choosing the right sponsor requires careful consideration of the project's expected effects on specific functional areas and the entire organization, the resources required, the project objectives, and time constraints. For example, senior management sponsorship is essential for projects that cut across existing organizational boundaries. After helping to ensure that projects receive adequate funding, sponsors may serve as advisers to project teams, and they may provide additional resources if a team encounters unexpected problems. Through regular progress reports and sponsor participation in team meetings, the project team can ensure the active, ongoing support of the sponsor.     

Project Valuation With Time-Varying Cash Flows: A Bayesian Approach

This article investigates the valuation of a project when the distributions of cash flows vary over time. The decision maker is assumed to be a Bayesian decision maker under uncertainty. Using the dynamic programming principle of backward induction and assuming that the capital asset pricing model is valid in each time period, we derive the project's valuation formulas and systematic risks, and investigate their characteristics. Our valuation formulas embed a Bayesian learning effect and differ from the traditional textbook capital budgeting formulas.     

Investment Project Valuation: A New Equity Perspective

We suggest a new approach to calculating a project's net present value, termed the displaced equity method. Based on a straightforward formula, it analyzes a project partially financed with debt from the perspective that every year the amount of outstanding debt displaces an equivalent amount of equity that otherwise would be tied up in the project. Although they represent distinct shareholders' perspectives, the displaced equity method and the equity residual method yield identical net present values and internal rates of return. Every year, the project's value calculated with the displaced equity method is equal to the sum of the project's debt and equity values. In practice, when the schedule of expected outstanding debt amounts is known, using the displaced equity method is an easy way to estimate the project's net present value.     

PREPAYMENT OF INCOME TAX: A “SPREADSHEET” ANALYSIS

In their recent paper ( D. Asquith &; J.E. Bethel, “Using Heuristics to Evaluate Projects: The Case of Ranking Projects by IRR,” The Engineering Economist, Vol. 40, No. 3 (Spring 1995, pp. 287-294) ), the authors propose a project ranking procedure that is supposed to mitigate the impact of cash flow overvaluation by project managers. In the current contribution, it is indicated that this procedure is based upon a project ranking approach that employs the IRR criterion in a theoretically inadequate way. The correct, incremental approach to the IRR-based project ranking is reiterated, and it is shown that if this approach is applied, then its very design reduces the impact of CF-biases on project ranking. It is also demonstrated that even if competing projects are of equal scale, they must still be ranked by incremental comparison. Finally, it is pointed out that the incremental project ranking is the proper approach regardless of which NPV-compatible profitability measure is applied.     

THE IMPACT OF POLITICAL RISK ON THE FOREIGN DIRECT INVESTMENT DECISION: A CAPITAL BUDGETING ANALYSIS

Using a capital budgeting framework, we examine the impact of political risk on the foreign direct investment decision. Political risk may alter operating cash flows via discriminatory regulations as well as the investment via expropriation. We model the impact of political operating costs and expropriation costs on the NPV of a project under the assumption that the parameters that affect the NPV are constant over the life of the project. Next, we provide an illustration for the case in which the relevant parameters are variable over the life of the project. The paper concludes with an example of political risk in the 1990s, the case of Black Sea Energy Ltd.'s investment in Russia.     

The Role of Departmental Thought Worlds in Shaping Escalation of Commitment in New Product Development Projects

The debate over whether and how thought worlds of different departments (especially marketing and research and development [R&D]) affect managers' decision-making behavior in new product development (NPD) is ongoing. A key challenge of these decisions is to deal with deteriorating NPD projects, which are often subject to escalation of commitment (EoC), with many firms wasting billions of dollars by throwing good money after bad NPD projects. However, understanding departmental thought worlds and their role for EoC in NPD could help firms stop this profusion. Thus, this research provides answers to the question of how thought worlds affect managers' tendency toward EoC in NPD decision-making—both in general and under certain project characteristics. To do so, we conducted four studies based on real-life scenarios with 460 highly experienced NPD managers from marketing and R&D, thus ensuring high validity and reliability. Our research is the first to explore the impact of thought worlds on EoC, thereby detecting that the importance of managers' thought worlds for shaping EoC varies with the NPD project's characteristics. Thus, depending on the specific project situation, different types of managers may be more or less capable of making proper NPD decisions. Moreover, results show that belief updating serves as a respective key mediator. Doing so enriches the theory by showing that managers' thought worlds can substantially influence a major mechanism (i.e., belief updating) of coping with cognitive dissonance. Finally, post hoc tests reveal departmental differences in EoC behavior between marketing and R&D that vary with a project's characteristics. These results imply that firms need to carefully consider who is in charge of making decisions on NPD project continuance in different project situations.     

Barriers to Matching New Technologies and Market Opportunities in Established Firms

In industries that produce high‐technology products or are reliant on technology for administrative or manufacturing processes, it is essential appropriately to link technologies to markets in order to increase shareholder value and to build future cash flows. Research and development (R&D) allocations in such industries are greatly dependent on forecasts of the R&D project's estimated potential contribution to future cash flows, which is related to the project's ability to satisfy current or future customer needs. The resource allocation decisions are difficult, however, since both markets and technology are likely to be highly uncertain. Although the innovation literature ably has addressed specific relationships between certain factors and new product development outcomes, less attention has been given to obstacles faced in linking technology to markets. Grounded in a literature‐based discussion of technology and market opportunity, the authors develop a conceptual framework for identifying and understanding the barriers facing managers in the process of matching technologies to market opportunities. Technology and market barriers include technology‐market linkage, technology availability, technology and market capabilities of competitors, and business model feasibility. Strategy and structure barriers include competition for limited resources, technology capabilities, technology portfolio goals, current market strategies, and competition for control of market charters. Social and cultural barriers include interpretive and communication barriers between functional units and language and cultural barriers within the technology workforce. The article concludes with implications for researchers and managers. The conceptual framework presented here can encourage the development of a stream of research in the area of technology strategy and planning processes, allowing researchers to improve our understanding of the process of technology innovation. Managers can use the framework as a guide for addressing a wide range of issues related to the process of matching technologies to market opportunities. For example, rather than relying strictly on cash flow projections for estimating the value of a new technology, managers also should consider how the technology could create new market opportunities or could reshape existing ones.