Potencial Value Level: proposta de escala de valor aplicada em projetos de PD&I em safety innovation com múltiplos decisores

André Martins Ismail; Leonardo Lima Gomes; Carlos De Lamare Bastian Pinto

doi:10.5585/2025.28281

Authors

André Martins Ismail Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9440-3991
Leonardo Lima Gomes Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5239-7834
Carlos De Lamare Bastian Pinto Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8074-7662

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5585/2025.28281

Keywords:

decision making, complex environment, Potential Value Level, PVL, multicriteria analysis

Abstract

This paper aims to apply the Potential Value Level (PVL) scale to assess the value of Research, Development & Innovation (RD&I) in safety innovation in the oil and gas industry, as well as to assess the strengths, weaknesses, and threats with the existing literature. The methodology adopted involved the application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) method structured in two layers, based on the criteria: Royalties, Shares, Intangibles, and Strategic. Data collection was carried out through interviews with seven experts, including professors, doctoral students, and professionals with experience in portfolio management. The analysis was conducted with the support of Microsoft Excel software, allowing the comparison of the PVL scale with the traditional TRL and CRL scales. The results indicated that the PVL scale is effective in prioritizing projects from the perspective of value generation, with emphasis on the intangible criterion, which is often neglected by traditional methods. However, as it is an indicator, it is expected to be combined with other indicators, and its calibration depends on a coherent choice of criteria. The multicriteria application demonstrated coherence in the assessments among decision makers and provided evidence on the usefulness of the PVL scale as a decision support tool. The theoretical contribution of the research lies in the proposal of an innovative value assessment model applied to the context of RD&I. In practical terms, the study offers managers a structured instrument for selecting innovation projects in security, aligned with organizational strategies and value creation in environments of high complexity and uncertainty.

Author Biographies

André Martins Ismail, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Holds a Bachelor's degree in Accounting from Universidade Castelo Branco (2017), an MBA in Investment Management from the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (2022), an MBA in Finance from the Brazilian Institute of Capital Markets (IBMEC) (2019), and a Master’s degree in Accounting from the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (2021). Currently affiliated with the Academic Excellence Program (PROEX) at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro. Has experience in the field of Business Administration, with an emphasis on Accounting.

Leonardo Lima Gomes, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Professor of Finance and Innovation in the Department of Business Administration (IAG) at the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio) and its Graduate Program since 2008. Holds a Ph.D. and a Master's degree in Industrial Engineering with an emphasis in Finance from PUC-Rio (2002; 1998), and a Bachelor's degree in Mechanical Engineering with an emphasis in Production and Materials from UFES (1995). Engaged in teaching, research, and development in finance, with a focus on Blockchain, Decentralized Finance (DeFi), and Finance related to decarbonization and the energy transition. Coordinator of the Blockchain for Business and Energy Research Center (Ledger Labs). Served as Head of the Department of Business Administration and Dean of the Business School – IAG (2019–2023), Coordinator of the Professional Master’s in Business Administration (2016–2018), and Head of the Finance Area (2011–2013). Has published over 30 articles in scientific journals, including leading journals in Renewable Energy/Energy Economics such as Energy Economics, Renewable Energy, Energy Policy, Journal of Cleaner Production, Wind Energy, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, and International Journal of Energy Sector Management. Leads or has led several projects funded by research and development agencies in Brazil, as well as by the industry. His research interests include tokenization in energy market development, blockchain economics, decentralized finance applied to the energy industry, and financial modeling for the energy transition and decarbonization.

Carlos De Lamare Bastian Pinto, Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

Tenured Professor in the area of Finance and Real Options Valuation at the Business School (IAG) of the Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), with a postdoctoral degree completed at the same institution in 2021. He earned his Ph.D. in Finance and Business Administration with a concentration in Real Options from PUC-Rio in 2009 and was awarded the 2010 Capes Dissertation Prize in the field of Business Administration. He holds a Professional Master’s degree in Finance from IBMEC RJ (2004) and an MBA from IBMEC RJ (2001). He coordinated the Technological Undergraduate Program in Financial Management at the Department of Business Administration (IAG) at PUC-Rio. He was a tenured professor in the Professional Master’s Program in Business Administration at IBMEC RJ and served as Coordinator of both the Professional Master’s and the Undergraduate Program in Business Administration at IBMEC RJ from 2012 to June 2018. His experience lies in the field of Finance, with an emphasis on Project and Corporate Valuation, particularly using Real Options and Risk Analysis. He has worked on projects in the energy, agribusiness, environment, and infrastructure sectors, focusing on the evaluation of projects under conditions of risk, uncertainty, and flexibility. He has been a consultant for over 25 years in the area of business and project valuation.

