04 · Decide

Cape Manufacturing solar investment case — Digital Acumen

Open course in new window ↗

15:30 · Financial Director

I don’t need another spreadsheet. I need your recommendation.

Which system should we take forward, why, and what do we still need to verify? Keep it to 100 words.

Purpose → Outcome → Assessment criteria → Evidence

Purpose of this stage: integrate quantitative evidence, uncertainty and professional scepticism into a concise management recommendation.

Outcome for this stage: Formulate and communicate an evidence-based investment recommendation that integrates quantitative analysis, commercial trade-offs, uncertainty and professional scepticism.

Associated assessment criteria: a successful response identifies a proposal; uses at least two correctly interpreted quantitative results; explains one material trade-off; identifies an assumption requiring verification; distinguishes evidence from an unsupported supplier claim; and remains within 100 words.

Evidence: recommendation in Recommendation!A7 and professional-scepticism response in Recommendation!A22.

Excel + Google Sheets · Decide

Excel Enter the recommendation in the response area beginning Recommendation!A7. Use Home → Wrap Text if necessary.

Google Sheets Enter the recommendation in the same response area beginning Recommendation!A7. Use Format → Wrapping → Wrap if necessary.

Use the workbook cells as evidence rather than retyping numbers from memory. This audit trail is the same in both platforms.

Story so far: A is fastest on payback; C creates the greatest base-case NPV; B becomes preferable to C if C’s self-consumption falls below roughly 74%.

The case · The Financial Director wants a recommendation

The spreadsheet gives evidence. It does not choose the decision rule.

You now have a genuine commercial trade-off. Management needs a recommendation that distinguishes measured results from assumptions still requiring verification.

Criterion A B C
Simple payback 2.92 y 2.96 y 3.22 y
20-year NPV R2.152m R2.662m R2.871m
Self-consumption 90% 85% 78%
Primary exposure Lower long-term value Middle-ground option Utilisation assumption

Excel instruction · use the workbook as evidence

Do not retype numbers from memory

  • Payback evidence: Your Model!B7:D7.
  • Base NPV evidence: first scenario row Test Assumptions!B8:D8.
  • Sensitivity evidence: Test Assumptions!A8:E14.
  • Write your final recommendation in the merged response area beginning at Recommendation!A7 (displayed across A7:F13).

Use Wrap Text if needed. Keep the recommendation to 100 words or fewer.

Executive briefing task · ≤100 words

Recommend one proposal to the Financial Director.

  1. Name the selected proposal.
  2. Use at least two quantified pieces of Excel evidence.
  3. State one explicit commercial trade-off.
  4. Name one unverified operational assumption that must be confirmed before contract signature.

There is no single acceptable recommendation if the reasoning is coherent, quantified and appropriately qualified.

Professional scepticism · Supplier C’s environmental claim

Supplier C states that its panels have a lower lifecycle environmental impact but provides no independently verified evidence.

What evidence would you request before allowing the claim to influence the recommendation?

Excel instruction · record your scepticism response

Go to Recommendation!A22 (merged across A22:F26) and type your response. Consider lifecycle methodology, manufacturing impacts, expected service life, recyclability, independent certification, system boundaries and the basis of comparison with A and B.

Evidence produced: ≤100-word recommendation in Recommendation!A7 + evidence request in Recommendation!A22.

Pre-submission check

Before you send the briefing