Cost Risk as a Discriminator in Trade Studies

Stephen A. Book
{"title":"Cost Risk as a Discriminator in Trade Studies","authors":"Stephen A. Book","doi":"10.1080/1941658X.2010.10462234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Prior to formal program initiation, analysts typically undertake trade studies to investigate which of several candidate architectures or designs can best provide a desired capability at minimum cost. The various candidates, however, typically differ significantly in risk and uncertainty as well as in cost, but members of the government or industry trade-study team do not have the time and the candidate solutions usually aren't sufficiently detailed at this stage to allow a thorough risk analysis to be conducted. Yet, those differences in risk and uncertainty, as well as in cost, should be taken into account to the extent possible during the trade-study decision process. Because timeliness and simplicity are key requirements of analyses undertaken in support of trade studies, what usually happens is that a “point” cost estimate, or perhaps a 50%-confidence estimate, is established for each candidate, and the go-ahead decision is made based on that estimate. A nagging question remains: “What if Candidate A, the lower-cost option based on those estimates, faces risk issues that make its 80th-percentile cost higher than that of Candidate B?” In other words, Candidate B would be the lower-cost option if the cost comparison were made at the 80% confidence level. This situation is classic, where the decision maker must choose between a low-cost, high-risk option and a high-cost, low-risk option. This article offers a methodology that allows the program manager to take account of all risk scenarios by making use of all cost percentiles simultaneously, namely the entire cost probability distribution of each candidate not simply the point estimate or the 80% confidence cost. As it turns out, the expression of system cost in terms of a lognormal or simulation-generated probability distribution makes it possible to estimate the probability that each candidate will turn out to be the least costly of all the options, and probabilities of that kind are the basis on which an informed decision can be made.","PeriodicalId":390877,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","volume":"96 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cost Analysis and Parametrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1941658X.2010.10462234","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Abstract Prior to formal program initiation, analysts typically undertake trade studies to investigate which of several candidate architectures or designs can best provide a desired capability at minimum cost. The various candidates, however, typically differ significantly in risk and uncertainty as well as in cost, but members of the government or industry trade-study team do not have the time and the candidate solutions usually aren't sufficiently detailed at this stage to allow a thorough risk analysis to be conducted. Yet, those differences in risk and uncertainty, as well as in cost, should be taken into account to the extent possible during the trade-study decision process. Because timeliness and simplicity are key requirements of analyses undertaken in support of trade studies, what usually happens is that a “point” cost estimate, or perhaps a 50%-confidence estimate, is established for each candidate, and the go-ahead decision is made based on that estimate. A nagging question remains: “What if Candidate A, the lower-cost option based on those estimates, faces risk issues that make its 80th-percentile cost higher than that of Candidate B?” In other words, Candidate B would be the lower-cost option if the cost comparison were made at the 80% confidence level. This situation is classic, where the decision maker must choose between a low-cost, high-risk option and a high-cost, low-risk option. This article offers a methodology that allows the program manager to take account of all risk scenarios by making use of all cost percentiles simultaneously, namely the entire cost probability distribution of each candidate not simply the point estimate or the 80% confidence cost. As it turns out, the expression of system cost in terms of a lognormal or simulation-generated probability distribution makes it possible to estimate the probability that each candidate will turn out to be the least costly of all the options, and probabilities of that kind are the basis on which an informed decision can be made.
成本风险在贸易研究中的区别
在正式的程序启动之前,分析人员通常进行贸易研究,以调查几种候选架构或设计中哪一种能够以最小的成本最好地提供所需的能力。然而,不同的备选方案在风险和不确定性以及成本方面通常存在很大差异,但政府或行业贸易研究团队的成员没有时间,在这个阶段,备选方案通常不够详细,无法进行彻底的风险分析。然而,在贸易研究决策过程中,应尽可能考虑到风险和不确定性以及成本方面的差异。因为时效性和简洁性是支持贸易研究的分析的关键要求,通常发生的情况是为每个候选人建立一个“点”成本估计,或者可能是50%置信度的估计,并根据该估计做出前进的决定。一个挥之不去的问题仍然存在:“如果候选A——基于这些估算的成本较低的选项——面临风险问题,导致其第80百分位成本高于候选B,该怎么办?”换句话说,如果在80%的置信水平上进行成本比较,候选人B将是成本较低的选项。这种情况很典型,决策者必须在低成本、高风险的选择和高成本、低风险的选择之间做出选择。本文提供了一种方法,允许项目经理同时利用所有的成本百分位数来考虑所有的风险场景,即每个候选项目的整个成本概率分布,而不仅仅是点估计或80%置信度成本。事实证明,用对数正态分布或模拟生成的概率分布来表示系统成本,可以估计出每个候选方案最终成为所有选项中成本最低的方案的概率,而这种概率是做出明智决策的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信