ارزش‌گذاری فناوری با رویکرد تحلیل اختیارات واقعی: مطالعه فناوری کاشی‌های نانوآنتی‌باکتریال

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری مدیریت فناوری دانشکده مهندسی پیشرفت دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران

2 استادیار دانشکده مهندسی پیشرفت، دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران

3 دانشیار دانشکده مهندسی صنایع دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران

10.22034/jstp.2018.10.3.539510

چکیده

یکی از چالش‌های حمایت از کارآفرینان، ارزش‌گذاری فناوری آنها به منظور تأمین مالی از طریق سرمایه‌گذاری خطرپذیر است. در خلال فرآیند تأمین مالی، برای سرمایه‌گذار مطلوب است که با مشخص شدن تدریجی عدم قطعیت‌ها، این حق را داشته باشد که با اعمال اختیاراتی نظیر توسعه، تحدید و یا فسخ، میزان سرمایه‌گذاری خود را افزایش و یا کاهش داده و یا حتی متوقف نماید. از سوی دیگر، منطقی است که کارآفرین در صورت اعطاء چنین اختیاراتی، ارزش بالاتری را برای فناوری خود طلب نماید. در این مقاله، مرور مطالعات و بهره‌مندی از نظرات خبرگان به عنوان روش تحلیل اختیارات واقعی ارزش‌گذاری فناوری در تأمین مالی خطرپذیر قرار گرفته است. بر خلاف پژوهش‌های قبلی که از اختیار ترکیبی بهره برده‌اند از "اختیار انتخاب" برای اعمال انعطاف‌پذیری‌های سرمایه‌گذاری در مرحله تجاری‌سازی استفاده و بدین طریق میزان ارزش افزوده برای ترغیب کارآفرین به اعطاء اختیارات مذکور محاسبه می‌شود. در پایان با ارزش‌گذاری یک فناوری موردی از طریق بکارگیری رویکرد پیشنهادی و حصول ارزش افزوده‌ای نزدیک به 36/4 میلیارد ریال در مقایسه با روش مرسوم تنزیل جریان نقدی، مشخص شد که محاسبات یک مورد واقعی با استدلال مطرح‌شده منطبق است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Technology Valuation via Real Options Analysis: Case Study of NanoAntibacterial Tiles Technology

نویسندگان [English]

  • Komeil Fattahi 1
  • Ali Bonyadi naeini 2
  • Mohammad ali Shafia 3
1 PhD Candidate in Management of Technology Iran University of Science and Technology Tehran Iran
2 Assistant Professor, Progress Engineering Faculty, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
3 Associate Professor Industrial Engineering Faculty Iran University of Science and Technology Tehran Iran
چکیده [English]

Technology valuation of entrepreneurs is one of the most critical challenges for financing them through the venture capital (VC) financing process. During the financing process and with the gradual identification of uncertainties, it is desirable for the investor to achieve the rights to terminate, increase or decrease the amount of his investment by exercising an option to abandon, expand, or contract. On the other hand, it is reasonable that by granting such rights to the investor, the entrepreneur requests a higher value for the relevant technology. In this paper, by reviewing the literature, and also by using the experts’ opinions, real options analysis (ROA) has been proposed for technology valuation during the VC financing process. Also, unlike previous researches that have utilized the compound options, an “option to choose” is used to apply investors’ flexibilities during the commercialization stage and contribute to determine the amount of value added to encourage the entrepreneur for granting the mentioned rights to the investor. Finally, by observing the results of technology valuation for one case study through the proposed method and the attainment of a value-added about 4.36 billion rials compared with the traditional discounted cash flow (DCF) method, it became clear that the calculations of a real case are consistent with the reasoning.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Technology Valuation
  • Real Options Analysis (ROA)
  • Option to Choose
  • Venture capital (VC)
[1] Runge, W. (2014). Technology Entrepreneurship: A Treatise on Entrepreneurs and Entrepreneurship for and in Technology Ventures (Vol. 2). KIT Scientific Publishing.

[2] Jones-Evans, D. (1995). A typology of technology-based entrepreneurs a model based on previous occupational background. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 1(1), 26-47.

[3] Rojas, F., & Huergo, E. (2016). Characteristics of entrepreneurs and public support for NTBFs. Small Business Economics, 47(2), 363-382.

[4] Phan, P. H., & Der Foo, M. (2004). Technological entrepreneurship in emerging regions. Journal of Business Venturing, 19(1), 1-5.

[5] Roberts, E. B., & Wainer, H. A. (1966). Some characteristics of technical entrepreneurs. M.I.T.

[6] Ferreira, J. J., Ferreira, F. A., Fernandes, C. I., Jalali, M. S., Raposo, M. L., & Marques, C. S. (2016). What do we [not] know about technology entrepreneurship research? International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 12(3), 713-733.

[7] Evers, N., Cunningham, J., & Hoholm, T. (2014). Technology entrepreneurship: bringing innovation to the marketplace. Macmillan International Higher Education.

[8] Brinckmann, J. (2008). Competence of top management teams and success of new technology-based firms. Gabler.

