Introduction to Net Present Value (NPV) - What is Net Present Value (NPV) ? How it impacts financial decisions regarding project management?
At Oak Spring University, we provide corporate level professional Net Present Value (NPV) case study solution. Aligning Corporate Learning with Strategy case study is a Harvard Business School (HBR) case study written by Shlomo Ben-Hur, Bernie Jaworski, David Gray. The Aligning Corporate Learning with Strategy (referred as “Learning Agenda” from here on) case study provides evaluation & decision scenario in field of Strategy & Execution. It also touches upon business topics such as - Value proposition, .
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.
Surveys of CEOs point to a shortage of leadership and management talent as a leading concern. It's not that companies refrain from investing in developing their people: In 2012, companies in developed economies spent nearly $400 billion on training. But, as authors Shlomo Ben-Hur, Bernard Jaworski, and David Gray argue, much of the investment and effort that organizations spend on learning is focused on the wrong things. Instead of focusing on new modes of instruction and technology, they write, corporate learning executives need to emphasize aligning learning programs with business strategy.Although learning executives such as chief learning officers must shoulder the burden of developing the company's talent capabilities and supporting strategic priorities, the authors argue that CEOs and other top executives have a critical role to play. Personal engagement and leadership on the part of the CEO can make a big difference in setting the right tone for the organization. While companies often begin with training-needs assessments, the authors recommend starting by mapping what they call the "CEO agenda"to ensure that learning gets properly aligned with strategy. This connects learning and development with the company's specific needs and cuts through the noise of multiple initiatives vying for attention -highlighting the critical "must-win battles"that the CEO has identified. The next task is to operationalize the learning agenda through a portfolio of learning and development activities. This involves doing an inventory of existing learning and development resources. Companies should repeat this on a regular basis, the authors say, to ensure that the activities in place reflect the company's learning strategy. Companies should be wary about making wholesale changes to learning portfolios and organizational structures, the authors warn, unless there are major shifts in the company's mission or business context. Reorganizations "should be limited to situations where they are warranted -for example, when the learning agenda is misaligned with corporate strategy or the strategy changes." Like the CEO agenda, the company's learning agenda should articulate the essential strategic initiatives for corporate learning. Choices about what to include or eliminate to bring learning activities in line with current priorities should not be made in isolation, and the authors say it's important to get input and buy-in from both the learning organization and business leaders -all the way to the CEO level. Although the CEO's personal involvement is valuable, a broader effort of stakeholder management is typically required to promote and gain buy-in for the learning agenda. Learning leaders should map out a concerted "campaign"to inform and gather input from key influencers and decision makers in other parts of the business. A disciplined effort of stakeholder engagement and outreach gives learning leaders an opportunity to deepen their understanding of strategic priorities and demonstrate the business value of learning interventions. This is an MIT Sloan Management Review article.
Years | Cash Flow | Net Cash Flow | Cumulative Cash Flow |
Discount Rate @ 6 % |
Discounted Cash Flows |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Year 0 | (10022490) | -10022490 | - | - | |
Year 1 | 3461725 | -6560765 | 3461725 | 0.9434 | 3265778 |
Year 2 | 3955522 | -2605243 | 7417247 | 0.89 | 3520400 |
Year 3 | 3973985 | 1368742 | 11391232 | 0.8396 | 3336634 |
Year 4 | 3237261 | 4606003 | 14628493 | 0.7921 | 2564214 |
TOTAL | 14628493 | 12687027 |
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 -
Capital Budgeting Approaches
There are four types of capital budgeting techniques that are widely used in the corporate world –
1. Internal Rate of Return
2. Payback Period
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. Timing of the expected cash flows – stockholders of Learning Agenda 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. Learning Agenda shareholders have preference for diversified projects investment rather than prospective high income from a single capital intensive project.
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
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 Learning Agenda 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 Learning Agenda 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.
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 | (10022490) | -10022490 | - | - | |
Year 1 | 3461725 | -6560765 | 3461725 | 0.8696 | 3010196 |
Year 2 | 3955522 | -2605243 | 7417247 | 0.7561 | 2990943 |
Year 3 | 3973985 | 1368742 | 11391232 | 0.6575 | 2612960 |
Year 4 | 3237261 | 4606003 | 14628493 | 0.5718 | 1850914 |
TOTAL | 10465013 |
(10465013 - 10022490 )
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 | (10022490) | -10022490 | - | - | |
Year 1 | 3461725 | -6560765 | 3461725 | 0.8333 | 2884771 |
Year 2 | 3955522 | -2605243 | 7417247 | 0.6944 | 2746890 |
Year 3 | 3973985 | 1368742 | 11391232 | 0.5787 | 2299760 |
Year 4 | 3237261 | 4606003 | 14628493 | 0.4823 | 1561179 |
TOTAL | 9492600 |
At 20% discount rate the NPV is negative (9492600 - 10022490 ) so ideally we can't select the project if macro and micro factors don't allow financial managers of Learning Agenda to discount cash flow at lower discount rates such as 15%.
Simplest Approach – If the investment project of Learning Agenda has a NPV value higher than Zero then finance managers at Learning Agenda 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 Learning Agenda, then the stock price of the Learning Agenda 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.
Project selection is often a far more complex decision than just choosing it based on the NPV number. Finance managers at Learning Agenda 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 –
Understanding of risks involved in the project.
What are the key aspects of the projects that need to be monitored, refined, and retuned for continuous delivery of projected cash flows.
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.
What can impact the cash flow of the project.
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.
Shlomo Ben-Hur, Bernie Jaworski, David Gray (2018), "Aligning Corporate Learning with Strategy Harvard Business Review Case Study. Published by HBR Publications.
Feel free to connect with us if you need business research.
You can download Excel Template of Case Study Solution & Analysis of Aligning Corporate Learning with Strategy
Technology , Communications Equipment
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Crops
Technology , Software & Programming
Services , Retail (Technology)
Consumer/Non-Cyclical , Beverages (Alcoholic)
Healthcare , Biotechnology & Drugs
Technology , Semiconductors
Services , Motion Pictures
Technology , Electronic Instr. & Controls
Services , Hotels & Motels
Consumer Cyclical , Recreational Products