GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services Net Present Value (NPV) / MBA Resources

Introduction to Net Present Value (NPV) - What is Net Present Value (NPV) ? How it impacts financial decisions regarding project management?

NPV solution for GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services case study

At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Net Present Value (NPV) case study solution. GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Heidi K. Gardner, Silvia Hodges Silverstein. The GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services (referred as “Gsk Rigor” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Organizational Development. It also touches upon business topics such as - Value proposition, Change management, Collaboration, Competition, Marketing, Pricing, Supply chain.

The net present value (NPV) of an investment proposal is the present value of the proposal’s net cash flows less the proposal’s initial cash outflow. If a project’s NPV is greater than or equal to zero, the project should be accepted.

NPV = Present Value of Future Cash Flows LESS Project’s Initial Investment

---

Case Description of GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services Case Study

Pharmaceutical company GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) uses an innovative new approach to procuring outside legal counsel: it replaces relationship-based selection and law firms' traditional time-based billing with data-driven decision making and an online reverse auction. In the case, GSK is hit with a potentially devastating suit and must hire a firm in time to respond. The recently hired managing attorney, Sophia Keating, grapples with GSK's approach. The GSK veterans assure her that the approach drives down costs and improves the quality of work by systematically increasing the rigor in the procurement process. Still skeptical, Sophia runs the process of systematically analyzing and comparing the competing firms' bids. This case also describes the process by which these tools were created and adopted. Beyond the implications for law firms and other service providers, lessons from this case are applicable for teaching about institutional change, procurement processes relevant to many fields, and how to increase rigor in typically informal business processes.

Case Authors : Heidi K. Gardner, Silvia Hodges Silverstein

Topic : Organizational Development

Related Areas : Change management, Collaboration, Competition, Marketing, Pricing, Supply chain

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 6% for GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services Case Study

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 6 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10020726)	-10020726	-	-
Year 1	3452159	-6568567	3452159	0.9434	3256754
Year 2	3979989	-2588578	7432148	0.89	3542176
Year 3	3942016	1353438	11374164	0.8396	3309793
Year 4	3244507	4597945	14618671	0.7921	2569953
TOTAL			14618671		12678676

The Net Present Value at 6% discount rate is 2657950

In isolation the NPV number doesn't mean much but put in right context then it is one of the best method to evaluate project returns. In this article we will cover -

Different methods of capital budgeting

What is NPV & Formula of NPV,
How it is calculated,
How to use NPV number for project evaluation, and
Scenario Planning given risks and management priorities.

---

Capital Budgeting Approaches

Methods of Capital Budgeting

There are four types of capital budgeting techniques that are widely used in the corporate world –

1. Profitability Index
2. Net Present Value
3. Internal Rate of Return
4. Payback Period

Apart from the Payback period method which is an additive method, rest of the methods are based on Discounted Cash Flow technique. Even though cash flow can be calculated based on the nature of the project, for the simplicity of the article we are assuming that all the expected cash flows are realized at the end of the year.

Discounted Cash Flow approaches provide a more objective basis for evaluating and selecting investment projects. They take into consideration both –

1. Timing of the expected cash flows – stockholders of Gsk Rigor have higher preference for cash returns over 4-5 years rather than 10-15 years given the nature of the volatility in the industry.
2. Magnitude of both incoming and outgoing cash flows – Projects can be capital intensive, time intensive, or both. Gsk Rigor shareholders have preference for diversified projects investment rather than prospective high income from a single capital intensive project.

---

Formula and Steps to Calculate Net Present Value (NPV) of GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services

NPV = Net Cash In Flowt1 / (1+r)t1 + Net Cash In Flowt2 / (1+r)t2 + … Net Cash In Flowtn / (1+r)tn
Less Net Cash Out Flowt0 / (1+r)t0

Where t = time period, in this case year 1, year 2 and so on.
r = discount rate or return that could be earned using other safe proposition such as fixed deposit or treasury bond rate. Net Cash In Flow – What the firm will get each year.
Net Cash Out Flow – What the firm needs to invest initially in the project.

