5 ms·

Hi, MBA here, not sure what "training" you're referring to. Certainly nothing I learned in school taught me to focus on quarterly results and ignore R&D. I lear

Hi, MBA here, not sure what "training" you're referring to. Certainly nothing I learned in school taught me to focus on quarterly results and ignore R&D. I learned to attempt to push ROIC above WACC in order to ensure firms are generating economic profits, I learned that we probably should capitalize R&D and include it in ROIC to show that it does impact value, among other things

Torkel 6y ago
ROIC: return on invested capital WACC: weighted average cost of capital
jimbob45 6y ago
I love this website for blindly downvoting an MBA. Proud of y’all. On the other hand, attempting to quantify R&D seems like a fool’s errand. Maybe quantifying between different paths of R&D to see which could pay off more is beneficial but cutting the R&D budget outright because it’s not profitable? Seems like you’re cutting away from your company’s future at that point.
kelnos 6y ago
> capitalize R&D That's the problem with "MBA thinking". You can't put a dollar value on R&D. You just can't. Anything you do will be a gross approximation, and because the number is so fuzzy, you'll be encouraged (even subconsciously) to fudge it around to make other things look better, which will undoubtedly lead you to undervalue R&D to the point where it negatively impacts your business, but you have no idea why, because you're solely focused on dollar figures and not what really matters. Y'know, like developing the ability to solve actual customer problems in an exceptional manner. This sort of thing is very difficult to quantify, and any approach that starts from a finance perspective is always going to be sub-optimal at best, but often just flat-out wrong. I see so many people optimizing the things that are quantifiable at the expense of the things that aren't, when the loss of the qualitative things is what's killing their business. MBA types seem to never get this, and the form of your reply is basically a textbook example of that.
- formercoder 6y ago
  What? Sure I can. It’s on the income statement. Then I can show that some firms see more of a return on that R&D spending than others, and that impacts how valuable they are. It’s the same as how some firms get more return out of spending the same amount on factories as others. They are better factories.
  - AnthonyMouse 6y ago
    > What? Sure I can. It’s on the income statement. It's on the income statement five years from now, not the one you have when you're making the decision today. The R&D paid for five years ago will commonly have been under different market conditions. > Then I can show that some firms see more of a return on that R&D spending than others, and that impacts how valuable they are. The question is, how do you cause your company to be the one getting more of a return?
    - formercoder 6y ago
      Time being a factor is exactly why you capitalize R&D, which means make it an asset on your balance sheet. The second question is definitely an interesting one however I usually look at businesses more from an outside in view -so it’s not what I think about every day.
  - dougmwne 6y ago
    I have to say, you're really walking right into this one. Your approach, that everything about the business can be quantified and then optimized is exactly why MBAs kill companies. The relationship between the employees and the company and the customers and the product is fundamentally emotional and therefore beyond quantification. R&D is fundamentally hopeful and creative and that future potential cannot be quantified either. Accounting is a fine management tool, especially for optimization of companies and products that already have the magic. Don't let those nice cognitive tools turn you into a paperclip maximizer.

Torkel 6y ago

ROIC: return on invested capital WACC: weighted average cost of capital

jimbob45 6y ago

I love this website for blindly downvoting an MBA. Proud of y’all. On the other hand, attempting to quantify R&D seems like a fool’s errand. Maybe quantifying between different paths of R&D to see which could pay off more is beneficial but cutting the R&D budget outright because it’s not profitable? Seems like you’re cutting away from your company’s future at that point.

kelnos 6y ago

> capitalize R&D That's the problem with "MBA thinking". You can't put a dollar value on R&D. You just can't. Anything you do will be a gross approximation, and because the number is so fuzzy, you'll be encouraged (even subconsciously) to fudge it around to make other things look better, which will undoubtedly lead you to undervalue R&D to the point where it negatively impacts your business, but you have no idea why, because you're solely focused on dollar figures and not what really matters. Y'know, like developing the ability to solve actual customer problems in an exceptional manner. This sort of thing is very difficult to quantify, and any approach that starts from a finance perspective is always going to be sub-optimal at best, but often just flat-out wrong. I see so many people optimizing the things that are quantifiable at the expense of the things that aren't, when the loss of the qualitative things is what's killing their business. MBA types seem to never get this, and the form of your reply is basically a textbook example of that.

formercoder 6y ago
What? Sure I can. It’s on the income statement. Then I can show that some firms see more of a return on that R&D spending than others, and that impacts how valuable they are. It’s the same as how some firms get more return out of spending the same amount on factories as others. They are better factories.
- AnthonyMouse 6y ago
  > What? Sure I can. It’s on the income statement. It's on the income statement five years from now, not the one you have when you're making the decision today. The R&D paid for five years ago will commonly have been under different market conditions. > Then I can show that some firms see more of a return on that R&D spending than others, and that impacts how valuable they are. The question is, how do you cause your company to be the one getting more of a return?
  - formercoder 6y ago
    Time being a factor is exactly why you capitalize R&D, which means make it an asset on your balance sheet. The second question is definitely an interesting one however I usually look at businesses more from an outside in view -so it’s not what I think about every day.
- dougmwne 6y ago
  I have to say, you're really walking right into this one. Your approach, that everything about the business can be quantified and then optimized is exactly why MBAs kill companies. The relationship between the employees and the company and the customers and the product is fundamentally emotional and therefore beyond quantification. R&D is fundamentally hopeful and creative and that future potential cannot be quantified either. Accounting is a fine management tool, especially for optimization of companies and products that already have the magic. Don't let those nice cognitive tools turn you into a paperclip maximizer.