METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DETERMINING CAPITAL INVESTMENT, EMPLOYMENT CREATION AND GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION OF GREENFIELD INVESTMENT PROJECTS
A Project Size Estimation and Triple Weighted Location Assessment Model to estimate the capital investment, employment creation and to determine the highest quality geographic location for a Greenfield investment project, based on algorithms that firstly calculate and apply capital and employment intensity and average project size ratios to estimate capital investment and employment creation for the project and secondly apply a triple weighted quality assessment model to calculate the quality competitiveness of locations for the investment project.
1 . A method of estimating the size of a Greenfield investment project, where size is at least one of capital investment and employment creation, comprising accessing data from a Project Size Estimation model database which specifies a set of ratios relating to historical capital investment intensities, job creation intensities and project size for each of a plurality of combinations of Country, Activity and Sector, and using the data to estimate the size of the Greenfield investment project.
2 . A method as claimed in claim 1 , comprising outputting the estimated size.
3 . A method as claimed in claim 2 , wherein outputting comprises at least one of displaying and printing.
4 . A method as claimed in claim 1 , wherein ratios for capital investment intensities, job intensities, capital investment and job creation are specified in the database for each combination of Country, Activity and Sector.
5 . A method as claimed in claim 1 , wherein the ratios are determined subject to minimum sample size requirements and adjustments to remove outliers.
6 . A method of estimating the highest quality geographic location for a Greenfield investment project, comprising accessing data from a Weighted Location Assessment Model database which specifies a plurality of weights associated with respective influence items arranged in three predetermined tiers: (1) a set of Location Criteria; (2) a set of Location Factors within each Location Criterion; and (3) a set of Data Points within each Location Criterion; each weight indicating the relative importance of its associated influence item in investment decision making, and using the data to calculate an overall Quality Competitiveness of various locations for the Greenfield investment project for use in estimating the highest quality location for the Greenfield investment project.
7 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , comprising presenting the results in graphical form.
8 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , wherein the calculation is based on a model that considers how each location deviates from the average of all locations.
9 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , wherein the weights in each set sum to a predetermined number.
10 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , wherein the average Quality Competitiveness of all locations is arranged to be a predetermined number.
11 . A method as claimed in claim 9 , wherein the predetermined number is 100.
12 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , wherein the results show, for each location, the overall Quality Competitiveness with a breakdown by Location Criteria.
13 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , wherein the results show, for each location, a breakdown for at least one Location Factor.
14 . A method as claimed in claim 6 , comprising calculating the deviation from the average of all locations for each Data Point.
15 . A method as claimed in claim 14 , comprising multiplying the deviation from the average by the weights assigned to each Data Point to produce a Weighted Quality Score of each Location for each Data Point.
16 . A method as claimed in claim 15 , comprising multiplying the sum of weighted quality scores for all Data Points within each Location Factor by the weights assigned to each Location Factor to produce a Weighted Quality Score of each Location for each Location Factor.
17 . A method as claimed in claim 15 , comprising multiplying the sum of weighted quality scores for all Location Factors within each Location Criteria by the weights assigned to each Location Criteria to produce a Weighted Quality Score of each Location for each Location Criteria.
18 . A method as claimed in claim 15 , wherein the sum of weighted quality scores for each location criteria produces a single Quality Competitiveness Score for each location.
19 . A method as claimed in claim 18 , wherein the score is 100% aligned to the location requirements of the Greenfield investment project, and calculated quantitatively based on empirical data (Data Points).
20 . A program stored on a machine readable medium which, when executed, causes the machine to perform the method recited in claim 1 .
21 . A program stored on a machine readable medium which, when executed, causes the machine to perform the method recited in claim 6 .