David Chang Is The Owner Of A Small Electronics Company

Situationdavid Chang Is The Owner Of A Small Electronics Company In S

David Chang is the owner of a small electronics company facing a critical decision concerning the development of an innovative microprocessor, the X-32, which holds the potential to produce a superior timing system for the 2016 Olympic Games. The decision involves evaluating whether to continue research and development (R&D) for the X-32, develop an alternative, or abandon the project entirely. Several financial implications and probabilistic outcomes are associated with each choice, which must be carefully analyzed to determine the optimal strategic path.

The core options include continuing R&D, which incurs initial costs of $200,000, and developing a prototype costing an additional $50,000. If successful, the company can win a $1 million contract, but additional costs of $150,000 for production will be necessary to deliver the final product. If R&D fails, the project can be abandoned with no further costs or opportunities. An alternative scenario involves not pursuing the R&D, thereby eliminating potential winnings but also avoiding expenses.

The uncertainty lies in the success of R&D, with probabilities set at 60% success and 40% failure, and subsequent chances of winning the contract with an alternative system if R&D fails, albeit at a lower probability. Decision trees and expected monetary value (EMV) calculations guide the analysis, considering the different pathways's profitability and risks. The primary goal is to recommend the decision based on maximized expected value, factoring in all relevant costs, probabilities, and potential revenues.

Paper For Above instruction

Decisions in technological development and project management have become increasingly complex with numerous uncertainties affecting outcomes and profitability. The case of David Chang’s electronics firm exemplifies such strategic decision-making, particularly concerning the development of an innovative microprocessor for a high-stakes event such as the Olympic Games. The core dilemma revolves around whether to continue R&D efforts aimed at producing a cutting-edge timing system, develop an alternative, or abandon the project entirely. By systematically analyzing the potential outcomes, costs, and benefits using decision tree analysis and expected monetary value (EMV), a rational choice can be made to maximize the firm's expected profit and strategically position it for future success.

The situation entails several key options. The first option, to abandon the project, involves no further costs or potential revenue but foregoes the opportunity to win the lucrative Olympic contract. The second option is to continue R&D, incurring initial costs of $200,000 for development and an additional $50,000 for prototyping, with a 60% probability of success and a 40% probability of failure. If successful, the firm can win the contract worth $1 million, with an additional $150,000 in production costs, leading to a net profit of approximately $600,000 after expenses. If unsuccessful, the firm may still win using a modified, albeit inferior, timing system, but with a smaller probability, resulting in a significantly lower payoff.

Constructing a decision tree allows visualizing these options and their associated probabilistic outcomes. The first decision node presents the choice to abandon or continue R&D. If the firm continues, it branches into success or failure states, each with their respective probabilities and payoffs. Success leads to the possibility of winning the contract and earning a profit, while failure results in costs without any gains. The alternative—abandoning—has no further branches and yields zero profit or loss.

Applying the EMV formula facilitates quantifying the expected profitability of each strategy: EMV = (Probability of success × net gain if successful) + (Probability of failure × net gain if failed). In this context, the EMV for continuing R&D accounts for the 60% success probability, chance of winning the contract, and associated revenues and costs, adjusted for the initial investments. For abandoning, the EMV is straightforwardly zero since no further costs or gains are involved.

Calculations reveal that the EMV of continuing R&D exceeds the zero baseline of abandoning the project, primarily due to the high probability (60%) of success and the substantial payoff if successful. Conversely, pursuing a lower-probability or less promising alternative would diminish the expected value. Evaluating alternative strategies such as developing a modified, less advanced system if R&D fails, can further influence the decision, potentially improving outcomes under certain circumstances.

In conclusion, the decision to continue R&D appears justified when considering the probabilistic analysis and the high potential payoff in case of success. Nevertheless, firms must also consider qualitative factors like technological risks, market competitiveness, and strategic reputation. Relying on decision tree models and EMV calculations provides a rational, quantitative framework for guiding such pivotal decisions in technological innovation, ensuring resource allocation aligns with maximizing expected benefits and minimizing unnecessary risks.

References

• Boardman, C., Greenberg, D., Vining, A., & Weimer, D. (2018). Cost-Benefit Analysis: Concepts and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
• Clemen, R. T., & Reilly, T. (2014). Making Hard Decisions with Decision Tools. Cengage Learning.
• Hansson, S. O. (2012). Ethical Decision Making and Moral Philosophy. Psychology Department, Göteborg University.
• Horowitz, H. (2014). Decision Theory: Principles and Approaches. Psychology Press.
• Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-offs. Cambridge University Press.
• Louviere, J., Hensher, D., & Swait, J. (2010). Stated Choice Methods: Analysis and Applications. Cambridge University Press.
• Pfleeger, S. L., & Atlee, J. (2010). Software Engineering: Theory and Practice. Pearson.
• Raiffa, H., & Schlaifer, R. (1961). Applied Statistical Decision Theory. Harvard University Press.
• Sutton, R. S., & Barto, A. G. (2018). Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press.
• Thompson, L. (2017). Making the Right Decision: A Guide to Rational Thinking. Routledge.