Teaming at GE Aviation 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 Teaming at GE Aviation case study

At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Net Present Value (NPV) case study solution. Teaming at GE Aviation case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Rakesh Khurana, Jeffrey T. Polzer, Willy Shih, Eric Baldwin. The Teaming at GE Aviation (referred as “Teaming Aviation” 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, Design, Developing employees, Financial management, Government, Labor, Leadership, Leading teams, Manufacturing, Marketing, National competitiveness, Organizational structure, Product development, Productivity, Social responsibility, Strategic planning, Workspaces.

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 Teaming at GE Aviation Case Study

Describes the challenges and successes encountered by GE's Aviation business in implementing a teaming work structure and culture in plants across its supply chain. GE Aviation leadership had seen dramatic gains in productivity, quality, and worker satisfaction in manufacturing plants where it had implemented teaming, which was designed to move decision-making as close to the product as possible by delegating authority, responsibility, and accountability to front-line workers. The case describes what teaming looked like in two of GE Aviation's plants and discusses the benefits realized in teaming sites. It also describes the challenges GE Aviation leaders had encountered in implementing teaming in the face of an entrenched work structure and culture in one particular plant, and discusses the difficulty management had faced in moving forward in transforming the culture of the plant.

Case Authors : Rakesh Khurana, Jeffrey T. Polzer, Willy Shih, Eric Baldwin

Topic : Organizational Development

Related Areas : Change management, Collaboration, Competition, Design, Developing employees, Financial management, Government, Labor, Leadership, Leading teams, Manufacturing, Marketing, National competitiveness, Organizational structure, Product development, Productivity, Social responsibility, Strategic planning, Workspaces

---

Calculating Net Present Value (NPV) at 6% for Teaming at GE Aviation Case Study

Years	Cash Flow	Net Cash Flow	Cumulative     Cash Flow	Discount Rate @ 6 %	Discounted Cash Flows
Year 0	(10000849)	-10000849	-	-
Year 1	3472043	-6528806	3472043	0.9434	3275512
Year 2	3973476	-2555330	7445519	0.89	3536379
Year 3	3962388	1407058	11407907	0.8396	3326897
Year 4	3236922	4643980	14644829	0.7921	2563945
TOTAL			14644829		12702735

The Net Present Value at 6% discount rate is 2701886

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

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

---

Formula and Steps to Calculate Net Present Value (NPV) of Teaming at GE Aviation

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 Teaming Aviation 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 Teaming Aviation 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	(10000849)	-10000849	-	-
Year 1	3472043	-6528806	3472043	0.8696	3019168
Year 2	3973476	-2555330	7445519	0.7561	3004519
Year 3	3962388	1407058	11407907	0.6575	2605334
Year 4	3236922	4643980	14644829	0.5718	1850721
TOTAL					10479742

The Net NPV after 4 years is 478893

(10479742 - 10000849 )

---

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	(10000849)	-10000849	-	-
Year 1	3472043	-6528806	3472043	0.8333	2893369
Year 2	3973476	-2555330	7445519	0.6944	2759358
Year 3	3962388	1407058	11407907	0.5787	2293049
Year 4	3236922	4643980	14644829	0.4823	1561016
TOTAL					9506792

The Net NPV after 4 years is -494057

At 20% discount rate the NPV is negative (9506792 - 10000849 ) so ideally we can't select the project if macro and micro factors don't allow financial managers of Teaming Aviation 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 Teaming Aviation has a NPV value higher than Zero then finance managers at Teaming Aviation 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 Teaming Aviation, then the stock price of the Teaming Aviation 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 Teaming Aviation 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 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 are the key aspects of the projects that need to be monitored, refined, and retuned for continuous delivery of projected cash flows.

Understanding of risks involved in the project.

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

What can impact the cash flow of 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 Teaming at GE Aviation

References & Further Readings

Rakesh Khurana, Jeffrey T. Polzer, Willy Shih, Eric Baldwin (2018), "Teaming at GE Aviation Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.