Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/22144
標題: 以實質選擇權為基礎的方法來改善研發專案發展彈性之研究
A Real-Option-Based Planning Methodology to Improve Development Flexibility of R&D Projects
作者: 楊竣宇
Yang, Chung-Yu
關鍵字: Technology management;科技管理;Real option;Managerial flexibility;R&D Project management;Dynamic programming;Project evaluation;研發專案管理;實質選擇權;管理彈性;動態規劃;專案價值評估
出版社: 科技管理研究所
引用: 1、中文部份 陳昭姿. 2000. Fexofenadine HCI (Allegra)-無心臟毒性的非鎮靜型抗組織胺 台灣兒童過敏氣喘及免疫學會學會通訊. 1, 13 陳麗敏、羅淑慧. 2004 生技製藥公司的策略聯盟佈局. 生技中心ITIS計劃 秦慶瑤. 2004. 藥品委外研發及生產的發展現況及趨勢. 生技中心ITIS計劃 湯谷清. 2004. 生技產業技術鑑價模式分析 生技中心ITIS計劃 田蔚城. 1999 生物產業與製藥產業-(下冊)製藥產業. 九州圖書. 74 嚴敏心、王拔群、張燕良. 2002. Fexofenadine HCl (Allegra) 對於治療過敏性鼻炎效益與安全性評量的臨床試驗. 慈濟醫學. 14. 295 2、英文部分 Amram M. AND Kulatilaka N. 1999. Real Optionoption: Managing managing Strategic strategic Investment investment in an Uncertain uncertain Worldworld. Harvard Business School Press ANGELIS, D.I. 2000. Capturing the option value of R&D. Research Technology Management 43, 31. BENAROCH, M. 2001. Option-based management of technology investment risk. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 48, 428. BLACK, F. AND SCHOLES, M. 1973. The Pricing pricing of Options options and Corporate corporate Liabilitiesliabilities. The Journal of Political Economy 81, 637. BOER, F.P. 2000. Valuation of technology using "real options". Research Technology Management 43, 26. BOUTE, R., DEMEULEMEESTER, E. AND HERROELEN, W. 2004. A real options approach to project management. International Journal of Production Research 42, 1715. BRANDÃO, L.E., DYER, J.S. AND HAHN, W.J. 2005. Using Binomial binomial Decision decision Trees trees to Solve solve Realreal-Option option Valuation valuation Problemsproblems. Decision Analysis 2, 69. COPELAND, T. AND ANTIKAROV, V. 2001, Real option: A practitioner’s guide. Texere. New York COPELAND, T. AND TUFANO, P. 2004. A Realreal-World world Way way to Manage manage Real real Optionsoptions. Harvard Business Review 82, 90. COX, J.C., ROSS, S.A. AND RUBINSTEIN, M. 1979. Option Pricingpricing: A Simplified simplified Approachapproach. Journal of Financial Economics 7, 229. FAULKNER, T.W. 1996. Applying ''options thinking'' to R&D valuation. Research Technology Management 39, 50. Gil N. AND Tommelein I. D. AND Beckman S. 2004. Postponing Design design Processes processes in Unpredictable unpredictable Environmentsenvironments. RESEARCH Research IN In EngineeringNGINEERING DesignESIGN 15, 139. HARTMANN, M. AND HASSAN, A. 2006. Application of real options analysis for pharmaceutical R&D project valuation - Empirical results from a survey. Research Policy 35, 343. HARRISON, M. AND LERER L. 2002. Real Option for Biotechnology Valuation. Nature Biotechnology 20, 223 HERATH, H.S.B. AND BREMSER, W.G. 2005. Real-option valuation of research and development investments: Implications for performance measurement. Managerial Auditing Journal 20, 55. HUCHZERMEIER, A. AND LOCH, C.H. 2001. Project management under risk: Using the real options approach to evaluate flexibility in R&D. Management Science 47, 85. JAGLE, A. 1999 Shareholder Value, Real Options, and Innovation in Technology-Intensive Companies. R&D Management. 29, 271 KESTER, W.C. 1984. Today''s Options options for Tomorrow''s tomorrow''s Growthgrowth. Harvard Business Review 62, 153. KOGUT, B. AND KULATILAKA, N. 1994. Operating flexibility, global manufacturing, and the option value of a multinational network. Management Science 40, 123. LINT, O. AND PENNINGS, E. 2001. An option approach to the new product development process: A case study at Philips Electronics. R & D Management 31, 163. MERTON, R.C. 1973. An Intertemporal intertemporal Capital capital Asset asset Pricing pricing Modelmodel. Econometrica (pre-1986) 41, 867. Micalizzi A., Trigeorgis L. 1999. Project Evaluationevaluation, Strategy strategy and Real real Optionsoptions. Real Option Business Strategy, pp1-19 MYERS, S.C. 1984. Finance Theory theory and Financial financial Strategystrategy. Interfaces 14, 126. PASS, D. AND POSTLE, M. 2002. Unlocking the value of R&D. BioPharm 15, 67. PENNINGS, E. AND LINT, O. 2000. Market entry, phased rollout or abandonment? A real option approach. European Journal of Operational Research 124, 125. PERLITZ, M., PESKE, T. AND SCHRANK, R. 1999. Real options valuation: The new frontier in R&D project evaluation? R & D Management 29, 255. PIACHAUD, B.S. 2002. Outsourcing in the pharmaceutical manufacturing process: An examination of the CRO experience. Technovation 22, 81. ROGERS, M. J. AND GUPTA, A. AND MARANAS, C. D. 2002. Real option based analysis of optimal pharmaceutical research and development portfolios. American Chemical Society. 41, 6607 SAARI H. L. 2004. Risk management in drug development projects. Master Thesis. Laboratory of Industrial Management. Helsinki University of Technology. SANTIAGO, L.P. AND BIFANO, T.G. 2005. Management of R&D Projects projects Under under Uncertaintyuncertainty: A Multidimensional multidimensional Approach approach to Managerial managerial Flexibilityflexibility. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 52, 269. SHARPE, P. AND KEELIN, T. 1998. How SmithKline Beecham makes better resource-allocation decisions. Harvard Business Review 76, 45. STEWART, J. J. AND ALLISON P. N. AND JOHNSON R. 2001 Putting a Price on Biotechnology. Nature Biotechnology 19, 813
摘要: 
現今企業面對動態且不確定的競爭環境,以新藥開發為例,新藥開發通常包含了龐大的技術與市場不確定性,從探索階段算起,每項新藥的平均上市成功機率僅有0.01%~0.02%,在評估研發專案時,若無將管理彈性考量在內,往往無法反應出專案的真正價值。因此在執行研發專案前,管理者必須利用一套彈性規劃流程來規劃專案的管理彈性,以降低研發風險、提高研發價值。但是在評估新藥開發專案的價值時,傳統的評價工具沒能充分考慮到專案的管理彈性,以致於可能低估其價值。本研究以實質選擇權為基礎,發展一套彈性規劃的方法論,並藉此提升研發專案的發展彈性。彈性規劃方法論包含三個部份:第一、本研究先確認各個研發階段所可能包含的研發風險;第二、奠基於風險確認的結果,規劃出系列性選擇權結構(Cascading option structure)。系列性選擇權結構可以協助管理者了解何種研發風險適合用何種選擇權方案來解決;最後,吾人利用動態規劃模型取代複製投資組合法來評估實質選擇權價值。動態規劃模型利用產品預期績效來評估市場報酬。本研究以製藥專案為例,探討彈性規劃流程如何協助決策者提升新藥開發專案的彈性,以更客觀地評估專案的價值。

