The Operations Management Team Evaluated, Ranked, And Recomm ✓ Solved

The operations management team evaluated, ranked, and recommended

The operations management team evaluated, ranked, and recommended a set of capital projects using evaluation tools, such as NPV, payback, and IRR. The evaluation, ranking, and recommendations were by category of expenditures with the intent of establishing the cost of fully equipping a facility in compliance with the planned expansion. The fully equipped facility cost was then evaluated using tools, such as payback, NPV, and IRR. As part of the operations management team, you will do the following: Explain your recommendations about the choice of capital projects to the business owners, comprising the two founders and private investors. Consider the following points while providing your recommendations: What factors will you consider before planning the recommendations? How did the use of tools, such as payback, NPV, and IRR, help you in evaluating the fully equipped facility cost? Write your initial response in 4–5 paragraphs. Apply APA standards to citation of sources.

Paper For Above Instructions

Capital project evaluation is a crucial activity for any business that aims to expand its operations or improve its facilities. The operations management team, responsible for evaluating, ranking, and recommending capital projects, has employed various financial evaluation tools including Net Present Value (NPV), payback period, and Internal Rate of Return (IRR). These tools help the team assess potential projects' viability and financial returns, ensuring informed decision-making. When recommending projects to the business owners, factors such as project alignment with strategic goals, cost estimates, expected returns, and risk assessment must be taken into account.

Before making any recommendations on capital projects, it is essential to consider several factors. First, the alignment of potential projects with the organization's strategic goals is paramount. Projects that resonate with the company's long-term vision and objectives are more likely to receive support from business owners and private investors. Additionally, understanding the market trends can provide insight into which projects may yield the highest returns. It is also imperative to assess the financial health of the company, as well as its ability to fund the proposed projects without overextending its financial capabilities.

The use of financial evaluation tools, namely NPV, payback period, and IRR, plays a significant role in determining the feasibility and prioritization of capital projects. The NPV method allows us to calculate the present value of all cash inflows and outflows associated with a project, thereby providing a clear indication of its profitability. If the NPV exceeds zero, it suggests that the investment is worthwhile. The payback period, on the other hand, offers a straightforward measure of how quickly the company can recoup its initial investment. This measure is particularly valuable for assessing project liquidity and risk. The IRR is useful for determining the potential returns on investment, comparing different projects, and making investment decisions.

In recommending a set of capital projects, careful consideration must also be given to the inherent risks associated with each project. Risk assessment involves analyzing factors such as market volatility, competitive landscape, and the operational capabilities of the facility. Projects with higher potential returns often come with greater risks, which necessitates a comprehensive evaluation of the risk-reward ratio. This process is essential for ensuring that the projects not only align with the company's strategic goals but also fit within the risk tolerance level set by the founders and investors.

In summary, the evaluation, ranking, and recommendation process for capital projects is crucial for the planned expansion of the facility. By utilizing tools such as NPV, payback, and IRR, the operations management team can provide a thorough analysis of project viability. Additionally, considering strategic alignment, financial health, and risk factors further strengthens the recommendations made to the business owners. Ultimately, well-informed recommendations contribute to the long-term success and sustainability of the business.

References

• Brigham, E. F., & Ehrhardt, M. C. (2016). Financial management: Theory and practice. Cengage Learning.
• Damodaran, A. (2015). Valuation: Measuring and managing the valuation of companies. Wiley.
• Graham, J. R., & Harvey, C. R. (2001). The theory and practice of corporate finance: Evidence from the field. Journal of Financial Economics, 60(2), 187-243.
• Higgins, R. C. (2012). Analysis for financial management. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
• Koller, T., Goedhart, M., & Wessels, D. (2015). Valuation: Measuring and managing the value of companies. Wiley.
• Modigliani, F., & Miller, M. H. (1958). The cost of capital, corporation finance, and the theory of investment. American Economic Review, 48(3), 261-297.
• Myers, S. C., & Majluf, N. S. (1984). Corporate financing and investment decisions when firms have information that investors do not have. Journal of Financial Economics, 13(2), 187-221.
• Shin, H. H., & Stulz, R. M. (2000). Firm value, risk, and growth opportunities. Journal of Financial Economics, 58(3), 399-431.
• U.S. Small Business Administration. (2020). Capital investment. Retrieved from https://www.sba.gov
• Weygandt, J. J., Kimmel, P. D., & Kieso, D. E. (2015). Financial accounting. Wiley.