Providing an approach to identify and prioritize technology valuation methods in knowledge-based companies
Subject Areas : راهکارهای جذب سرمایهگذار خارجی برای کسب و کارهای دانشبنیان
azam shiri
1
*
,
Mohammadreza Jafari
2
1 - Master's degree, Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Industrial Engineering, Imam Javad University (AS), Yazd.
2 - Faculty member
Keywords: Valuation of technology, knowledge base, fuzzy TOPSIS,
Abstract :
Attracting investment in knowledge-based companies to manage costs and enhance revenue generation has made the valuation of these firms a crucial topic for entrepreneurs, founders, and investors alike. This study employs both field-based and library-based data collection methods. It presents a comprehensive approach to identifying and prioritizing valuation methods for technology firms by considering key evaluation criteria to align the perspectives of investors and entrepreneurs while assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the final method. To achieve this, a literature review was conducted to extract all significant and applicable valuation methods for these companies. Subsequently, the criteria influencing the evaluation were analyzed based on their applicability and the feasibility of various methods, as assessed by experts using the fuzzy Delphi method. The importance weights of these criteria were then determined using the fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). To evaluate the methods against the criteria and identify their strengths and weaknesses, the fuzzy Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) was applied. The results indicate that within the technology valuation group, the option pricing method, with a relative distance of 0.58619, is validated and recommended as a suitable approach based on the necessary criteria for entrepreneurs and investors. Finally, recommendations for enhancing the option pricing model are provided to develop appropriate indicators for investor and entrepreneur risk tolerance.
1- کرمی غلامرضا ، بیک بشرویه سلمان، تدوین مدل پیادهسازی نظام ارزشهای منصفانه در ایران با تأکید بر اندازهگیری، بررسیهای حسابداری و حسابرسی، (4)24، 1396، ص 596-537. https://doi.org/10.22059/acctgrev.2018.245353.1007745
2- رمضانپور نرگسی، قاسم, هاجری, مهدی, حمیدی, مهدی، رتبهبندی روشهای مناسب ارزشگذاری فناوریهای زیستی: حوزه تخمیر. فصلنامه مدیریت توسعه فناوری, 8(4), 1399، ص 169-196. https://doi.org/10.22104/jtdm.2021.4065.2445
3- خرم، مریم، و ترابی، تقی، و طلوعی اشلقی، عباس، بررسی جنبههای اقتصادی تغییرات فناوری در صنعت حفاری با روش MRC.، مطالعات اقتصاد انرژی, 17(68 ), 1400، ص 175-194.
4- https://www.sid.ir/fa/journal/ViewPaper.aspx?id=559139
5- طباطبائیان, سید حبیب الله، غریبی، جلیل، مبانی ارزشگذاری تکنولوژی. تهران: انتشارات مرکز آموزش و تحقیقات صنعتی ایران ، 1386.
6- شفیعا، محمدعلی، شاکری، آرنوش و عامری، محسن. مقایسه و تعیین عوامل تأثیرگذار بر انتخاب روش قیمتگذاری فناوری، چهارمین کنفرانس ملی مدیریت فناوری ایران، تهران، 1389. https://civilica.com/doc/94656/
7- اسلامی بیدگلی، غلامرضا و احمدی اول، مرتضی، بررسی عوامل اثرگذار بر ارزیابی طرحهای کارآفرینانه در شرکتهای سرمایهگذاری خطرپذیر، توسعه کارآفرینی، 2 (8)، ص 99-120. 1389. https://jed.ut.ac.ir/article_22824_7121adde477267a0237ca0aab8395b68.pdf
8- درخشان، شهرزاد و محمدی، پرستو، اولویتبندی عوامل اثرگذار بر ارزیابی طرحهای سرمایهگذاری خطرپذیر. مدیریت نوآوری، (3) 4، ص 22-34. 1393. http://www.nowavari.ir/article_14741_4d68710abb85f6a948e9b9e99420bd7d.pdf
9- شیری، اعظم. ارائه رویکردی جهت اولویتبندی روشهای ارزشگذاری شرکتهای دانشبنیان در ایران، پایان نامه کارشناسی ارشد، موسسه آموزش عالی امام جواد (ع) یزد، 1397.
10- امیریان، سجاد و آذر، عادل، ارائه مدلی برای رتبهبندی سهام تحت محیط تصمیمگیری چند شاخصه فازی گروهی، نهمین کنفرانس بینالمللی مدیریت، تهران، 1390. https://civilica.com/doc/240990
11- Gajek, L., & Kuciński, Ł, Complete discounted cash flow valuation. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 73, pp 1-19, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.insmatheco.2016.12.004
12- Kim .J , Lee .G , Lee .S , Lee. C, Towards expert–machine collaborations for technology valuation: An interpretable machine learning approach,Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 183,121940, pp 0040-1625, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2022.121940
13- Saaty, T.L. How to make a decision: the analytic hierarchy process, 1990. https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-2217(90)90057-I
14- Zeng. Weijun, Technology sharing with competitors when facing consumers with uncertain product valuation, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 163, 107815, 0360-8352, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2021.107815
15- MacMillan, I. C. New business development: A challenge for transformational leadership, Human Resource Management, 26(4), pp 439–454, 1987.
16- Levie, J., & Gimmon, E. Mixed signals: why investors may misjudge first time high technology venture founders. Venture Capital, 10(3), pp 233-256. 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691060802151820
17- Bandarian, R. Enablers of Commercialization in Research Organizations. In proceeding of International Management Conference, 2005.
18- Azar, A., & Faraji, H. Science of fuzzy management. Tehran. Nashre-e-Mehraban Publications, 2008.
19- Cheng, C. H., & Lin, Y. Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European journal of operational research, 142(1), pp 174-186, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00280-6
20- Poudel. N, Syeed .MS, Ngorsuraches .S, Diaz .J, Chaiyakunapruk .N , HTA39 Characterization, Measurement, and Valuation of Attributes of Innovation of Technologies for Healthcare: A Systematic Review ,Value in Health, 25, 7, S510-S511, pp 1098-3015, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2022.04.1171
21- Forman, E., Peniwati, K., (1998), "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process", European Journal of Operational Research, 108(1), 165-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0
22- Kou G., Lin C. (2014), "A cosine maximization method for the priority vector derivation in AHP", European Journal of Operational Research, 235. 225-232. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.10.019
23- Cheng, C. H., & Lin, Y. Evaluating the best main battle tank using fuzzy decision theory with linguistic criteria evaluation. European journal of operational research, 142(1), pp 174-186, 2002 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(01)00280-6
24- Helitha Muchtar, Novianty, Risang Ayu Palar, Miranda, Amirulloh, Muhamad, Development of a valuation system of technology for the enhancement of innovation in Indonesia, Heliyon, 9, 2, e13124, 2405-8440, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13124.
25- Beyazkilic Koc, Aysun, Yildirim, Nihan, A multi-criteria decision framework for IP valuation method selection: “Valuation case” matters, World Patent Information, 73, 102176, 0172-2190, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wpi.2023.102176