References

Araújo, L. M. M., Maior, C. B. S., Lins, I. D., & Moura, M. J. das C. (2023). Technology selection and ranking: Literature review and current applications in oil & gas industry. Geoenergy Science and Engineering, 226, 211771. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.GEOEN.2023.211771

Arpa-e (2010). Advanced Research Projects Agency – Energy. Technology to market plan

Azizian, N. , Sarkani, S. , & Mazzuchi, T. (2009). A comprehensive review and analysis of maturity assessment approaches for improved decision support to achieve efficient defense acquisition. 20–22.

Belton, V., & Stewart, T. J. (2002). Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Springer Science & Business Media.

Cornford, S. L., & Sarsfield, L. (2004). Quantitative methods for maturing and infusing advanced spacecraft technology. IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings, 1, 663–681. https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2004.1367652

Danesh, D., Ryan, M. J., & Abbasi, A. (2018). Multi-criteria decision-making methods for project portfolio management: a literature review. In Int. J. Management and Decision Making (Vol. 17, Issue 1).

de Souza, D. G. B., Dos Santos, E. A., Soma, N. Y., & da Silva, C. E. S. (2021). MCDM-Based R&D Project Selection: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2021, Vol. 13, Page 11626, 13(21), 11626. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU132111626

Er, A., Özkale, C., & Coşkun, S. B. (2024). Project portfolio selection criteria in the oil & gas industry and a decision support tool based on fuzzy Multimoora. Journal of Project Management, 9(3), 197–212. https://doi.org/10.5267/J.JPM.2024.5.002

Gerdsri, N., & Manotungvorapun, N. (2021). Readiness Assessment for IDE Startups: A Pathway toward Sustainable Growth. Sustainability 2021, Vol. 13, Page 13687, 13(24), 13687. https://doi.org/10.3390/SU132413687

GOMES, L. F. A. M., & GOMES, C. F. Simões. (2000). Tomada de decisão gerencial: enfoque multicritério. Atlas SA. https://scholar.google.com.br/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=pt-BR&user=IZriVnYAAAAJ&citation_for_view=IZriVnYAAAAJ:jE2MZjpN3IcC

Gomes, L. L., Carlos De Lamare, |, Pinto, B., & Henrique De Castro, J. (2024). Uma Escala de Valor Aplicada a Projetos de PD&I: Casos de Uso em Projetos de Safety Innovation A Value Scale Applied to R&D Projects: Use Cases in Safety Innovation Projects. https://doi.org/10.48072/2525-7579.rog.2024

Harto, A. A. ; W. ;, Agung, A. ;, Ridwan, M. K., Li, G., Du, B., Liu, L., Chen, X., Lai, X., Ai, Y., Rahmanta, M. A., Harto, A. W., Agung, A., & Ridwan, M. K. (2023). Nuclear Power Plant to Support Indonesia’s Net Zero Emissions: A Case Study of Small Modular Reactor Technology Selection Using Technology Readiness Level and Levelized Cost of Electricity Comparing Method. Energies 2023, Vol. 16, Page 3752, 16(9), 3752. https://doi.org/10.3390/EN16093752

Jesus, V. M. de, Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Filardi, F. (2019). The selection of contract strategies using the analytic network process for oil and gas projects: a case study. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 10(2), 355–379. https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v10i2.850

Kandakoglu, M., Walther, G., & Ben Amor, S. (2024). The use of multi-criteria decision-making methods in project portfolio selection: a literature review and future research directions. Annals of Operations Research, 332(1–3), 807–830. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-023-05564-3

