RSH Qam11 ch03
RSH Qam11 ch03
RSH Qam11 ch03
Decision Analysis
To accompany
Quantitative Analysis for Management, Eleventh Edition,
by Render, Stair, and Hanna
Power Point slides created by Brian Peterson
3-2
Learning Objectives
After completing this chapter, students will be able to:
3-3
Chapter Outline
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Six Steps in Decision Making
3.3 Types of Decision-Making
Environments
3.4 Decision Making under Uncertainty
3.5 Decision Making under Risk
3.6 Decision Trees
3.7 How Probability Values Are
Estimated by Bayesian Analysis
3.8 Utility Theory
3-4
Introduction
3-5
The Six Steps in Decision Making
3-6
Thompson Lumber Company
3-8
Thompson Lumber Company
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($)
Construct a large plant 200,000 –180,000
Do nothing 0 0
Table 3.1
3-9
Types of Decision-Making
Environments
3-10
Decision Making Under
Uncertainty
There are several criteria for making decisions
under uncertainty:
1. Maximax (optimistic)
2. Maximin (pessimistic)
3. Criterion of realism (Hurwicz)
4. Equally likely (Laplace)
5. Minimax regret
3-11
Maximax
Used to find the alternative that maximizes the
maximum payoff.
Locate the maximum payoff for each alternative.
Select the alternative with the maximum number.
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large 200,000 –180,000 200,000
plant
Maximax
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 100,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.2
3-12
Maximin
Used to find the alternative that maximizes
the minimum payoff.
Locate the minimum payoff for each alternative.
Select the alternative with the maximum
number.
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MINIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large 200,000 –180,000 –180,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 –20,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.3 Maximin
3-13
Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz)
This is a weighted average compromise
between optimism and pessimism.
Select a coefficient of realism , with 0≤α≤1.
A value of 1 is perfectly optimistic, while a
value of 0 is perfectly pessimistic.
Compute the weighted averages for each
alternative.
Select the alternative with the highest value.
3-14
Criterion of Realism (Hurwicz)
For the large plant alternative using = 0.8:
(0.8)(200,000) + (1 – 0.8)(–180,000) = 124,000
For the small plant alternative using = 0.8:
(0.8)(100,000) + (1 – 0.8)(–20,000) = 76,000
STATE OF NATURE
CRITERION
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE OF REALISM
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) ( = 0.8) $
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 124,000
plant
Realism
Construct a small 100,000 –20,000 76,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.4
3-15
Equally Likely (Laplace)
Considers all the payoffs for each alternative
Find the average payoff for each alternative.
Select the alternative with the highest average.
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE ROW
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) AVERAGE ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 40,000
plant
Equally likely
Do nothing 0 0 0
Table 3.5
3-16
Minimax Regret
Based on opportunity loss or regret,
regret this is
the difference between the optimal profit and
actual payoff for a decision.
Create an opportunity loss table by determining
the opportunity loss from not choosing the best
alternative.
Opportunity loss is calculated by subtracting
each payoff in the column from the best payoff
in the column.
Find the maximum opportunity loss for each
alternative and pick the alternative with the
minimum number.
3-17
Minimax Regret
Determining Opportunity Losses for Thompson Lumber
STATE OF NATURE
200,000 – 0 0–0
Table 3.6
3-18
Minimax Regret
Opportunity Loss Table for Thompson Lumber
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($)
Construct a large plant 0 180,000
Do nothing 200,000 0
Table 3.7
3-19
Minimax Regret
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE MAXIMUM IN
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) A ROW ($)
Construct a large
0 180,000 180,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 20,000 100,000
plant
Minimax
Do nothing 200,000 0 200,000
Table 3.8
3-20
Decision Making Under Risk
This is decision making when there are several
possible states of nature, and the probabilities
associated with each possible state are known.
The most popular method is to choose the
alternative with the highest expected monetary
value (EMV).
This is very similar to the expected value calculated in
the last chapter.
3-22
EMV for Thompson Lumber
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large
200,000 –180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 –20,000 40,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
Probabilities 0.50 0.50
3-23
Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
EVPI places an upper bound on what you should
pay for additional information.
EVPI = EVwPI – Maximum EMV
3-24
Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
Suppose Scientific Marketing, Inc. offers
analysis that will provide certainty about
market conditions (favorable).
Additional information will cost $65,000.
Should Thompson Lumber purchase the
information?
