Quantitative Analysis for Management

Thirteenth Edition

Chapter 3
Decision Analysis

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:
3.1 List the steps of the decision-making process.
3.2 Describe the types of decision-making environments.
3.3 Make decisions under uncertainty.
3.4 Use probability values to make decisions under risk.
3.5 Use computers to solve basic decision-making
problems.
3.6 Develop accurate and useful decision trees.
3.7 Revise probabilities using Bayesian analysis.
3.8 Understand the importance and use of utility theory in
decision making.
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Chapter Outline
3.1 The Six Steps in Decision Making
3.2 Types of Decision-Making Environments
3.3 Decision Making Under Uncertainty
3.4 Decision Making Under Risk
3.5 Using Software for Payoff Table Problems
3.6 Decision Trees
3.7 How Probability Values Are Estimated by Bayesian
Analysis
3.8 Utility Theory

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Introduction
• What is involved in making a good decision?

• Decision theory is an analytic and systematic approach to

the study of decision making

• A good decision is one that is based on logic, considers all

available data and possible alternatives, and applies a
quantitative approach

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
The Six Steps in Decision Making
1. Clearly define the problem at hand

2. List the possible alternatives

3. Identify the possible outcomes or states of nature

4. List the payoff (typically profit) of each combination of

alternatives and outcomes

5. Select one of the mathematical decision theory models

6. Apply the model and make your decision

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson Lumber Company (1 of 3)
• Step 1 – Define the problem
• Consider expanding by manufacturing and
marketing a new product – backyard storage
sheds
• Step 2 – List alternatives
• Construct a large new plant
• Construct a small new plant
• Do not develop the new product line
• Step 3 – Identify possible outcomes, states of nature
• The market could be favorable or unfavorable

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson Lumber Company (2 of 3)
• Step 4 – List the payoffs
• Identify conditional values for the profits for
large plant, small plant, and no development
for the two possible market conditions

• Step 5 – Select the decision model

• Depends on the environment and amount of
risk and uncertainty

• Step 6 – Apply the model to the data

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson Lumber Company (3 of 3)
TABLE 3.1 Decision Table with Conditional Values for
Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
MARKET MARKET
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000
Do nothing 0 0

Note: It is important to include all alternatives, including “do

nothing.”

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Types of Decision-Making Environments
• Decision making under certainty
– The decision maker knows with certainty the
consequences of every alternative or decision choice

• Decision making under uncertainty

– The decision maker does not know the probabilities of
the various outcomes

• Decision making under risk

– The decision maker knows the probabilities of the
various outcomes

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Decision Making Under Uncertainty
• Criteria for making decisions under uncertainty

1. Maximax (optimistic)
2. Maximin (pessimistic)
3. Criterion of realism (Hurwicz)
4. Equally likely (Laplace)
5. Minimax regret

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Optimistic
• Used to find the alternative that maximizes the maximum
payoff – maximax criterion
– Locate the maximum payoff for each alternative
– Select the alternative with the maximum number
TABLE 3.2 Thompson’s Maximax Decision
STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN

Blank MARKET MARKET A ROW

ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 200,000
Blank Blank Blank Maximax
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 100,000
Do nothing 0 0 0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Pessimistic
• Used to find the alternative that maximizes the minimum
payoff – maximin criterion
– Locate the minimum payoff for each alternative
– Select the alternative with the maximum number
TABLE 3.3 Thompson’s Maximin Decision
STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
Blank MARKET MARKET A ROW
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 −180,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 −20,000
Do nothing 0 0 0
Blank Blank Blank Maximin

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz) (1 of 2)
• Often called weighted average
– Compromise between optimism and pessimism
– Select a coefficient of realism α, with 0 ≤ α ≤ 1
α = 1 is perfectly optimistic
α = 0 is perfectly pessimistic
– Compute the weighted averages for each alternative
– Select the alternative with the highest value

Weighted average = α(best in row)

+ (1−α)(worst in row)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz) (2 of 2)
For the large plant alternative using α = 0.8
(0.8)(200,000) + (1−0.8)(−180,000) = 124,000
For the small plant alternative using α = 0.8
(0.8)(100,000) + (1−0.8)(−20,000) = 76,000
TABLE 3.4 Thompson’s Criterion of Realism Decision
STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE CRITERION OF REALISM
Blank MARKET MARKET OR WEIGHTED AVERAGE
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) (α = 0.8) ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 124,000
Blank Blank Blank Realism
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 76,000
Do nothing 0 0 0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Equally Likely (Laplace)
• Considers all the payoffs for each alternative
– Find the average payoff for each alternative
– Select the alternative with the highest average