Keeney, R. L., & Raiffa, H. (1993). Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value trade-offs. In Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs. Cambridge University Press. https://books.google.com/books/about/Decisions_with_Multiple_Objectives.html?hl=pt-BR&id=1oEa-BiARWUC

Lee, H. Y., Heng, Y. P., Selvanathan, K., Chandrahasan, P., & Chemmangattuvalappil, N. G. (2024). Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Tools for Project Selection by International Conglomerates. Process Integration and Optimization for Sustainability, 8(2), 375–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/S41660-023-00376-1/TABLES/21

Liesiö, J., Salo, A., Keisler, J. M., & Morton, A. (2021). Portfolio decision analysis: Recent developments and future prospects. European Journal of Operational Research, 293(3), 811–825. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2020.12.015

Lima, Y. Q. de, Gomes, F. A. M., & Leoneti, A. B. (2023). DECOMMISSIONING OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION SYSTEMS WITH SMAA-ExpTODIM. Pesquisa Operacional, 43, e267436. https://doi.org/10.1590/0101-7438.2023.043.00267436

Lima, Y. Q. de, & Gomes, L. F. A. M. (2021). Identificação e valoração dos critérios de decisão em projetos de descomissionamento offshore. Revista de Gestão e Projetos, 12(2), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.5585/gep.v12i2.19781

Lima, Y. Q. de, Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Leoneti, A. B. (2022). Towards the Green Economy: an MCDA approach to decommissioning offshore oil and gas production systems. Procedia Computer Science, 214(C), 337–343. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PROCS.2022.11.183

Lima, Y. Q. de, Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Machado, M. A. S. (2023). O descomissionamento de sistemas de produção Offshore sob a perspectiva do método Electre III – SRF. Revista Gestão & Tecnologia, 23(1), 69–92. https://doi.org/10.20397/2177-6652/2023.v23i1.2330

Mankins, J. C. (1995). TECHNOLOGY READINESS LEVELS A White Paper.

Mankins, J. C. (2009). Technology readiness assessments: A retrospective. Acta Astronautica, 65(9–10), 1216–1223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.058

Melo, R. T. de, Gomes, L. F. A. M., & Filardi, F. (2019). Project portfolio prioritization strategy to extend the service life of offshore platforms – a Prométhée V approach. Independent Journal of Management & Production, 10(5), 1421–1445. https://doi.org/10.14807/ijmp.v10i5.849

Nadarajah, S., & Secomandi, N. (2023). A review of the operations literature on real options in energy. European Journal of Operational Research, 309(2), 469–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJOR.2022.09.014

Nikolaichuk, L., Ignatiev, K., Filatova, I., & Shabalovac, A. (2023). Diversification of Portfolio of International Oil and Gas Assets using Cluster Analysis. International Journal of Engineering, 36(10), 1783–1792. https://doi.org/10.5829/IJE.2023.36.10A.06

Olechowski, A. L., Eppinger, S. D., Joglekar, N., & Tomaschek, K. (2020). Technology readiness levels: Shortcomings and improvement opportunities. Systems Engineering, 23(4), 395–408. https://doi.org/10.1002/sys.21533

Saaty, T. L. (1991). Some mathematical concepts of the analytic hierarchy process. Behaviormetrika, 18(29), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.2333/BHMK.18.29_1

Saaty, Thomas. L. (1994). How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Interfaces, 24(6), 19–43. https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.24.6.19

Saaty, Thomas. L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83–98. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijssci.2008.017590

Tsiglianu, P., Romasheva, N., & Nenko, A. (2023). Conceptual Management Framework for Oil and Gas Engineering Project Implementation. Resources 2023, Vol. 12, Page 64, 12(6), 64. https://doi.org/10.3390/RESOURCES12060064

Vergara, S. C. (2016). Projetos e Relatórios de Pesquisa em administração (16th ed.). Atlas S/A.

Zuluaga, J. A. F., Escobar, J. F., Martínez, G. A. G., D’Aleman, J. C., & Vallejo, A. O. (2024). Model for measuring technological maturity for critical sector industries. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 10(1), 100194. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JOITMC.2023.100194