Contingent Portfolio Programming for the Management of Risky Projects

Published Online:https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1050.0225

References

  • Birge J. R., Louveaux F.Introduction to Stochastic Programming (1997) (Springer, New York) Google Scholar
  • Dixit A. K., Pindyck R. S.Investment Under Uncertainty (1994) (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Eppen G. D., Martin R. K., Schrage L. A scenario approach to capacity planning. Oper. Res. (1989) 37(4):517–527LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Fishburn P. C. Mean-risk analysis with risk associated with below-target returns. Amer. Econom. Rev. (1977) 67(2):116–126Google Scholar
  • French S.Decision Theory—An Introduction to the Mathematics of Rationality (1986) (Ellis Horwood Limited, Chichester, UK) Google Scholar
  • Gear A. E., Lockett A. G. A dynamic model of some multistage aspects of research and development portfolios. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management (1973) EM20(1):22–29CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Ghasemzadeh F., Archer N., Iyogun P. A zero-one model for project portfolio selection and scheduling. J. Oper. Res. Soc. (1999) 50(7):745–755CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Heidenberger K. Dynamic project selection and funding under risk: A decision tree based MILP approach. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (1996) 95(2):284–298CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Henriksen A., Traynor A. A practical R&D project-selection scoring tool. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management (1999) 46(2):158–170CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Jia J., Dyer J. S. A standard measure of risk and risk-value models. Management Sci. (1996) 42(12):1691–1705LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Jia J., Dyer J. S., Butler J. C. Generalized disappointment models. J. Risk Uncertainty (2001) 22(1):59–78CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Keeney R. L., Raiffa H.Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs (1976) (John Wiley and Sons, New York) Google Scholar
  • Konno H., Yamazaki H. Mean-absolute deviation portfolio optimization and its applications to the Tokyo stock market. Management Sci. (1991) 37(5):519–531LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Levy H. Stochastic dominance and expected utility: Survey and analysis. Management Sci. (1992) 38(4):555–593LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Luenberger D. G.Investment Science (1998) (Oxford University Press, New York) Google Scholar
  • Machina M. Dynamic consistency and non-expected utility models of choice under risk. J. Econom. Literature (1989) 27(4):1622–1668Google Scholar
  • Markowitz H. M. Portfolio selection. J. Finance (1952) 7(1):77–91Google Scholar
  • Markowitz H. M.Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments (1959) (Cowles Foundation, Yale University, New Haven, CT) Google Scholar
  • Markowitz H. M.Mean-Variance Analysis in Portfolio Choice and Capital Markets (1987) (Frank J. Fabozzi Associates, New Hope, PA) Google Scholar
  • Martino J. P.Research and Development Project Selection (1995) (John Wiley and Sons, New York) Google Scholar
  • Mulvey J. M., Gould G., Morgan C. An asset and liability management model for Towers Perrin-Tillinghast. Interfaces (2000) 30(1):96–114LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Ogryczak W., Ruszczynski A. From stochastic dominance to mean-risk models: Semideviations as risk measures. Eur. J. Oper. Res. (1999) 116(1):33–50CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • Smith J. E., Nau R. F. Valuing risky projects: Option pricing theory and decision analysis. Management Sci. (1995) 41(5):795–816LinkGoogle Scholar
  • Trigeorgis L.Real Options: Managerial Flexibility and Strategy in Resource Allocation (1996) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) Google Scholar
INFORMS site uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some are essential to make our site work; Others help us improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Please read our Privacy Statement to learn more.