>>14275315He might be looking in the wrong direction for value. Sure, some cost-benefit analysis works for straight forward things, but most values are abstract and it is easier to make decisions with relative members of the class without defining everything so closely. If your costs and more than just a price tag, picking the best among options as trade-offs is a much easier problem.
This is done by starting with some cost tolerance, and anything that doesn't violate it will be considered. Any other costs are considered irrelevant. The remaining members are compared for their functionality.
One example is in the repair of live high-voltage lines. There is no way helicopters would have a green light by any standard approach, but once it gets into the running there are so many peculiar benefits that it builds its own niche. This is the result because there is confusion in evaluating risks, many of which are abstract to a given decision maker. You can outsource for expert opinion, but almost by definition, these people can only tell you of well known costs and risks. To understand costs requires getting out there with that pilot and getting his opinion while he is approaching that power line. Furthermore, to even know that this is the man to speak to requires knowing what the solution already is. Cost-benefit analysis boiled down to a feasibility study.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNdZhDFiDYI 
