Dynamic R&D Investment Policies
AbstractThis paper examines dynamic R&D investment policies and the valuation of R&D programs in a contingent claims framework. We incorporate the following characteristics of R&D programs into our model: learning-by-doing, collateral learning between different projects in the program, interaction between project cash flows, periodic reevaluations of the program, different intensities of investment, capital rationing constraints, and competition. We show that a firm may invest in multiple projects even if only one can be implemented after development is complete. Furthermore, the firm may significantly alter its funding policy over time. For example, it may simultaneously develop multiple projects for a period of time, then focus on a lead project, and potentially resume funding of a "backup" project if the lead project fails to deliver on its early promise. We show how a firm can forecast expected R&D spending through time for an optimally executed R&D program. While project volatility plays an important role in determining R&D program value, we find that for high volatility projects the optimal investment policy is not very sensitive to changes in (or misestimation of) volatility. In considering whether to accelerate development of a project, a firm should balance the adverse effects of increased costs and the loss of investment flexibility against the positive effects of rapid uncertainty resolution and accelerated cash flows. In the presence of a budget constraint that prevents the firm from simultaneously accelerating projects and developing projects in parallel, we find that, if one project significantly dominates another early in the development stage, the option to accelerate the lead project is likely to be more valuable than the option to exchange projects. Thus, the backup project would be shelved in order to commit extra resources to development of the lead project. Finally, competition from other firms leads to more parallel investment in the early development stages of projects, less parallel investment in the latter stages of development, and lower overall investment.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by INFORMS in its journal Management Science.
Volume (Year): 45 (1999)
Issue (Month): 10 (October)
real options; research and development (R&D); project interactions; learning-by-doing; accelerated development;
You can help add them by filling out this form.
CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
- Michele Moretto & Chiara D’Alpaos, 2004. "The Value of Flexibility in the Italian Water Service Sector: A Real Option Analysis," Working Papers 2004.140, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
- Andrea Gamba & Alberto Micalizzi, 2004.
"Product Development and Market Expansion: A Real Options Model,"
wpn04-03, Warwick Business School, Finance Group.
- Andrea Gamba & Alberto Micalizzi, 2007. "Product Development and Market Expansion: A Real Options Model," Financial Management, Financial Management Association International, vol. 36(1), pages 91-112, 03.
- Lukas, Elmar, 2013. "Modeling the transitional dynamics of international joint venture policies: An option pricing approach," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 21-36.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Mirko Janc).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.