TABLE 3.5 Thompson’s Equally Likely Decision

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Blank
Blank MARKET MARKET ROW AVERAGE
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 10,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 40,000
Blank Blank Blank Equally likely
Do nothing 0 0 0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Minimax Regret (1 of 4)
• Based on opportunity loss or regret
– The difference between the optimal profit and actual
payoff for a decision
1. Create an opportunity loss table by determining the
opportunity loss from not choosing the best
alternative
2. Calculate opportunity loss by subtracting each
payoff in the column from the best payoff in the
column
3. Find the maximum opportunity loss for each
alternative and pick the alternative with the
minimum number
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Minimax Regret (2 of 4)
TABLE 3.6 Determining Opportunity Losses for Thompson
Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
MARKET MARKET
($) ($)
200,000 − 200,000 0 − (−180,000)
200,000 − 100,000 0 − (−20,000)
200,000 − 0 0−0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Minimax Regret (3 of 4)
TABLE 3.7 Opportunity Loss Table for Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
Blank MARKET MARKET
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 0 180,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 20,000
Do nothing 200,000 0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Minimax Regret (4 of 4)
TABLE 3.8 Thompson’s Minimax Decision Using
Opportunity Loss

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
Blank MARKET MARKET A ROW
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) ($)
Construct a large plant 0 180,000 180,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 20,000 100,000
Blank Blank Blank Minimax
Do nothing 200,000 0 200,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Decision Making Under Risk (1 of 2)
• When there are several possible states of nature and the
probabilities associated with each possible state are
known
– Most popular method – choose the alternative with the
highest expected monetary value (EMV)
EMV  alternative  =  X i P  X i 
 

where
Xi = payoff for the alternative in state of nature i
P(Xi) = probability of achieving payoff Xi (i.e., probability of
state of nature i)
∑ = summation symbol
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Decision Making Under Risk (2 of 2)
• Expanding the equation

EMV (alternative i) = (payoff of first state of nature)

×(probability of first state of nature)
+ (payoff of second state of nature)
×(probability of second state of
nature)
+ … + (payoff of last state of nature)
×(probability of last state of nature)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
EMV for Thompson Lumber (1 of 2)
• Each market outcome has a probability of occurrence of
0.50
• Which alternative would give the highest EMV?

EMV (large plant) = ($200,000)(0.5) + (−$180,000)(0.5)

= $10,000
EMV (small plant) = ($100,000)(0.5) + (−$20,000)(0.5)
= $40,000
EMV (do nothing) = ($0)(0.5) + ($0)(0.5)
= $0

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
EMV for Thompson Lumber (2 of 2)
TABLE 3.9 Decision Table with Probabilities and EMVs for
Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Blank
Blank MARKET MARKET Blank
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 10,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 40,000
Blank Blank Blank Best EMV
Do nothing 0 0 0
Probabilities 0.50 0.50 Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (1 of 6)
• EVPI places an upper bound on what you should pay for
additional information
• EVwPI is the long run average return if we have perfect
information before a decision is made
EVwPI = ∑(best payoff in state of nature i)
(probability of state of nature i)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (2 of 6)
• Expanded EVwPI becomes
EVwPI = (best payoff for first state of nature)
× (probability of first state of nature)
+ (best payoff for second state of nature)
× (probability of second state of nature)
+ … + (best payoff for last state of nature)
× (probability of last state of nature)

And
EVPI = EVwPI − Best EMV

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (3 of 6)
• Scientific Marketing, Inc. offers analysis that will provide
certainty about market conditions (favorable)
• Additional information will cost $65,000
• Should Thompson Lumber purchase the information?

