Real options theory and entrepreneurship
Real Options Theory: Why Flexibility Adds Value to Startups
How do you value a startup that has no revenue, massive uncertainty, but huge potential? Traditional accounting fails here. Instead, savvy investors use Real Options Theory.
Originally derived from financial markets (Bowman & Hurry, 1993), this theory treats investments in "real" assets (like a factory, a startup team, or a patent) similarly to financial stock options.
- Call Options: Allowing investors to bet on the upside without committing full capital immediately (e.g., a Seed round).
- Put Options: Allowing investors to limit downside losses (e.g., liquidation preferences).
Real Options vs. Net Present Value (NPV)
According to McGrath (1999), Real Options Theory is superior to traditional Net Present Value (NPV) analysis under conditions of high uncertainty.
NPV assumes a linear path: you invest $X today to get $Y tomorrow. But startups aren't linear. Real Options logic argues that an opportunity that has a "way out" is worth more than one that does not.
For example, a startup has intrinsic value because it possesses "options":
- Option to Pivot: A team can be moved from one opportunity to another.
- Option to Merge: Two failing startups can combine resources.
- Option to Abandon: Resources can be stripped and sold to recoup costs.
Failure as a Learning Mechanism
In this framework, failure is not a total loss; it is the "cost of the option" to learn. Entrepreneurs and investors view failure as a learning opportunity that contributes to the assessment of future projects.
This thinking reduces the social cost of failure. If the "option price" of trying a venture is low, more potential entrepreneurs will be willing to take the risk.
Application to Bankruptcy Law
Lee et al. (2007) apply this logic to policy. They argue that bankruptcy laws should not punish entrepreneurs too severely.
If bankruptcy is a "life sentence," the cost of the option to start a business becomes too high. To encourage innovation, the legal system must provide a low-cost "Put Option" (an exit strategy) so individuals will pursue high-risk, high-reward opportunities.
Entry Decisions and Irreversibility
Finally, O'Brien et al. (2003) found that entrepreneurs intuitively use Real Options logic when deciding to enter a market.
They found that entrepreneurs are significantly less likely to enter an industry where investments are irreversible (high sunk costs). If they cannot "get out" easily, they demand a much higher potential return to "get in."
Video: Real Options in Strategic Decision Making
References
Bowman, E. H., & Hurry, D. (1993). Strategy through the option lens: An integrated view of resource investments and the incremental-choice process. Academy of Management Review, 18(4), 760-782.
Lee, S. H., Peng, M. W., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Bankruptcy law and entrepreneurship development: A real options perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 257-272.
McGrath, R. G. (1999). Falling forward: Real options reasoning and entrepreneurial failure. Academy of Management Review, 24(1), 13-30.
O'Brien, J. P., Folta, T. B., & Johnson, D. R. (2003). A real options perspective on entrepreneurial entry in the face of uncertainty. Managerial and Decision Economics, 24(8), 515-533.
