Exploring the Usefulness of Real Options Theory for Foreign Affiliate Divestments: Real Abandonment Options’ Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Scholars propose that future research on real options theory should shift attention away from option buying during the first investment stage and toward option execution after investment. Researchers maintain that it would be interesting to explore the circumstances under which investors decide to withdraw their investments, thereby exercising the option to abandon their investments. The present research seeks to fill the gap in the literature and investigate the applicability of real options theory when an organization enhances sustainability policies while focusing on disciplined capital allocation through exit strategies. With case study data on Natura &Co’s divestment strategy for the Body Shop in November 2023, a real options analysis revealed the method’s practical advantages and disadvantages. This paper investigates real options theory in the context of the divestments of foreign affiliates, providing unique viewpoints and enhancing the theory beyond previous knowledge while also increasing our understanding of the divestiture phenomenon. This study concludes with a review of this paper’s theoretical contributions to real options theory, the managerial and practical/social implications of real options applications in general, and the valuation methods of abandonment options in particular, shedding light on the potential of future research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".