Value Creation and Enhancement: Back to the Future
1
Value Creation and Enhancement: Back to the Future
Aswath Damodaran Stern School of Business 44 West Fourth Street New York, NY 10012 adamodar@stern.nyu.edu
1
2
Abstract In recent years, firms have turned to their attention increasingly to ways in which they can increase their value. A number of competing measures, each with claims to being the "best" approach to value creation, have been developed and marketed by investment banking firms and consulting firms. In this paper, we begin with a generic discounted cash flow model, and consider the ways in which value can be created or destroyed in a firm. We then look at two of the most widely used value enhancement measures, Economic Value Added and Cash Flow Return on Investment, and consider where these approaches yield similar results to those obtained from traditional valuation models, and where (and why) there might be differences. In conclusion, we show that there is little that is new or unique in these competing measures, and while they might be simpler than traditional discounted cash flow valuation, the simplicity comes at a cost that is substantial for high growth firms with shifting risk profiles.
2
3 Financial theorists have long argued that the objective in decision making should be to maximize firm value. Managers and practitioners have often criticized them for being too single minded about value maximization and for not considering the broader aspects of corporate strategy or the interests of other stakeholders. In the last decade, however, managers seem to have come around to the view that value maximization should be, if not the only, at least the primary objective for their firms. This turn-around can be partly attributed to the frustration that many of them have felt with strategic consulting and its failures, or partly to an increase in their ownership of equity in the firms that they manage. Whatever the reason, the shift of focus to value maximization has created an
Value Creation and Enhancement: Back to the Future
Aswath Damodaran Stern School of Business 44 West Fourth Street New York, NY 10012 adamodar@stern.nyu.edu
1
2
Abstract In recent years, firms have turned to their attention increasingly to ways in which they can increase their value. A number of competing measures, each with claims to being the "best" approach to value creation, have been developed and marketed by investment banking firms and consulting firms. In this paper, we begin with a generic discounted cash flow model, and consider the ways in which value can be created or destroyed in a firm. We then look at two of the most widely used value enhancement measures, Economic Value Added and Cash Flow Return on Investment, and consider where these approaches yield similar results to those obtained from traditional valuation models, and where (and why) there might be differences. In conclusion, we show that there is little that is new or unique in these competing measures, and while they might be simpler than traditional discounted cash flow valuation, the simplicity comes at a cost that is substantial for high growth firms with shifting risk profiles.
2
3 Financial theorists have long argued that the objective in decision making should be to maximize firm value. Managers and practitioners have often criticized them for being too single minded about value maximization and for not considering the broader aspects of corporate strategy or the interests of other stakeholders. In the last decade, however, managers seem to have come around to the view that value maximization should be, if not the only, at least the primary objective for their firms. This turn-around can be partly attributed to the frustration that many of them have felt with strategic consulting and its failures, or partly to an increase in their ownership of equity in the firms that they manage. Whatever the reason, the shift of focus to value maximization has created an
References: Bacidore, J.M, J.A. Boquist, T.T. Milbourn and A.V. Thakor, “The Search for the Best Financial Performance Measure”, Financial Analysts Journal, May-June 1997 Bernstein, R., An Analysis of EVA, Merrill Lynch Quantitative Viewpoint, December 19 (1997) and February 3 (1998) Damodaran A., 1998, “Applied Corporate Finance”, John Wiley Damodaran, A., 1994, “Investment Valuation”, John Wiley Dillon, R.D,. and J.E. Owers, EVA as a Financial Metric: Attributes, Utilization and Relationship to NPV, Financial Practice and Education, Spring/Summer 1997 Ehrbar, Al, 1998, “EVA”, John Wiley Kramer, J.K. and G. Pushner, “ An Empirical Analysis of Economic Value Added as a Proxy for Market Value Added”, Financial Practice and Education, Spring/Summer 1997 Madden, B.J., “The CFROI Valuation Model”, The Journal of Investing, Spring 1998. O’Byrne, S.F., “ EVA and the Shareholder”, Financial Practice and Education, Spring/Summer 1997 Peterson, Pamela P., and D.R. Peterson, 1996, “Company Performance and Measures of Value Added”, The Research Foundation of the Institute of Chartered Financial Analysts Stewart, G.Bennett, 1991, “The Quest for Value”, Harper Business. 72