A Generalized Fuzzy Optimization Framework for R&D Project Selection Using Real Options Valuation

  • E. Ertugrul Karsak
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3982)


Global marketplace and intense competition in the business environment lead organizations to focus on selecting the best R&D project portfolio among available projects using their scarce resources in the most effective manner. This happens to be a sine qua non for high technology firms to sharpen their competitive advantage and realize long-term survival with sustainable growth. To accomplish that, firms should take into account both the uncertainty inherent in R&D using appropriate valuation techniques accounting for flexibility in making investment decisions and all possible interactions between the candidate projects within an optimization framework. This paper provides a fuzzy optimization model for dealing with the complexities and uncertainties regarding the construction of an R&D project portfolio. Real options analysis, which accounts for managerial flexibility, is employed to correct the deficiency of traditional discounted cash flow valuation that excludes any form of flexibility. An example is provided to illustrate the proposed decision approach.


Analytic Hierarchy Process Fuzzy Number Real Option Analytic Network Process Project Selection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Carlsson, C., Fullér, R.: A fuzzy approach to real option valuation. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 139, 297–312 (2003)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Carr, P.: The valuation of sequential exchange opportunities. The Journal of Finance 43, 1235–1256 (1988)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dixit, A.K., Pindyck, R.S.: The options approach to capital investment. Harvard Business Review, 105–115 (May-June 1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Geske, R., Johnson, H.E.: The American put option valued analytically. The Journal of Finance 39, 1511–1524 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Inuiguchi, M., Ramik, J.: Possibilistic linear programming: a brief review of fuzzy mathematical programming and a comparison with stochastic programming in portfolio selection problem. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 111, 3–28 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karsak, E.E., Özogul, C.O.: An options approach to valuing expansion flexibility in flexible manufacturing system investments. The Engineering Economist 47, 169–193 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kuchta, D.: A fuzzy model for R&D project selection with benefit, outcome and resource interactions. The Engineering Economist 46, 164–180 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, J.W., Kim, S.H.: Using analytic network process and goal programming for interdependent information system project selection. Computers & Operations Research 27, 367–382 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee, J., Paxson, D.A.: Valuation of R&D real American sequential exchange options. R&D Management 31, 191–201 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liberatore, M.: An extension of the analytic hierarchy process for industrial R&D project selection and resource allocation. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 34, 12–18 (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Margrabe, W.: The value of an option to exchange one asset for another. The Journal of Finance 33, 177–186 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meade, L.M., Presley, A.: R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 49, 59–66 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schmidt, R.L.: A model for R&D project selection with combined benefit, outcome and resource interactions. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 40, 403–410 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wang, J., Hwang, W.-L.: A fuzzy set approach for R&D portfolio selection using a real options valuation model. To appear in Omega (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Watters, L.J.: Reduction of integer polynomial programming problems to zero-one linear programming problems. Operations Research 15, 1171–1174 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Weingartner, H.M.: Capital budgeting of interrelated projects: survey and synthesis. Management Science 12, 485–516 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Ertugrul Karsak
    • 1
  1. 1.Industrial Engineering DepartmentGalatasaray UniversityOrtaköy, IstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations