Chapter 3

Project Selection and

Portfolio Management

03-01
 Chapter 3 Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:
● Explain six criteria for a useful
project-selection/screening model.
● Understand how to employ checklists and simple
scoring models to select projects.
● Use more sophisticated scoring models, such as the
Analytical Hierarchy Process.
● Learn how to use financial concepts, such as the
efficient frontier and risk/return models.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-02

 Chapter 3 Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:
● Employ financial analyses and options analysis to
evaluate the potential for new project investments.
● Recognize the challenges that arise in maintaining an
optimal project portfolio for an organization.
● Understand the three keys to successful project
portfolio management.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-03

 Project Selection
Screening models help managers pick winners from a
pool of projects. Screening models should have:

Realism
Capability
Flexibility
Ease of use
Cost effectiveness
Comparability

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-04

 Project Selection
Screening models are:
Numeric
● Seek to use numbers as input for decision.
● These values can be derived either objectively,
subjectively.
Nonnumeric
● Don’t employ the numbers in decision rather rely on
other data.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 5

 Screening & Selection Issues
● Risk – unpredictability to the firm
● Commercial – market potential
● Internal operating – changes in firm operations
● Additional – image, patent, fit, etc.

All models only partially reflect reality and

have both objective and subjective factors
imbedded

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-06

 Screening & Selection Issues

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 7

 Approaches to Project Screening
● Checklist model
● Simplified scoring models

● Analytic hierarchy process

● Profile models
● Financial models

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-08

 Checklist Model
A checklist is a list of criteria applied to possible
projects.

✓Requires agreement on criteria

✓Assumes all criteria are equally important

Checklists are valuable for recording opinions and

encouraging discussion

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-07

 Checklist Model ( in deciding new product)

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 10

 Checklist Model
Performance on Criteria
Project Criteria High Medium Low
Project Alpha Cost X
Profit Potential X
Time X
Development Risk X
Project Beta Cost X
Profit Potential X
Time X
Development Risk X

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 11

 Simplified Scoring Models
Each project receives a score that is the weighted sum
of its grade on a list of criteria. Scoring models require:
▪ agreement on criteria
▪ agreement on weights for criteria
▪ a score assigned for each criteria

Relative scores can be misleading!

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-012

 Simplified Scoring Models

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 13

 Analytic Hierarchy Process
The AHP is a four step process:
1. Construct a hierarchy of criteria and subcriteria
2. Allocate weights to criteria
3. Assign numerical values to evaluation dimensions
4. Scores determined by summing the products of
numeric evaluations and weights
Unlike the simple scoring model, these scores can be
compared!

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-014

 FIGURE 3.1  Sample AHP with Rankings for Salient Selection Criteria
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-15
Analytic Hierarchy Process

16
 Profile Models
Show risk/return options for projects.
X7
X6
Maximum
Desired Risk

Criteria
X2 selection as
axes
Risk

X4 X5

Efficient Frontier
X3
Rating each
project on
X1
criteria
Minimum Return
Desired Return
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
Figure 3.4 03-17
 Efficient Frontier

Figure 3.5
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-18
 Financial Models
Based on the time value of money principal

● Payback period
● Net present value
● Internal rate of return
● Options models

All of these models use discounted cash flows

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-19

 Payback Period
Determines how long it takes for a project
to reach a breakeven point

Cash flows should be discounted

Lower numbers are better (faster payback)

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-20

 Payback Period Example
A project requires an initial investment of $200,000 and
will generate cash savings of $75,000 each year for the next
five years. What is the payback period?
Year Cash Flow Cumulative Divide the
0 ($200,000) ($200,000) cumulative amount
by the cash flow
1 $75,000 ($125,000) amount in the third
2 $75,000 ($50,000) year and subtract
from 3 to find out
3 $75,000 $25,000
the moment the
project breaks
even.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-21
 Net Present Value
Projects the change in the firm’s stock value if a project
is undertaken.

Higher NPV
values are better!

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-22

 Net Present Value Example
Should you invest $60,000 in a project that will return $15,000
per year for five years? You have a minimum return of 8% and
expect inflation to hold steady at 3% over the next five years.
The NPV
Year Net flow Discount NPV
column total
0 -$60,000 1.0000 -$60,000.00
is negative,
1 $15,000 0.9009 $13,513.51
so don’t
2 $15,000 0.8116 $12,174.34
invest!
3 $15,000 0.7312 $10,967.87
4 $15,000 0.6587 $9,880.96
5 $15,000 0.5935 $8,901.77
-$4,561.54
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-23
 Internal Rate of Return
A project must meet a minimum rate of return
before it is worthy of consideration.

Higher IRR values

are better!

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-24

 Internal Rate of Return Example
A project that costs $40,000 will generate cash flows of
$14,000 for the next four years. You have a rate of return
requirement of 17%; does this project meet the threshold?

Year Net flow Discount NPV

This table
0 -$40,000 1.0000 -$40,000.00
has been
1 $14,000 0.9009 $12,173.91
calculated
2 $14,000 0.8116 $10,586.01
using a
3 $14,000 0.7312 $9,205.23 discount
4 $14,000 0.6587 $8,004.55 rate of
-$30.30 15%

The project doesn’t meet our 17% requirement

and should not be considered further.
Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-25
 Options Models
NPV and IRR methods don’t account for failure to
make a positive return on investment. Options
models allow for this possibility.

Options models address:

1. Can the project be postponed?
2. Will future information help decide?

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-26

 Project Portfolio

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall FIGURE 3.6  GE’s Tollgate Process 03-27
 GE Tollgate Review Process Flow Map

Figure 3.7 03-28

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall
 Project Portfolio Management
The systematic process of selecting, supporting, and
managing the firm’s collection of projects.
Portfolio management requires:
decision making,
prioritization,
review,
realignment, and
reprioritization of a firm’s projects.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-29

 Pharmaceuticals Development Process

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall Figure 3.8 03-30
 Keys to Successful
Project Portfolio Management
❖Flexible structure and freedom of
communication

❖Low-cost environmental scanning

❖Time-paced transition

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-31

 Problems in Implementing
Portfolio Management

➢Conservative technical communities

➢Out of sync projects and portfolios

➢Unpromising projects

➢Scarce resources

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-32

 Summary
1. Explain six criteria for a useful project-selection
screening model.
2. Understand how to employ checklists and simple
scoring models to select projects, including the
recognition of their strengths and weaknesses.
3. Use more sophisticated scoring models, such as the
Analytical Hierarchy Process.
4. Learn how to use financial concepts, such as the
efficient frontier and risk/return models.

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-33

 Summary
5. Employ financial analyses and options analysis to
evaluate the potential for new project investments.
6. Recognize the challenges that arise in maintaining
an optimal project portfolio for an organization.
7. Understand the three keys to successful project
portfolio management. 

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-34

Copyright © 2013 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall 03-35