[9] Berglund, H. (2015). Between cognition and discourse: phenomenology and the study of entrepreneurship. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, 21(3), 472-488.

[10] Sandberg, J. (2000). Understanding human competence at work: an interpretative approach. Academy of management journal, 43(1), 9-25.

[11] Yitshaki, R., & Kropp, F. (2016). Entrepreneurial passions and identities in different contexts: a comparison between high-tech and social entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 28(3-4), 206-233.

[12] Jones, R., & Parry, S. (2011). Business support for new technology-based firms: A study of entrepreneurs in north Wales. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Research, 17(6), 645-662.

[13] Hayton, J. C., & McEvoy, G. M. (2006). Guest editors' note. Human Resource Management, 45(3), 291-294.

[14] McHenry, J. (2002). The role and management of learning from experience in an entrepreneurial context. In Entrepreneurial Learning (pp. 94-114). Routledge.

[15] Wainer, H. A. & Rubin, I. M. (1969). Motivation of research and development entrepreneurs: Determinants of company success. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53(3p1), 178-184.

[16] Tajeddini, K., & Mueller, S. L. (2009). Entrepreneurial characteristics in Switzerland and the UK: A comparative study of techno-entrepreneurs. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 7(1), 1-25.

[17] Yang, J., Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Chen, H., & Niu, F. (2015). Escalation bias among technology entrepreneurs: the moderating effects of motivation and mental budgeting. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management27(6), 693-708.

[18] Autio, E. and Kauranen, I. (1994). Technologist-entrepreneurs versus non-entrepreneurial technologists: Analysis of motivational triggering factors. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 6(4), 315-328.

[19] Knight, R. M. (1989). Technological innovation in Canada: A comparison of independent entrepreneurs and corporate innovators. Journal of Business Venturing, 4(4), 281-288.

[20] Gemmell, R. M., Boland, R. J., & Kolb, D. A. (2012). The socio-cognitive dynamics of entrepreneurial ideation. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 36(5), 1053-1073.

[21] Umesh, U. N., Jessup, L., & Huynh, M. Q. (2007). [Getting ideas to market] Current issues faced by technology entrepreneurs. Communications of the ACM, 50(10), 60-66.

[22] Samson, K. J., & Gurdon, M. A. (1993). University scientists as entrepreneurs: a special case of technology transfer and high-tech venturing. Technovation, 13(2), 63-71.

[23] Marvel, M. R., & Lumpkin, G. T. (2007). Technology entrepreneurs' human capital and its effects on innovation radicalness. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 31(6), 807-828.

[24] Marvel, M. R., & Droege, S. (2010). Prior tacit knowledge and first-year sales: Learning from technology entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 17(1), 32-44.

[25] Roberts, E. B. (1989). The personality and motivations of technological entrepreneurs. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 6(1), 5-23.

[26] Sanchez, A. M., & Perez, O. U. (1998). Entrepreneurship networks and high technology firms: The case of Aragon. Technovation, 18(5), 335-345.

[27] Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative enquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage publications Ltd.

[28] Nazarzadeh, Z. M., Pourkarimi, J., Abili, K., & Zakersalehi, G. (2016). Presenting a pattern for faculty members’ competency in the international engagements: A phenomenological study. Journal of Science and Technology Policy, 8(3), 25-38. {In Persian}.

[29] Boudlaei, H., Khanbashi, M., & Farahani, Gh. (2012). Phenomenological Study about Competencies of Social Entrepreneurs. Journal of Public Administration Perspective, 4(3), 139-165. {In Persian}.

[30] Brinkmann, S. (2013). Qualitative interviewing. Oxford University Press.

[31] Seidman, I. (2013). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences. Teachers college press.

[32] Berglund, H. (2007). Researching entrepreneurship as lived experience. Handbook of qualitative research methods in entrepreneurship, 3, 75-93.

[33] Julien, H. (2008). Content analysis. The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, 2, 120-122.

[34] Cacciotti, G., Hayton, J. C., Mitchell, J. R., & Giazitzoglu, A. (2016). A reconceptualization of fear of failure in entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 31(3), 302-325.

[35] Refai, D., Klapper, R. G., & Thompson, J. (2015). A holistic social constructionist perspective to enterprise education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 21(3), 316-337.

[36] Garrone, P., Grilli, L., & Mrkajic, B. (2018). Human capital of entrepreneurial teams in nascent high-tech sectors: a comparison between Cleantech and Internet. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 30(1), 84-97.

[37] Waseem, D., Biggemann, S., & Garry, T. (2018). Value co-creation: The role of actor competence. Industrial Marketing Management, 70, 5-12.

[38] Buang, N. A., Halim, L., & Mohd Meerah, T. S. (2009). Understanding the thinking of scientists entrepreneurs: Implications for science education in Malaysia. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 6(2), 3-11.

[39] Baum, J. A., & Silverman, B. S. (2004). Picking winners or building them? Alliance, intellectual, and human capital as selection criteria in venture financing and performance of biotechnology startups. Journal of business venturing, 19(3), 411-436.

[40] Cope, J. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry: Philosophical and methodological issues. International Small Business Journal, 23(2), 163-189.