Incorporating managerial flexibility in an R&D project is important, because managers are facing greater uncertainty in today's competitive and dynamic changing environment. In order to hedge against uncertainty, managers must have more managerial flexibility during the R&D process. For example, a pharmaceutical R&D project usually encounters very high technology uncertainty and market uncertainty. The average success rate for launching a new drug was about 0.02% to 0.01%. Therefore, it's essential to bring managerial flexibility into R&D project planning to decrease R&D risk and increase potential market value. The objective of this paper is to develop a flexibility planning methodology based on the real option concept to improve development flexibility for R&D projects. The proposed flexibility planning methodology contains three steps. Firstly, we identify potential risks that may occur during each stage of the R&D process. The second step is to develop a cascading option structure based on the result of risk identification. The cascading option structure can help decision makers to understand which option could appropriately be used to increase development flexibility at each R&D stage. Finally, instead of using traditional option pricing method, a dynamic programming model that considers multidimensional product performance and market payoff for an R&D project is developed to evaluate R&D project's value. Using the proposed methodology, managers can easily identify future scenarios as a function of the management actions. The major contribution of this paper is that a flexibility planning methodology is developed to help managers improve development flexibility of an R&D project and increase the success rate of product launch to the market. In addition, the dynamic programming method used in this paper allows managers to evaluate the flexibility value of their management actions in a more straightforward manner. A drug development project is used to illustrate the proposed concept.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/11455/22144
其他識別: U0005-0507200715492600
Appears in Collections:科技管理研究所

Show full item record
 
TAIR Related Article

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.