3-25
Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
Decision Table with Perfect Information
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EMV ($)
Construct a large
200,000 -180,000 10,000
plant
Construct a small
100,000 -20,000 40,000
plant
Do nothing 0 0 0
With perfect
200,000 0 100,000
information
EVwPI
Probabilities 0.5 0.5
Table 3.10
3-26
Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
3-27
Expected Value of Perfect
Information (EVPI)
3-28
Expected Opportunity Loss
3-29
Expected Opportunity Loss
STATE OF NATURE
FAVORABLE UNFAVORABLE
ALTERNATIVE MARKET ($) MARKET ($) EOL
Construct a large plant 0 180,000 90,000
Construct a small
100,000 20,000 60,000
plant
Do nothing 200,000 0 100,000
Probabilities 0.50 0.50
Table 3.11 Minimum EOL
arge plant) = (0.50)($0) + (0.50)($180,000)
= $90,000
mall plant) = (0.50)($100,000) + (0.50)($20,000)
= $60,000
o nothing) = (0.50)($200,000) + (0.50)($0)
= $100,000
3-30
Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analysis examines how the decision
might change with different input data.
For the Thompson Lumber example:
3-31
Sensitivity Analysis
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
3-32
Sensitivity Analysis
EMV Values
$300,000
$200,000
Point 2 EMV (large plant)
$100,000
Point 1 EMV (small plant)
0
EMV (do nothing)
–$100,000
.167 .615 1
–$200,000 Values of P
Figure 3.1
3-33
Sensitivity Analysis
Point 1:
EMV(do nothing) = EMV(small plant)
20,000
0 $120,000 P $20,000 P 0.167
120,000
Point 2:
EMV(small plant) = EMV(large plant)
$120,000 P $20,000 $380,000 P $180,000
160,000
P 0.615
260,000
3-34
Sensitivity Analysis
BEST RANGE OF P
ALTERNATIVE VALUES
Do nothing Less than 0.167
EMV Values
Construct a small plant 0.167 – 0.615
$300,000 Construct a large plant Greater than 0.615
$200,000
Point 2 EMV (large plant)
$100,000
Point 1 EMV (small plant)
0
EMV (do nothing)
–$100,000
.167 .615 1
–$200,000 Values of P
Figure 3.1
3-35
Using Excel
Input Data for the Thompson Lumber Problem
Using Excel QM
Program 3.1A
3-36
Using Excel
Program 3.1B
3-37
Decision Trees
Any problem that can be presented in a
decision table can also be graphically
represented in a decision tree.
Decision trees are most beneficial when a
sequence of decisions must be made.
All decision trees contain decision points
or nodes, from which one of several alternatives
may be chosen.
All decision trees contain state-of-nature
points or nodes, out of which one state of
nature will occur.
3-38
Five Steps of
Decision Tree Analysis
3-39
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.
3-40
Thompson’s Decision Tree
A State-of-Nature Node
Favorable Market
A Decision Node
1
Unfavorable Market
uct nt
s tr la
o n eP
C arg
L
Favorable Market
Construct
Small Plant 2
Unfavorable Market
Do
No
th
in
g
Figure 3.2
3-41
Thompson’s Decision Tree
EMV for Node = (0.5)($200,000) + (0.5)(–$180,000)
1 = $10,000 Payoffs
Favorable Market (0.5)
$200,000
Alternative with best
EMV is selected 1
Unfavorable Market (0.5)
ct nt
–$180,000
u
tr la
s
n eP
o
C arg
L Favorable Market (0.5)
$100,000
Construct
Small Plant 2
Unfavorable Market (0.5)
–$20,000
Do
No
th EMV for Node = (0.5)($100,000)
in
g 2 = $40,000 + (0.5)(–$20,000)
Figure 3.3
$0
3-42
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
First Decision Second Decision Payoffs
Point Point
Favorable Market (0.78)
$190,000
nt 2 Unfavorable Market (0.22)
P la –$190,000
ge
Lar Favorable Market (0.78)
$90,000
) Small
. 45 Plant
3 Unfavorable Market (0.22)
–$30,000
(0
e y ts le
rv ul ab No Plant
–$10,000
Su Res vor
1 Sur Fa Favorable Market (0.27)
ve $190,000
y
Re y (
ve
ge
5) Lar
tS
Plant –$30,000
tM
uc
No Plant
–$10,000
nd
Co
3-43
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
3-44
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
3-45
Thompson’s Complex Decision Tree
First Decision Second Decision Payoffs
Point Point
$106,400 Favorable Market (0.78)
$190,000
l a nt Unfavorable Market (0.22)
$106,400
P –$190,000
a rge $63,600 Favorable Market (0.78)
L $90,000
) Small
. 45 Plant
Unfavorable Market (0.22)
–$30,000
(0
e y ts le
rv ul ab No Plant
–$10,000
Su Res vor
Su Fa –$87,400 Favorable Market (0.27)
rv $190,000
y
e
Re y (
ve
Ne su 0.5 ant
Pl
Unfavorable Market (0.73)
–$190,000
ur
5) rge $2,400
$2,400
tS
Plant –$30,000
Mt
uc
No Plant
–$10,000
nd
$49,200
Co
3-46
Expected Value of Sample Information
3-47
Sensitivity Analysis
3-48
Sensitivity Analysis
p = probability of a favorable survey
result
(1 – p) =
EMV(node 1) =probability
($106,400)pof+($2,400)(1
a negative–survey
p)
result = $104,000p + $2,400
We are indifferent when the EMV of node 1 is the
same as the EMV of not conducting the survey,
$40,000
$104,000p + $2,400= $40,000
$104,000p = $37,600
p = $37,600/$104,000 = 0.36
If p<0.36, do not conduct the survey. If p>0.36,
conduct the survey.
