This preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.
Unformatted text preview: ysis tools
they use for decision-making. The chapter concludes by developing a model of
current practice in investment appraisal in the upstream. If there is a gap between
current practice and capability, this model will allow possible reasons for its existence
to be explored.
6.2 THE USE OF DECISION ANALYSIS BY ORGANISATIONS
Drawing on the research interviews, this section establishes first the extent to which
companies are aware of and second, the amount to which they use each of the
128 techniques identified in Chapter 5. This picture of current practice can then be
compared with the 9-step approach presented in figure 5.12 of Section 5.7 in Chapter
5 that represented current capability.
• The concepts of decision tree analysis and EMV Awareness in the industry of the concepts of EMV and decision tree analysis is high
and, in all but one of the companies interviewed, their use in investment appraisal
decision-making is commonplace. Confirming the literature that was reviewed in
Section 5.2 of Chapter 5, the value of a decision tree is appreciated almost universally
in the upstream. Most of the companies have been using decision trees for some time
and find the tool useful. Several respondents believe that decision trees are more
effective in organisational investment decision-making than techniques such as Monte
Carlo simulation because they encourage the explicit consideration of all the potential
outcomes of a decision. This, interviewees feel, is especially valuable when an
investment decision is particularly complex. Some organisations have software packages to assist with structuring and presenting their decision trees. The most
commonly used package is Decision Tree™ (produced by Merak). The majority,
however, are of the opinion that it is easier to draw decision trees by hand:
“…and then they say, “Can you put this decision tree into a drawing program?
And you go, “Eh?” Because it asks for your hierarchies, sub-hierarchies or
whatever. And with our decision tree program there’s an awful lot of
None of the companies reported using influence diagrams to structure their decision
trees. Pearson-Tukey approximations are not employed by any of the companies in
decision tree analysis. Decision trees tend to be used for all the investment decisions
throughout the life of an asset (see figure 5.1 and Section 5.2 of Chapter 5 outlines
these decisions). However, in most organisations decision trees are not presented to,
or used by, the main board. This is issue receives further attention in section 6.3.
Recognising the folly of reliance on only one decision-making criterion (Atrill, 2000)
and echoing earlier observations by Schuyler (1997) and others (Arnold and
Hatzopoulous, 1999; Carr and Tomkins, 1998; Schuyler, 1997; Buckley et al., 1996 129 Fletcher and Dromgoole, 1996; Shao and Shao, 1993; Kim, Farragher and Crick,
1984; Stanley and Block, 1983; Wicks Kelly and Philippatos, 1982; Bavishi, 1981;
Oblak and Helm, 1980 and St...
View Full Document
- Summer '14
- The Land