IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v35y2007i3p247-257.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A fuzzy set approach for R&D portfolio selection using a real options valuation model

Author

Listed:
  • Wang, Juite
  • Hwang, W.-L.

Abstract

Making R&D portfolio decision is difficult, because long lead times of R&D and market and technology dynamics lead to unavailable and unreliable collected data for portfolio management. The objective of this research is to develop a fuzzy R&D portfolio selection model to hedge against the R&D uncertainty. Fuzzy set theory is applied to model uncertain and flexible project information. Since traditional project valuation methods often underestimate the risky project, a fuzzy compound-options model is used to evaluate the value of each R&D project. The R&D portfolio selection problem is formulated as a fuzzy zero-one integer programming model that can handle both uncertain and flexible parameters to determine the optimal project portfolio. A new transformation method based on qualitative possibility theory is developed to convert the fuzzy portfolio selection model into a crisp mathematical model from the risk-averse perspective. The transformed model can be solved by an optimization technique. An example is used to illustrate the proposed approach. We conclude that the proposed approach can assist decision makers in selecting suitable R&D portfolios, while there is a lack of reliable project information.

Suggested Citation

  • Wang, Juite & Hwang, W.-L., 2007. "A fuzzy set approach for R&D portfolio selection using a real options valuation model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 247-257, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:35:y:2007:i:3:p:247-257
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305-0483(05)00087-3
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norman Baker & James Freeland, 1975. "Recent Advances in R&D Benefit Measurement and Project Selection Methods," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(10), pages 1164-1175, June.
    2. James E. Smith & Robert F. Nau, 1995. "Valuing Risky Projects: Option Pricing Theory and Decision Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 795-816, May.
    3. Geske, Robert, 1979. "The valuation of compound options," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 63-81, March.
    4. Ringuest, Jeffrey L. & Graves, Samuel B. & Case, Randy H., 2004. "Mean-Gini analysis in R&D portfolio selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 154(1), pages 157-169, April.
    5. Pennings, Enrico & Lint, Onno, 1997. "The option value of advanced R & D," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 103(1), pages 83-94, November.
    6. Wang, Juite, 2004. "A fuzzy robust scheduling approach for product development projects," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(1), pages 180-194, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Philipp N. Baecker, 2007. "Real Options and Intellectual Property," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, Springer, number 978-3-540-48264-2, July.
    2. Cassimon, Danny & Engelen, Peter-Jan & Yordanov, Vilimir, 2011. "Compound Real Option Valuation with Phase-Specific Volatility: a Multi-phase Mobile Payments Case Study," MPRA Paper 46053, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Hartmann, Marcus & Hassan, Ali, 2006. "Application of real options analysis for pharmaceutical R&D project valuation--Empirical results from a survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 343-354, April.
    4. Pennings, Enrico & Sereno, Luigi, 2011. "Evaluating pharmaceutical R&D under technical and economic uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 212(2), pages 374-385, July.
    5. Lo Nigro, Giovanna & Morreale, Azzurra & Enea, Gianluca, 2014. "Open innovation: A real option to restore value to the biopharmaceutical R&D," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 183-193.
    6. Douglas A. Bodner & William B. Rouse, 2007. "Understanding R&D value creation with organizational simulation," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(1), pages 64-82, March.
    7. Pennings, H.P.G. & Sereno, L., 2010. "A Model for Evaluating Pharmaceutical R&D Investment Projects under Technical and Economic Uncertainties," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2010-009-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    8. Cassimon, D. & Engelen, P. J. & Thomassen, L. & Van Wouwe, M., 2004. "The valuation of a NDA using a 6-fold compound option," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 41-51, January.
    9. Guglielmo D’Amico & Giovanni Villani, 2021. "Valuation of R&D compound option using Markov chain approach," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 379-404, September.
    10. Lander, Diane M. & Pinches, George E., 1998. "Challenges to the Practical Implementation of Modeling and Valuing Real Options," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 38(3, Part 2), pages 537-567.
    11. Arnd Huchzermeier & Christoph H. Loch, 2001. "Project Management Under Risk: Using the Real Options Approach to Evaluate Flexibility in R...D," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 85-101, January.
    12. Koussis, Nicos & Martzoukos, Spiros H. & Trigeorgis, Lenos, 2013. "Multi-stage product development with exploration, value-enhancing, preemptive and innovation options," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 174-190.
    13. Cassimon, D. & De Backer, M. & Engelen, P.J. & Van Wouwe, M. & Yordanov, V., 2011. "Incorporating technical risk in compound real option models to value a pharmaceutical R&D licensing opportunity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(9), pages 1200-1216.
    14. Kumar, Ram L., 1999. "Understanding DSS value: an options perspective," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 295-304, June.
    15. Ulrich Pape & Stephan Schmidt-Tank, 2005. "Valuing Joint Ventures Using Real Options," Finance 0503030, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Giovanna Lo Nigro & Azzurra Morreale & Lorenzo Abbate, 2016. "An Open Innovation Decision Support System to Select a Biopharmaceutical R&D Portfolio," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 37(6), pages 392-406, September.
    17. Rainer Andergassen & Luigi Sereno, 2012. "Valuation of N-stage Investments Under Jump-Diffusion Processes," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 39(3), pages 289-313, March.
    18. Fernandes, Glaucia & Perobelli, Fernanda Finotti Cordeiro & Brandão, Luiz Eduardo T., 2016. "A model for valuing new technologies under a pull incentives environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 482-493.
    19. Jiao Wang & Lima Zhao & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2021. "Operations‐Finance Interface in Risk Management: Research Evolution and Opportunities," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(2), pages 355-389, February.
    20. Álvarez Echeverría Francisco & López Sarabia Pablo & Venegas Martínez Francisco, 2012. "Valuación financiera de proyectos de inversión en nuevas tecnologías con opciones reales," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 57(3), pages 115-145, julio-sep.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:35:y:2007:i:3:p:247-257. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.