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (4 of 6)
TABLE 3.10 Decision Table with Perfect Information

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Blank
Blank MARKET MARKET Blank
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 −180,000 10,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 −20,000 40,000
Do nothing 0 0 0
With perfect information 200,000 0 100,000
Blank Blank Blank EVwPI
Probabilities 0.50 0.50 Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (5 of 6)
• The maximum EMV without additional information is
$40,000
– Therefore

EVPI = EVwPI − Maximum EMV

= $100,000 − $40,000
= $60,000

So the maximum Thompson should pay for the

additional information is $60,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Perfect Information
(EVPI) (6 of 6)
• The maximum EMV without additional information is
$40,000
– Therefore Thompson should not pay $65,000
for this information

EVPI = EVwPI − Maximum EMV

= $100,000 − $40,000
= $60,000

So the maximum Thompson should pay for the

additional information is $60,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Opportunity Loss (1 of 2)
• Expected opportunity loss (EOL) is the cost of not picking
the best solution
– Construct an opportunity loss table
– For each alternative, multiply the opportunity loss by
the probability of that loss for each possible outcome
and add these together
– Minimum EOL will always result in the same decision
as maximum EMV
– Minimum EOL will always equal EVPI

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Opportunity Loss (2 of 2)
EOL (large plant) = (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($180,000) = $90,000
EOL (small plant) = (0.50)($100,000) + (0.50)($20,000) = $60,000
EOL (do nothing) = (0.50)($200,000) + (0.50)($0) = $100,000

TABLE 3.11 EOL Table for Thompson Lumber

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE Blank
Blank MARKET MARKET Blank
ALTERNATIVE ($) ($) EOL ($)
Construct a large plant 0 180,000 90,000
Construct a small plant 100,000 20,000 60,000
Blank Blank Blank Best EOL
Do nothing 200,000 0 100,000
Probabilities 0.50 0.50 Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sensitivity Analysis (1 of 4)
Define P = probability of a favorable market
EMV(large plant) = $200,000P − $180,000)(1 − P)
= $200,000P − $180,000 + $180,000P
= $380,000P − $180,000
EMV(small plant) = $100,000P − $20,000)(1 − P)
= $100,000P − $20,000 + $20,000P
= $120,000P − $20,000
EMV(do nothing) = $0P + 0(1 − P)
= $0
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sensitivity Analysis (2 of 4)
FIGURE 3.1 Sensitivity Analysis

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sensitivity Analysis (3 of 4)
Point 1: EMV(do nothing) = EMV(small plant)

20,000
0 = $120,000P − $20,000 P= = 0.167
120,000

Point 2: EMV(small plant) = EMV(large plant)

$120,000P - $20,000 = $380,000P - $180,000
160,000
P= = 0.615
260,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sensitivity Analysis (4 of 4)
FIGURE 3.1 Sensitivity Analysis

BEST ALTERNATIVE RANGE OF P VALUES

Do nothing Less than 0.167
Construct a small plant 0.167 − 0.615
Construct a large plant Greater than 0.615
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (1 of 8)
• Three year lease for a copy machine
– Which machine should be selected?

TABLE 3.12 Payoff Table with Monthly Copy Costs for

Business Analytics Department

Blank 10,000 20,000 30,000

COPIES PER COPIES PER COPIES PER
MONTH MONTH MONTH
Machine A 950 1,050 1,150
Machine B 850 1,100 1,350
Machine C 700 1,000 1,300

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (2 of 8)
• Three year lease for a copy machine
– Which machine should be selected?

TABLE 3.13 Best and Worst Payoffs (Costs) for Business

Analytics Department

Blank 10,000 20,000 30,000 BEST WORST

COPIES PER COPIES PER COPIES PER PAYOFF PAYOFF
MONTH MONTH MONTH (MINIMUM) (MAXIMUM)
Machine A 950 1,050 1,150 950 1,150

Machine B 850 1,100 1,350 850 1,350

Machine C 700 1,000 1,300 700 1,300

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (3 of 8)
• Using Hurwicz criteria with 70% coefficient

Weighted average = 0.7(best payoff)

+ (1 − 0.7)(worst payoff)

For each machine

Machine A: 0.7(950) + 0.3(1,150) = 1,010
Machine B: 0.7(850) + 0.3(1,350) = 1,000
Machine C: 0.7(700) + 0.3(1,300) = 880

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (4 of 8)
• For equally likely criteria

For each machine

Machine A: (950 + 1,050 + 1,150)÷3 = 1,050
Machine B: (850 + 1,100 + 1,350)÷3 = 1,100
Machine C: (700 + 1,000
ç + 1,300)÷3 = 1,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (5 of 8)
• For EMV criteria

USAGE PROBABILITY
10,000 0.40
20,000 0.30
30,000 0.30

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (6 of 8)
• For EMV criteria

TABLE 3.14 Expected Monetary Values and Expected

Values with Perfect Information for Business Analytics
Department
Blank 10,000 20,000 30,000
COPIES PER COPIES PER COPIES PER
MONTH MONTH MONTH EMV
Machine A 950 1,050 1,150 1,040