Step 1 – Understand the nature of the project and calculate cash flow for each year.
Step 2 – Discount those cash flow based on the discount rate.
Step 3 – Add all the discounted cash flow.
Step 4 – Selection of the project

Why Organizational Development Managers need to know Financial Tools such as Net Present Value (NPV)?

In our daily workplace we often come across people and colleagues who are just focused on their core competency and targets they have to deliver. For example marketing managers at Gsk Rigor often design programs whose objective is to drive brand awareness and customer reach. But how that 30 point increase in brand awareness or 10 point increase in customer touch points will result into shareholders’ value is not specified.

To overcome such scenarios managers at Gsk Rigor needs to not only know the financial aspect of project management but also needs to have tools to integrate them into part of the project development and monitoring plan.

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 15%

After working through various assumptions we reached a conclusion that risk is far higher than 6%. In a reasonably stable industry with weak competition - 15% discount rate can be a good benchmark.

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 15 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10020726)	-10020726	-	-
Year 1	3452159	-6568567	3452159	0.8696	3001877
Year 2	3979989	-2588578	7432148	0.7561	3009443
Year 3	3942016	1353438	11374164	0.6575	2591940
Year 4	3244507	4597945	14618671	0.5718	1855057
TOTAL					10458318

The Net NPV after 4 years is 437592

(10458318 - 10020726 )

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 20%

If the risk component is high in the industry then we should go for a higher hurdle rate / discount rate of 20%.

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 20 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10020726)	-10020726	-	-
Year 1	3452159	-6568567	3452159	0.8333	2876799
Year 2	3979989	-2588578	7432148	0.6944	2763881
Year 3	3942016	1353438	11374164	0.5787	2281259
Year 4	3244507	4597945	14618671	0.4823	1564674
TOTAL					9486613

The Net NPV after 4 years is -534113

At 20% discount rate the NPV is negative (9486613 - 10020726 ) so ideally we can't select the project if macro and micro factors don't allow financial managers of Gsk Rigor to discount cash flow at lower discount rates such as 15%.

Acceptance Criteria of a Project based on NPV

Simplest Approach – If the investment project of Gsk Rigor has a NPV value higher than Zero then finance managers at Gsk Rigor can ACCEPT the project, otherwise they can reject the project. This means that project will deliver higher returns over the period of time than any alternate investment strategy.

In theory if the required rate of return or discount rate is chosen correctly by finance managers at Gsk Rigor, then the stock price of the Gsk Rigor should change by same amount of the NPV. In real world we know that share price also reflects various other factors that can be related to both macro and micro environment.

In the same vein – accepting the project with zero NPV should result in stagnant share price. Finance managers use discount rates as a measure of risk components in the project execution process.

Sensitivity Analysis

Project selection is often a far more complex decision than just choosing it based on the NPV number. Finance managers at Gsk Rigor should conduct a sensitivity analysis to better understand not only the inherent risk of the projects but also how those risks can be either factored in or mitigated during the project execution. Sensitivity analysis helps in –

What are the key aspects of the projects that need to be monitored, refined, and retuned for continuous delivery of projected cash flows.

What can impact the cash flow of the project.

What are the uncertainties surrounding the project Initial Cash Outlay (ICO’s). ICO’s often have several different components such as land, machinery, building, and other equipment.

What will be a multi year spillover effect of various taxation regulations.

Understanding of risks involved in the project.

Some of the assumptions while using the Discounted Cash Flow Methods –

Projects are assumed to be Mutually Exclusive – This is seldom the came in modern day giant organizations where projects are often inter-related and rejecting a project solely based on NPV can result in sunk cost from a related project.

Independent projects have independent cash flows – As explained in the marketing project – though the project may look independent but in reality it is not as the brand awareness project can be closely associated with the spending on sales promotions and product specific advertising.

---

Negotiation Strategy of GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services

References & Further Readings

Heidi K. Gardner, Silvia Hodges Silverstein (2018), "GlaxoSmithKline: Sourcing Complex Professional Services Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.