IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i11p3866-d178001.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Real Options Analysis for Acquisition of New Technology: A Case Study of Korea K2 Tank’s Powerpack

Author

Listed:
  • Sungchul Kim

    (Defense Agency for Technology and Quality, 420, Dongjin-ro, Jinju-si, Gyeongsangnam-do 52851, Korea)

  • Ronald Giachetti

    (Department of Systems Engineering, Naval Postgraduate School, 777 Dyer Rd, Monterey, CA 94943, USA)

  • Sangsung Park

    (Graduate School of Management of Technology, Korea University, Seoul 136-701, Korea)

Abstract

For sustainable defense management, it is essential to acquire weapons systems that can adapt to future uncertain threats and, at the same time, to invest efficiently with limited budgets. Economic analysis is used to examine the costs, benefits and uncertainties of alternatives. In particular, the use of the real options valuation, which is one of the methodologies of economic analysis, is expanding. The real options valuation has shown effectiveness across various industries to evaluate investment strategies. In this paper, we apply the real options valuation to the weapon systems development case and confirm its usefulness. Unlike previous studies, the real option valuation methodology is applied retroactively to the finished project, compared to existing research mainly applying real options to value research and development (R&D) without knowing how the project completed. We use the following procedure. (1) Define the uncertainties of the three acquisition alternatives (development, technology adoption, and purchase). (2) Calculate the benefits of the three acquisition alternatives with expected and actual data without uncertainties. (3) Model the decision tree without options and with options. (4) Analyze and compare results with benefit and benefit cost ratio. We analyzed the Korea K2 tank powerpack development case by applying real options. We could see that the real options could have reduced the risk of losses when the development risk is high and market uncertainty exists. From the case study of the development of the powerpack, we learned the following three lessons. First, we reaffirmed the importance of objective value analysis in project decision making. Second, we need to analyze the project value continuously and revise the acquisition strategy accordingly. Third, the effectiveness of the real options valuation was confirmed for sustainable defense management. In addition, the real option analysis data acquired from similar finished projects can be useful for establishing a new product acquisition strategy and, at every decision-making phase, the real option evaluation should be continuously performed with updated information. In this paper, we first perform real option valuation of finished weapon systems in the Korean defense field. This paper is valuable in establishing a rational methodology for applying economic analysis to weapon system acquisition projects.

Suggested Citation

  • Sungchul Kim & Ronald Giachetti & Sangsung Park, 2018. "Real Options Analysis for Acquisition of New Technology: A Case Study of Korea K2 Tank’s Powerpack," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-18, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:3866-:d:178001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/3866/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/11/3866/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luigi Ranieri & Giorgio Mossa & Roberta Pellegrino & Salvatore Digiesi, 2018. "Energy Recovery from the Organic Fraction of Municipal Solid Waste: A Real Options-Based Facility Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-15, January.
    2. Lenos Trigeorgis, 1993. "Real Options and Interactions With Financial Flexibility," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 22(3), Fall.
    3. Avinash K. Dixit & Robert S. Pindyck, 1994. "Investment under Uncertainty," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 5474.
    4. Luiz E. Brandão & James S. Dyer & Warren J. Hahn, 2005. "Using Binomial Decision Trees to Solve Real-Option Valuation Problems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 69-88, June.
    5. Michel Benaroch & Robert J. Kauffman, 1999. "A Case for Using Real Options Pricing Analysis to Evaluate Information Technology Project Investments," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 10(1), pages 70-86, March.
    6. Michael J. Pennock & William B. Rouse & Diane L. Kollar, 2007. "Transforming the Acquisition Enterprise: A Framework for Analysis and a Case Study of Ship Acquisition," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 99-117, June.
    7. Muhammad Salman Habib & Biswajit Sarkar, 2017. "An Integrated Location-Allocation Model for Temporary Disaster Debris Management under an Uncertain Environment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-26, April.
    8. Robert McDonald & Daniel Siegel, 1986. "The Value of Waiting to Invest," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 101(4), pages 707-727.
    9. Douglas K. R. Robinson & Lu Huang & Yan Guo & Alan L. Porter, 2013. "Forecasting Innovation Pathways (FIP) for new and emerging science and technologies," Post-Print hal-01070417, HAL.
    10. Scott, Louis O., 1987. "Option Pricing when the Variance Changes Randomly: Theory, Estimation, and an Application," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(4), pages 419-438, December.
    11. Joost Buurman & Stephen Zhang & Vladan Babovic, 2009. "Reducing Risk Through Real Options in Systems Design: The Case of Architecting a Maritime Domain Protection System," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(3), pages 366-379, March.
    12. Sakata, Ichiro & Sasaki, Hajime & Akiyama, Masanori & Sawatani, Yuriko & Shibata, Naoki & Kajikawa, Yuya, 2013. "Bibliometric analysis of service innovation research: Identifying knowledge domain and global network of knowledge," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(6), pages 1085-1093.
    13. Boyle, Phelim & Broadie, Mark & Glasserman, Paul, 1997. "Monte Carlo methods for security pricing," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(8-9), pages 1267-1321, June.
    14. Avner Engel & Tyson R. Browning, 2008. "Designing systems for adaptability by means of architecture options," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(2), pages 125-146, June.
    15. D.K. Robinson & Lu Huang & Ying Guo & Alan L. Porter, 2013. "Forecasting Innovation Pathways (FIP) for new and emerging science and technologies," Post-Print hal-01071140, HAL.
    16. Brennan, Michael J & Schwartz, Eduardo S, 1985. "Evaluating Natural Resource Investments," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 58(2), pages 135-157, April.
    17. Black, Fischer & Scholes, Myron S, 1973. "The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 81(3), pages 637-654, May-June.
    18. Merton, Robert C, 1969. "Lifetime Portfolio Selection under Uncertainty: The Continuous-Time Case," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 51(3), pages 247-257, August.
    19. Alex Triantis & Adam Borison, 2001. "Real Options: State Of The Practice," Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, Morgan Stanley, vol. 14(2), pages 8-24, June.
    20. Charles Cheah & Jicai Liu, 2006. "Valuing governmental support in infrastructure projects as real options using Monte Carlo simulation," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(5), pages 545-554.
    21. James E. Smith, 2005. "Alternative Approaches for Solving Real-Options Problems," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 2(2), pages 89-102, June.
    22. Sungchul Kim & Dongsik Jang & Sunghae Jun & Sangsung Park, 2015. "A Novel Forecasting Methodology for Sustainable Management of Defense Technology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(12), pages 1-17, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Azzurra Morreale & Luigi Mittone & Thi-Thanh-Tam Vu & Mikael Collan, 2020. "To Wait or Not to Wait? Use of the Flexibility to Postpone Investment Decisions in Theory and in Practice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-19, April.