Machine B 850 1,100 1,350 1,075

Machine C 700 1,000 1,300 970

With perfect information 700 1,000 1,150 925

Probability 0.4 0.3 0.3 Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (7 of 8)
• For EVPI

TABLE 3.14 Expected Monetary Values and Expected

Values with Perfect Information EVwPI = $925
for Business Analytics
Department
Best EMV without perfect information = $970
Blank 10,000 20,000 30,000
EVPI
COPIES =
PER 970 − 925
COPIES PER= $45
COPIES PER
MONTH MONTH MONTH EMV
Machine A 950 1,050 1,150 1,040

Machine B 850 1,100 1,350 1,075

Machine C 700 1,000 1,300 970

With perfect information 700 1,000 1,150 925

Probability 0.4 0.3 0.3 Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
A Minimization Example (8 of 8)
• Opportunity loss criteria

TABLE 3.15 Opportunity Loss Table for Business Analytics

Department

Blank 20,000 30,000

10,000 COPIES
COPIES PER COPIES PER
PER MONTH
MONTH MONTH MAXIMUM EOL
Machine A 250 50 0 250 115

Machine B 150 100 200 200 150

Machine C 0 0 150 150 45

Probability 0.4 0.3 0.3 Blank Blank

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Software (1 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.1A QM for Windows Input for Thompson
umber Example

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Software (2 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.1B QM for Windows Output Screen for
Thompson Lumber Example

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Excel (1 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.2A Excel QM Results for Thompson Lumber
Example

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Excel (2 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.2B Key Formulas in Excel QM for Thompson
Lumber Example

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Decision Trees
• Any problem that can be presented in a decision table can
be graphically represented in a decision tree
– Most beneficial when a sequence of decisions must be
made
– All decision trees contain decision points/nodes and
state-of-nature points/nodes
– At decision nodes one of several alternatives may be
chosen
– At state-of-nature nodes one state of nature will occur

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Five Steps of Decision Tree Analysis
1. Define the problem
2. Structure or draw the decision tree
3. Assign probabilities to the states of nature
4. Estimate payoffs for each possible combination of
alternatives and states of nature
5. Solve the problem by computing expected monetary
values (EMVs) for each state of nature node

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Structure of Decision Trees
• Trees start from left to right
• Trees represent decisions and outcomes in sequential
order
• Squares represent decision nodes
• Circles represent states of nature nodes
• Lines or branches connect the decisions nodes and the
states of nature

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Decision Tree (1 of 2)
FIGURE 3.2 Thompson’s Decision Tree

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Decision Tree (2 of 2)
FIGURE 3.3 Completed and Solved Decision Tree for
Thompson Lumber

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree (1 of 5)
FIGURE 3.4 Larger Decision Tree with Payoffs and
Probabilities for Thompson Lumber

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree (2 of 5)
1. Given favorable survey results

EMV(node 2) = EMV(large plant | positive survey)

= (0.78)($190,000) + (0.22)(−$190,000)
= $106,400
EMV(node 3) = EMV(small plant | positive survey)
= (0.78)($90,000) + (0.22)(−$30,000)
= $63,600
EMV for no plant = −$10,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree (3 of 5)
2. Given negative survey results

EMV(node 4) = EMV(large plant | negative survey)

= (0.27)($190,000) + (0.73)(−$190,000)
= −$87,400
EMV(node 5) = EMV(small plant | negative survey)
= (0.27)($90,000) + (0.73)(−$30,000)
= $2,400
EMV for no plant = −$10,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s
The best Complex Decision
choice is to seek Tree
marketing information
(4 of 5)

3. Expected value of the market survey

EMV(node 1) = EMV(conduct survey)
= (0.45)($106,400) + (0.55)($2,400)
= $47,880 + $1,320 = $49,200
4. Expected value no market survey
EMV(node 6)= EMV(large plant)
= (0.50)($200,000) + (0.50)(−$180,000)
= $10,000
EMV(node 7)= EMV(small plant)
= (0.50)($100,000) + (0.50)(−$20,000)
= $40,000
EMV for no plant = $0
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree (5 of 5)
FIGURE 3.5 Thompson’s Decision Tree with EMVs Shown

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Expected Value of Sample Information
• Thompson wants to know the actual value of doing the
survey

 Expected value   Expected value of best 

  
EV SI =  with sample   decision without sample 
 information   information 
  

= (EV with SI + cost) − (EV without SI)

