En investering i en kommersiell fastighet kräver finansiering av något slag. I dagsläget är det vanligt förekommande att fastighetsinvesterare tar banklån för att erhålla likvida medel för fastighetsköpet. För en beviljad kredit krävs det även att en värdering av fastigheten har genomförts. Därför är kreditbedömning och värdering av kommersiella fastigheter två betydelsefulla processer i bankens dagliga arbete. Relationen mellan fastighetsinvesterare och banken är också av avgörande betydelse då fastighetsinvesteraren är i behov av likvida medel för sitt fastighetsköp. Dessa processer för dock med sig ett flertal problem. En värdering är alltid osäker och baseras till stor del på schabloner vilket kan leda till att vissa fastigheter antingen över- eller undervärderas. För bankens del medför en utlåning alltid en kreditrisk, vilken måste minimeras för att banken ska undvika kreditförluster.Syftet med uppsatsen har varit att beskriva och förklara hur kreditbedömnings- och värderingsprocessen för utlåning till kommersiella fastigheter ser ut för tre olika bankkontor i Borås. Vidare har studien byggt på att beskriva vilka likheter och skillnader som förekommer emellan dessa banker. Syftet har även varit att studera hur lokala fastighetsinvesterare i kommersiella fastigheter upplever dessa processer.Studien är främst av kvalitativ karaktär då den största delen av det empiriska materialet är baserat på kvalitativa intervjuer genomförda med representanter från SEB, Swedbank Sjuhärad samt Handelsbanken Stora Torget. Vi har dock även tillämpat en kvantitativ metod eftersom vi har utfört en enkätundersökning med ett tiotal fastighetsinvesterare. Med hjälp av vår teoretiska referensram har vi analyserat det empiriska materialet, utifrån vilken vi senare har kunnat dra slutsatser och föra en diskussion kring.Resultatet visade att bankernas kreditbedömningsprocesser skiljer sig åt främst när det gäller olika beslutsinstanser och interna regelverk. En slutsats vi dragit är att det är bankens interna regelverk som spelar den avgörande rollen för kreditbedömningen. Beträffande värderingen applicerar samtliga banker liknande metoder däremot frånskiljer det sig när det gäller vem som genomför själva värderingen. Utifrån enkätundersökningen med fastighetsinvesterare har vi konstaterat att relationen mellan fastighetsinvesterarna och bankerna i vår studie fungerar väl. Båda parter är villiga att anpassa sig efter varandra och samarbeta för att få igenom en framgångsrik affär. / Program: Civilekonomprogrammet

Choosing the right investment option by a fund manager or analyst is the first step that contributes to the overall performance of any portfolio of assets. The decision making process is complicated. Markowitz portfolio theory (1952, 1959) laid the theoretical foundations for asset selection and management. However the decision maker is influenced by parameters outside the realm of financial theory and mathematical models (French and French 1997; French 2001). The actual behavior of decision makers can deviate from this normative model. This can be due to the problem solving behavior of the human brain. Human problem solving theory began with the work of Newell and Simon (1972) and Simon (1978). They argue that the human memory is characterized by limitations in terms of processing capacities (Newell and Simon 1972). Given the amount of data the decision maker has to analyze, the process of asset selection is complicated and difficult. Besides the volume of data, the information items may provide information relating to the same aspect of the asset making some of the data set redundant. Besides that, some of information contained in the data set might provide contradictory signals about the performance or characteristics of the asset. Thus the information set available to a decision maker is large, multi-channeled (different data providing different information) and multi-dimensional (for example real estate assets have information pertaining to legal aspects, financial aspects, physical aspects etc.). The limitations in the decision maker’s processing capabilities and the characteristics of the information cues make the asset selection process exceedingly difficult. French (2001) in a study of fund managers from U.K finds that asset allocation uses two sets of hard information during the process, namely historic data and current market perceptions. The study also finds differences between exposure levels of the funds dictated by theory (as per portfolio theory) and actual decisions made by companies (true asset allocations of funds). Gallimore, Gray and Hansz (2000) find medium-sized and small companies’ investment decision making does not follow any normative model due to the diverse nature of property markets in the United Kingdom. Past literature in the field of decision making finds that an expert’s decision making behavior differs from that of a novice. (Bedard and Mock (1992), Bouwman (1984) and Jacoby et al. (1984, 1985, 1986, 1987)). The primary purpose of this study is to understand the impact of experience on the decision making behavior of investors and see if their behavior differs from that of inexperienced individuals. In a controlled experiment design, two groups of subjects are tested. One group is composed of experienced subjects (experts) represented by real estate professionals such as acquisition analysts, fund/portfolio managers or real estate investors (experienced individuals investing either their own money or a client’s money in real estate). The other group tested is composed of students, who are inexperienced subjects (novices). Both groups are asked to choose between two investment cases in two different cities. The two options offered are both class A office properties, institutional grade. Fifteen sets of data are given for each investment option. Data for the cases is sourced from investment management companies, involved in managing funds on behalf of institutional clients. Using a process tracing technique, each subject’s behavior is observed and recorded while making the investment choice. These observations will give us insight into the actual (descriptive) behavior of experienced real estate professionals and inexperienced novices. It will help in isolating the impact of experience on the decision making behavior of real estate investors. This study finds mixed evidence relating to the difference in the behavior of novices and experts. On the five aspects that the two groups are tested, evidence that their behavior differs in three has been uncovered. They are search pattern, number of steps and time on task. However, for the other two aspects, sequencing and cue utilization, no difference was found.

While there is considerable academic research on the intersection of comprehensive plans, finance policies, zoning policies and how these factors influence real estate developers' choice of what land to develop and what buildings to construct on that land, little is understood about whether these three variables promote or hinder real estate developers' choice of whether to build communities that promote healthy living. Using urban planning theory as the foundation, the purpose of this correlational study was to determine how real estate developers' decisions are made to support healthy New Urbanism development in the United States. Secondary data from the Urban Land Institute were used for this multiple regression study that explored the degree to which comprehensive plans, finance, and zoning policies predict the likelihood that real estate developers will build New Urbanism communities in the United States. Findings indicated that comprehensive plans, finance policies, and zoning policies had a statistically significant influence on real estate developers' decisions on the types of communities to build in the United States by 53.6%, 46.8%, and 71.6% respectively p < .05. The information presented in this study is important to urban planners/designers, health care professionals, and municipal officials because of the intra and interdisciplinary approach of the built environment as a nonmedical determinant of health. Cultivating public and private collaboration to develop public policy could affect social change by directly affect the alterations and improvements in the built environment health that either promote or impede healthy outcomes.