    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. Carlos Andrés Zapata Quimbayo, 2020. "OPCIONES REALES Una guía teórico-práctica para la valoración de inversiones bajo incertidumbre mediante modelos en tiempo discreto y simulación de Monte Carlo," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Finanzas, Gobierno y Relaciones Internacionales, number 138, August.
    2. Lim, Terence & Lo, Andrew W. & Merton, Robert C. & Scholes, Myron S., 2006. "The Derivatives Sourcebook," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 1(5–6), pages 365-572, April.
    3. Suresh M. Sundaresan, 2000. "Continuous‐Time Methods in Finance: A Review and an Assessment," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1569-1622, August.
    4. Dalbem, Marta Corrêa & Brandão, Luiz Eduardo Teixeira & Gomes, Leonardo Lima, 2014. "Can the regulated market help foster a free market for wind energy in Brazil?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 303-311.
    5. Schachter, J.A. & Mancarella, P., 2016. "A critical review of Real Options thinking for valuing investment flexibility in Smart Grids and low carbon energy systems," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 261-271.
    6. Miao, Jianjun & Wang, Neng, 2007. "Investment, consumption, and hedging under incomplete markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(3), pages 608-642, December.
    7. Jianjun Miao & Neng Wang, 2004. "Investment, Hedging, and Consumption Smoothing," Finance 0407014, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Marcel Philipp Müller & Sebastian Stöckl & Steffen Zimmermann & Bernd Heinrich, 2016. "Decision Support for IT Investment Projects," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 58(6), pages 381-396, December.
    9. Garcia Fronti, Javier, 2015. "Modelo estocástico para la valuación de una inversión nanomédica [Nanomedical Stochastic Investment Valuation]," MPRA Paper 63948, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Guj, Pietro & Chandra, Atul, 2019. "Comparing different real option valuation approaches as applied to a copper mine," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 180-189.
    11. de Braganca, Gabriel Fiuza & Rocha, Katia & Moreira, Rafael Henrique Rodrigues, 2008. "Real Options and the Regulation of Brazilian Fixed-Line Telephone Operators: The Mark-up on the Cost of Capital," Working Paper Series 19098, Victoria University of Wellington, The New Zealand Institute for the Study of Competition and Regulation.
    12. 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.
    13. 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.
    14. Jan Vlachý, 2009. "Solving the Capacity Optimization Problem under Demand Uncertainty," Romanian Economic Journal, Department of International Business and Economics from the Academy of Economic Studies Bucharest, vol. 12(34), pages 97-116, (4).
    15. repec:vuw:vuwscr:19098 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Collan, Mikael, 2004. "Giga-Investments: Modelling the Valuation of Very Large Industrial Real Investments," MPRA Paper 4328, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Mark Burton & Charles Sims, 2016. "Understanding Railroad Investment Behaviors, Regulatory Processes, and Related Implications for Efficient Industry Oversight," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 49(2), pages 263-288, September.
    18. Secomandi, Nicola & Seppi, Duane J., 2014. "Real Options and Merchant Operations of Energy and Other Commodities," Foundations and Trends(R) in Technology, Information and Operations Management, now publishers, vol. 6(3-4), pages 161-331, July.
    19. Kim, Amy M. & Li, Huanan, 2020. "Incorporating the impacts of climate change in transportation infrastructure decision models," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 271-287.
    20. Bolton, Patrick & Wang, Neng & Yang, Jinqiang, 2019. "Investment under uncertainty with financial constraints," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    21. Balibrea-Iniesta, José & Rodríguez-Monroy, Carlos & Núñez-Guerrero, Yilsy María, 2021. "Economic analysis of the German regulation for electrical generation projects from biogas applying the theory of real options," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sustainable defense management; real options; discounted cash flow; net present value; benefit valuation; K2 tank; powerpack;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K2 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:11:p:3866-:d:178001. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.