EVSI = ($49,200 + $10,000) − $40,000 = $19,200

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 Market survey is only 32% as
Efficiency of Sampleefficient
Information
as perfect information
• Possibly many types of sample information available
• Different sources can be evaluated

EVSI
Efficiency of sample information = 100%
EVPI

• For Thompson

19,200
Efficiency of sample information = 100% = 32%
60,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Sensitivity Analysis (1 of 2)
• How sensitive are the decisions to changes in the
probabilities?
• How sensitive is our decision to the probability of a
favorable survey result?
• If the probability of a favorable result (p = .45) were to
change, would we make the same decision?
• How much could it change before we would make a
different decision?

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 If p < 0.36, do not conduct the survey
Sensitivity Analysis
If p > (2 of 2)conduct the survey
0.36,

p = probability of a favorable survey result

(1−p) = probability of a negative survey result
EMV(node 1) = ($106,400)p +($2,400)(1−p)
= $104,000p + $2,400
We are indifferent when the EMV of node 1 is the same as
the EMV of not conducting the survey
$104,000p + $2,400 = $40,000
$104,000p = $37,600
p = $37,600÷$104,000 = 0.36

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Bayesian Analysis
• Many ways of getting probability data
– Management’s experience and intuition
– Historical data
– Computed from other data using Bayes’ theorem
• Bayes’ theorem incorporates initial estimates and
information about the accuracy of the sources
• Allows the revision of initial estimates based on new
information

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (1 of 7)
• Four conditional probabilities for Thompson Lumber

P(favorable market(FM) | survey results positive) = 0.78

P(unfavorable market(UM) | survey results positive) = 0.22
P(favorable market(FM) | survey results negative) = 0.27
P(unfavorable market(UM) | survey results negative) = 0.73

• Prior probabilities
P(FM) = 0.50
P(UM) = 0.50

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (2 of 7)
TABLE 3.16 Market Survey Reliability in Predicting States of
Nature

STATE OF NATURE
Blank FAVORABLE MARKET UNFAVORABLE MARKET
RESULT OF SURVEY (FM) (UM)
Positive (predicts P (survey positive | FM) P (survey positive | UM
favorable market for = 0.70 = 0.20
product)
Negative (predicts P (survey negative | FM) P (survey negative | UM)
unfavorable = 0.30 = 0.80
market for product)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (3 of 7)
• Calculating posterior probabilities

P (B | A )  P ( A )
P(A | B) =
P ( B | A )  P ( A ) + P ( B | A  )  P ( A )

where
A, B = any two events
A’ = complement of A
A = favorable market
B = positive survey
Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (4 of 7)
• P(FM | survey positive)
P (survey positive | FM)P (FM)
=
P (survey positive | FM)P (FM) + P (survey positive | UM)P (UM)
(0.70)(0.50) 0.35
= = = 0.78
(0.70)(0.50)+(0.20)(0.50) 0.45

• P(UM | survey positive)

P(survey positive | UM)P(UM)
=
P(survey positive | UM)P(UM) + P(survey positive | FM)P(FM)
(0.20)(0.50) 0.10
= = = 0.22
(0.20)(0.50)+(0.70)(0.50) 0.45

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (5 of 7)
TABLE 3.17 Probability Revisions Given a Positive Survey

POSTERIOR PROBABILITY

CONDITIONAL
PROBABILITY P(STATE OF
P(SURVEY NATURE |
STATE OF POSITIVE | STATE PRIOR JOINT SURVEY
NATURE OF NATURE) PROBABILITY PROBABILITY POSITIVE)
0.35÷0.45
FM 0.70 × 0.50 = 0.35 Blank 0.78
=
0.10÷0.45
UM 0.20 × 0.50 = 0.10 Blank 0.22
=
P(survey results
Blank Blank = 0.45 Blank Blank 1.00
positive)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (6 of 7)
• P(FM | survey negative)
P (survey negative | FM)P (FM)
=
P (survey negative | FM)P (FM) + P (survey negative | UM)P (UM)
(0.30)(0.50) 0.15
= = = 0.27
(0.30)(0.50)+(0.80)(0.50) 0.55

• P(UM | survey negative)

P (survey negative | UM)P (UM)
=
P (survey negative | UM)P (UM) + P (survey negative | FM)P (FM)
(0.80)(0.50) 0.40
= = = 0.73
(0.80)(0.50)+(0.30)(0.50) 0.55