3-49
Bayesian Analysis
There are many ways of getting
probability data. It can be based on:
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.
It also allows the revision of initial
estimates based on new information.
3-50
Calculating Revised Probabilities
P (FM) = 0.50
P (UM) = 0.50
3-51
Calculating Revised Probabilities
Through discussions with experts Thompson has
learned the information in the table below.
He can use this information and Bayes’ theorem
to calculate posterior probabilities.
STATE OF NATURE
RESULT OF FAVORABLE MARKET UNFAVORABLE MARKET
SURVEY (FM) (UM)
Negative (predicts
unfavorable P (survey negative | FM) P (survey negative | UM)
market for = 0.30 = 0.80
product)
Table 3.12
3-52
Calculating Revised Probabilities
Recall Bayes’ theorem:
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
3-53
Calculating Revised Probabilities
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
(0.20)(0.50) 0.10
0.22
(0.20 )(0.50) (0.70 )(0.50 ) 0.45
3-54
Calculating Revised Probabilities
Table 3.13
3-55
Calculating Revised Probabilities
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
(0.80)(0.50) 0.40
0.73
(0.80 )(0.50) (0.30 )(0.50 ) 0.55
3-56
Calculating Revised Probabilities
CONDITIONAL
PROBABILITY P(STATE OF
P(SURVEY NATURE |
STATE OF NEGATIVE | STATE PRIOR JOINT SURVEY
NATURE OF NATURE) PROBABILITY PROBABILITY NEGATIVE)
FM 0.30 X 0.50 = 0.15 0.15/0.55 = 0.27
Table 3.14
3-57
Using Excel
Formulas Used for Bayes’ Calculations in Excel
Program 3.2A
3-58
Using Excel
Results of Bayes’ Calculations in Excel
Program 3.2B
3-59
Potential Problems Using
Survey Results
3-60
Utility Theory
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.
3-61
Utility Theory
Your Decision Tree for the Lottery Ticket
$2,000,000
Accept
Offer
$0
Heads
Reject (0.5)
Offer
Tails
(0.5)
3-62
Utility Theory
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.
Al
ter
na
tiv
e2
Other Outcome
Utility = ?
Figure 3.7
3-64
Investment Example
Jane Dickson wants to construct a utility curve
revealing her 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, Jane would prefer to
have her money in the bank.
So if p = 0.80, Jane is indifferent between the bank
or the real estate investment.
3-65
Investment Example
p = 0.80 $10,000
U($10,000) = 1.0
(1 – p) = 0.20 $0
s t in te U($0.00) = 0.0
e
Inv Esta
eal
R
I nv
es
t in
Ba
nk
$5,000
U($5,000) = p = 0.80
3-66
Investment Example
We can assess other utility values in the same way.
For Jane these are:
3-67
Utility Curve
1.0 –
U ($10,000) = 1.0
0.7 –
0.6 –
0.5 –
U ($3,000) = 0.50
Utility
0.4 –
0.3 –
0.2 –
0.1 –
U ($0) = 0
| | | | | | | | | | |
$0 $1,000 $3,000 $5,000 $7,000 $10,000
Monetary Value
Figure 3.9
3-68
Utility Curve
Jane’s utility curve is typical of a risk avoider.
She gets less utility from greater risk.
She avoids situations where high losses might occur.
As monetary value increases, her utility curve increases
at a slower rate.
3-69
Preferences for Risk
Risk
Avoider
e
nc
re
Utility
ffe
di
In
k
is
R
Risk
Seeker
Figure 3.10
Monetary Outcome
3-70
Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria
3-71
Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria
Tack Lands
1 ame
ve the G Point Down (0.55)
t i –$10,000
t erna lays
Al rk P
Ma
Alt
er n
ati
ve
2
Figure 3.11 Mark Does Not Play the Game
$0
3-73
Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria
3-74
Utility Curve for Mark Simkin
1.00 –
0.75 –
Utility
0.50 –
0.30 –
0.25 –
0.15 –
0.05 –
Figure 3.12 | | | | |
0–
3-75
Utility as a
Decision-Making Criteria
Tack Lands
1 a me
ve the G Point Down (0.55)
t i 0.05
erna ys
a
Alt rk Pl
Ma
Al
te rn
ati
ve
2
Figure 3.13 Don’t Play
0.15
3-76
Copyright