Skip to main content
Log in

Real R&D options with time-to-learn and learning-by-doing

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We model R&D efforts to enhance the value of a product or technology before final development. Such efforts may be directed towards improving quality, adding new features, or adopting technological innovations. They are implemented as optional, costly and interacting control actions expected to enhance value but with uncertain outcome. We examine the interesting issues of the optimal timing of R&D, the impact of lags in the realization of the R&D outcome, and the choice between accelerated versus staged (sequential) R&D. These issues are also especially interesting since the history of decisions affects future decisions and the distributions of asset prices and induces path-dependency. We show that the existence of optional R&D efforts enhances the investment option value significantly. The impact of a dividend-like payout rate or of project volatility on optimal R&D decisions may be different with R&D timing flexibility than without. The attractiveness of sequential strategies is enhanced in the presence of learning-by-doing and decreasing marginal reversibility of capital effects.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abel, A.B., A.K. Dixit, J.C. Eberly, and R.S. Pindyck. (1996). “Options, the Value of Capital, and Investment.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 111, 753–777.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Abel, A.B. and J.C. Eberly. (1997). “An Exact Solution for the Investment and Value of a Firm Facing Uncertainty, Adjustment Costs, and Irreversibility.” Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 21, 831–852.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amir, E., Y. Guan, and G. Livne. (2004). “The Association between the Uncertainty of Future Economic Benefits and Current R&D and Capital Expenditures: An Industry Analysis.” Working Paper, London Business School. Forthcoming, Journal of Business, Finance & Accounting

  • Bar-Ilan, A. and W.C. Strange. (1998). “A Model of Sequential Investment.” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 22, 437–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Illan, A., A. Sulem, and A. Zanello. (2002). “Time-to-Build and Capacity Choice.” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 26, 69–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Black, F. and M. Scholes. (1973). “The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities.” Journal of Political Economy, 81, 637–659.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brynjolfsson, E. and L.M. Hitt. (2000). “Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 23–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan, S.H., J.D. Martin, and J.W. Kensinger. (1990). “Corporate Research and Development Expenditures and Share Value.” Journal of Financial Economics, 26, 255–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Childs, P.D. and A.J. Triantis. (1999). “Dynamic R&D Investment Policies.” Management Science, 45, 1359–1377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Constantinides, G. (1978). “Market Risk Adjustment in Project Valuation.” Journal of Finance, 33, 603–616.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cox, J., J.E. Ingersoll Jr, and S. Ross. (1985). “An Intertemporal General Equilibrium Model of Asset Prices.” Econometrica, 53, 363–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dixit, A. and R. Pindyck. (1994). Investment Under Uncertainty. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geske, R. (1979). “The Valuation of Compound Options.” Journal of Financial Economics, 7, 63–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grabowski, H. and J. Vernon. (1990). “A New Look at the Returns and Risks to Pharmaceutical R&D.” Management Science, 36, 804–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grenadier, S.R. and A.M. Weiss. (1997). “Investment in Technological Innovations: An Option Pricing Approach.” Journal of Financial Economics, 44, 397–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J.M. and S. Pliska. (1981). “Martingales and Stochastic Integrals in the Theory of Continuous Trading.” Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, 11, 313–316.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, R. and M. Hendrickson. (2002). “Optimal Partially Reversible Investment.” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control, 26, 483–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, J. and A. White. (1993). “Efficient Procedures for Valuing European and American Path-Dependent Options.” Journal of Derivatives, 1, 21–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Korn, R. (1997). “Optimal Impulse Control when Control Actions Have Random Consequences.” Mathematics of Operations Research, 22, 639–667.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kothari, S.P., T.E. Laguerre, and A.J. Leone. (2002). “Capitalization versus Expensing: Evidence on the Uncertainty of Future Earnings from Capital Expenditures versus R&D Outlays.” Review of Accounting Studies, 7, 355–382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulatilaka, N. (1988). “Valuing the Flexibility of Flexible Manufacturing Systems.” IEEE Transactions in Engineering Management, 35, 250–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majd, S. and R. Pindyck. (1987). “Time to Build, Option Value, and Investment Decisions.” Journal of Financial Economics, 18, 7–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Majd, S. and R. Pindyck. (1989). “The Learning Curve and Optimal Production under Uncertainty.” RAND Journal of Economics, 20, 331–343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martzoukos, S.H. (2000). “Real Options with Random Controls and the Value of Learning.” Annals of Operations Research, 99, 305–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martzoukos, S.H. (2003). “Real R&D Options with Endogenous and Exogenous Learning.” In D.A. Paxson (ed.), Real R&D Options. Butterworth-Heinemann Quantitative Finance Series.

  • McDonald, R. and D. Siegel. (1984). “Option Pricing When the Underlying Asset Earns a Below-Equilibrium Rate of Return: A Note.” Journal of Finance, 39, 261–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R.C. (1973). “An Intertemporal Capital Asset Pricing Model.” Econometrica, 41, 867–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myers, S.C. and S. Majd. (1990). “Abandonment Value and Project Life.” Advances in Futures and Options Research, 4, 1–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennings, E. and O. Lint. (1997). “The Option Value of Advanced R&D.” European Journal of Operational Research, 103, 83–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pindyck, R.S. (1993). “Investments of Uncertain Cost.” Journal of Financial Economics, 34, 53–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ritchken, P. and B. Kamrad. (1991). “A Binomial Contingent Claims Model for Valuing Risky Ventures.” European Journal of Operational Research, 53, 106–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, K. and M. Weitzman. (1981). “Funding Criteria for Research, Development, and Exploration Projects.” Econometrica, 49, 1261–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, E.S. and C. Zozaya-Gorostiza. (2003). “Investment Under Uncertainty in Information Technology: Acquisition and Development Projects.” Management Science, 49, 57–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, E.S. and C. Zozaya-Gorostiza. (2000b). “Evaluating Investments in Disruptive Technologies.” UCLA Working Paper.

  • Schwartz E.S. and M. Moon. (2000). “Evaluating Research and Development Investments.” In M.J. Brennan and L. Trigeorgis (eds.), Project Flexibility, Agency and Competition. New Developments in the Theory and Applications of Real Options. Oxford University Press.

  • Thompson, A.C. (1995). “Valuation of Path-dependent Contingent Claims with Multiple Exercise Decisions over Time: The Case of Take-or-Pay.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 30, 271–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigeorgis, L. (1991). “Anticipated Competitive Entry and Early Preemptive Investment in Deferrable Projects.” Journal of Economics and Business, 43, 143–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trigeorgis, L. (1996). Real Options: Managerial Flexibility and Strategy in Resource Allocation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Spiros H. Martzoukos.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Koussis, N., Martzoukos, S.H. & Trigeorgis, L. Real R&D options with time-to-learn and learning-by-doing. Ann Oper Res 151, 29–55 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-006-0127-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-006-0127-3

Keywords

Navigation