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Calculating Revised Probabilities (7 of 7)
TABLE 3.18 Probability Revisions Given a Negative Survey
POSTERIOR PROBABILITY
CONDITIONAL
PROBABILITY P(STATE OF
P(SURVEY NATURE |
STATE OF NEGATIVE | STATE PRIOR JOINT SURVEY
NATURE OF NATURE) PROBABILITY PROBABILITY NEGATIVE)
0.15÷0.55
FM 0.30 × 0.50 = 0.15 Blank 0.27
=
0.40÷0.55
UM 0.80 × 0.50 = 0.40 Blank 0.73
=
P(survey
Blank Blank results = 0.55 Blank Blank 1.00
negative)

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Excel (1 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.3A Results of Bayes’ Calculations in Excel
2016

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Using Excel (2 of 2)
PROGRAM 3.3B Formulas Used for Bayes’ Calculations in
Excel 2016

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Potential Problems Using Survey Results
• We can not always get the necessary data for analysis
• Survey results may be based on cases where an action
was taken
• Conditional probability information may not be as accurate
as we would like

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Theory (1 of 5)
• Monetary value is not always a true indicator of the overall
value of the result of a decision
• The overall value of a decision is called utility
• Economists assume that rational people make decisions to
maximize their utility

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Theory (2 of 5)
FIGURE 3.6 Your Decision Tree for the Lottery Ticket

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Theory (3 of 5)
• Utility assessment assigns the worst outcome a utility of
0 and the best outcome a utility of 1
• A standard gamble is used to determine utility values
• When you are indifferent, your utility values are equal

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Theory (4 of 5)
FIGURE 3.7 Standard Gamble for Utility Assessment

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Theory (5 of 5)
Expected utility of alternative 2
= Expected utility of alternative 1
Utility of other outcome
= (p)(utility of best outcome, which is 1)
+ (1−p)(utility of the worst outcome, which is 0)
Utility of other outcome
= (p)(1) + (1−p)(0) = p

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Investment Example (1 of 3)
• Construct a utility curve revealing preference for money
between $0 and $10,000
• A utility curve plots the utility value versus the monetary
value
– An investment in a bank will result in $5,000
– An investment in real estate will result in $0 or $10,000
– Unless there is an 80% chance of getting $10,000
from the real estate deal, prefer to have her money in
the bank
– If p = 0.80, Jane is indifferent between the bank or the
real estate investment

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Investment Example (2 of 3)
FIGURE 3.8 Utility of $5,000

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Investment Example (3 of 3)
• Assess other utility values
Utility for $7,000 = 0.90
Utility for $3,000 = 0.50

• Use the three different dollar amounts and assess utilities

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Curve (1 of 2)
FIGURE 3.9 Utility Curve for Jane Dickson

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility Curve (2 of 2)
• Typical of a risk avoider
– Less utility from greater risk
– Avoids situations where high losses might occur
– As monetary value increases, utility curve increases at
a slower rate
• A risk seeker gets more utility from greater risk
– As monetary value increases, the utility curve
increases at a faster rate
• Risk indifferent gives a linear utility curve

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Preferences for Risk
FIGURE 3.10 Preferences for Risk

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (1 of 6)
• Once a utility curve has been developed it can be used in
making decisions
• Replaces monetary outcomes with utility values
• Expected utility is computed instead of the EMV

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (2 of 6)
• Mark Simkin loves to gamble
– A game tossing thumbtacks in the air
– If the thumbtack lands point up, Mark wins $10,000
– If the thumbtack lands point down, Mark loses $10,000
– Mark believes that there is a 45% chance the
thumbtack will land point up
• Should Mark play the game (alternative 1)?

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (3 of 6)
FIGURE 3.11 Decision Facing Mark Simkin

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (4 of 6)
Step 1– Define Mark’s utilities
U(−$10,000)= 0.05
U($0) = 0.15
U($10,000) = 0.30

FIGURE 3.12 Utility Curve

for Mark Simkin

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (5 of 6)
Step 2 – Replace monetary values with utility values

E(alternative 1: play the game) = (0.45)(0.30) + (0.55)(0.05)

= 0.135 + 0.027 = 0.162
E(alternative 2: don’t play the game) = 0.15

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Utility as a Decision-Making Criteria (6 of 6)
FIGURE 3.13 Using Expected Utilities in Decision Making

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Copyright

Copyright © 2018, 2015, 2012 Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved.