Free SAVE International VMA Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

Risk management in Value Methodology (VM) includes strategies for both threats and opportunities, particularly during the Implementation Planning phase, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #8: Implementation Planning). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, which aligns with project management best practices (e.g., PMI’s PMBOK, as noted in Question 28), risk response strategies for opportunities include:

Exploit: Ensure the opportunity is realized by taking actions to make it certain (e.g., assigning the best resources).

Share: Partner with others to increase the likelihood or benefit of the opportunity (e.g., joint ventures).

Enhance: Increase the probability of the opportunity occurring and/or the magnitude of its beneficial results (e.g., by improving conditions or amplifying benefits).

Accept: Take no action to influence the opportunity.

The question specifically asks for the strategy that seeks to “increase the probability of an opportunity occurring and/or the magnitude of results being beneficial,” which directly matches the definition ofEnhance. For example, in a VM study, enhancing an opportunity might involve marketing a new feature to increase its adoption rate (probability) or improving its design to maximize savings (magnitude).

Option A (Exploit) is incorrect because exploiting ensures the opportunity happens, not necessarily increasing its probability or magnitude.

Option B (Share) is incorrect because sharing involves collaboration, not directly increasing probability or magnitude.

Option C (Mitigate) is incorrect because mitigation applies to threats, not opportunities.

Option D (Enhance) is correct, as it focuses on increasing the probability and/or magnitude of an opportunity’s benefits.

SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) is a tool sometimes used in Value Methodology, particularly during the Information Phase or Evaluation Phase, to assess the context of a project or product, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #3: Value Methodology Job Plan). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “SWOT analysis evaluates internal and external factors: Strengths and Weaknesses are internal attributes of the system or organization, while Opportunities and Threats are external attributes from the environment.”

Strengths: Internal, helpful attributes (e.g., strong design team).

Weaknesses: Internal, harmful attributes (e.g., high production costs).

Opportunities: External, helpful attributes (e.g., market demand).

Threats: External, harmful attributes (e.g., regulatory changes).

This framework helps the VM team identify factors that could impact the study’s success, such as external opportunities to leverage or threats to mitigate.

Option A (Strengths and opportunities are internal attributes) is incorrect because opportunities are external, not internal.

Option B (Threats and strengths are harmful attributes) is incorrect because strengths are helpful, not harmful.

Option C (Strengths and weaknesses are helpful attributes) is incorrect because weaknesses are harmful, not helpful.

Option D (Opportunities and threats are external attributes) is correct, as both are external factors in SWOT analysis.

A Value Methodology (VM) study is a core concept in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #1: Value Methodology Overview). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, a VM study is defined as “a structured effort by a multidisciplinary team using the Value Methodology to identify the functions of a project or process, establish a worth for each function, and develop alternatives to achieve those functions at the lowest overall cost while maintaining performance.” This definition emphasizes the structured nature of the VM Job Plan, the use of a multidisciplinary team (as noted in Question 24), and the focus on improving value through systematic analysis. This aligns with the description in Question 4, where a VM study was described as a structured effort using the VM process, but here the emphasis on a multidisciplinary team is key.

Option A (An analysis of a completed project design by a VM team) is incorrect because VM studies are not limited to completed designs; they can be applied at any stage of the project lifecycle, with the greatest impact early on (as noted in Questions 21 and 25).

Option B (An improvement process similar to Lean Six Sigma) is incorrect because, while VM shares goals with Lean Six Sigma (e.g., improving efficiency), it is a distinct methodology focused on function analysis and value optimization, not process variation reduction.

Option C (A workshop that applies the VM facilitated by a CVS) is incorrect because, while VM studies are often conducted as workshops and may be facilitated by a Certified Value Specialist (CVS), a CVS is not required (as clarified in Question 4), and “workshop” is too narrow a description for a VM study.

Option D (A structured effort by a multidisciplinary team using the VM) is correct, as it best captures the essence of a VM study per SAVE International’s definition, emphasizing the structured process and multidisciplinary team.

Value Methodology (VM) is defined by SAVE International in its Value Methodology Standard as “a systematic process that uses a structured Job Plan to improve the value of projects, products, or processes by analyzing their functions and identifying opportunities to achieve required functions at the lowest total cost without compromising quality or performance” (as noted in Question 23). The VMF 1 course (Core Competency #1: Value Methodology Overview) highlights three main characteristics that define VM:

Systematic process: VM follows a methodical, step-by-step approach (the VM Job Plan) to ensure consistency and effectiveness.

Multidisciplinary team: VM studies are conducted by a diverse team with varied expertise to bring different perspectives (as emphasized in Question 24).

Qualified VM facilitator: A facilitator trained in VM (often, but not always, a Certified Value Specialist) ensures the process is applied correctly and the team achieves optimal results.

While a Certified Value Specialist (CVS) is often involved, the broader characteristic is a qualified VM facilitator, as not all studies require a CVS (as noted in Question 4).

Option A (Systematic process, function analysis, CVS) is incorrect because, while systematic process and function analysis are key, a CVS is not a defining characteristic; a qualified facilitator is more broadly applicable.

Option B (Function Analysis, brainstorming, teamwork) is incorrect because these are components or activities within VM, not the main characteristics that define the methodology.

Option C (Systematic process, multidisciplinary team, qualified VM facilitator) is correct, as it captures the three core characteristics of VM per SAVE International’s standards.

Option D (Multidisciplinary team, cost reduction, function improvement) is incorrect because cost reduction and function improvement are outcomes of VM, not defining characteristics; the systematic process and facilitation are more fundamental.

The Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan, as outlined in the VMF 1 course and SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, consists of six phases: Information, Function Analysis, Creative, Evaluation, Development, and Presentation. This was established in Question 1, where the VM Job Plan was confirmed to have six phases. The last four phases, therefore, are: Creative, Evaluation, Development, and Presentation. However, the options include “Implementation,” which is not a formal phase in the standard VM Job Plan but is often considered a post-study activity (e.g., in the post-study phase, where recommendations are implemented). For the purposes of the VMA exam, which focuses on the VMF 1 curriculum, Implementation is sometimes treated as an extension of the Presentation Phase, where the team ensures stakeholder buy-in and facilitates the transition to implementation.

Thus, the correct sequence of the last four phases, interpreting Implementation as the post-Presentation activity, is:

Creative(third phase, but the first of the last four).

Evaluation(fourth phase): Assess ideas for feasibility and value improvement.

Development(fifth phase): Refine selected ideas into actionable proposals.

Presentation(sixth phase): Present recommendations to stakeholders for approval and implementation.

Implementation: Follows Presentation as a post-study activity to execute the recommendations.

Option A (Development, Presentation, Evaluation, and Implementation) is incorrect because Evaluation must precede Development—ideas are evaluated before being developed into proposals.

Option B (Evaluation, Development, Presentation, and Implementation) is correct, as it follows the VM Job Plan’s sequence and includes Implementation as the post-study step.

Option C (Evaluation, Development, Implementation, and Presentation) is incorrect because Presentation (delivering recommendations) must occur before Implementation.

Option D (Development, Evaluation, Presentation, and Implementation) is incorrect because Development cannot precede Evaluation in the VM Job Plan.

In Value Methodology’s Function Analysis, functions are classified based on their characteristics, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #2: Function Analysis). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “all-the-time functions are those that occur continuously or are always active during the operation of the system.” In a FAST diagram, all-the-time functions are often shown vertically (e.g., “when” direction) alongside the critical path, indicating they are ongoing while the main functions are performed. For example, in a car, “provide safety” (e.g., through seatbelts) is an all-the-time function because it is always active when the car is in use. This aligns with the FAST diagramming convention of showing simultaneous functions.

Option A (Outside the study scope) is incorrect because all-the-time functions are within the scope if they are part of the system’s operation, though they may be supporting functions.

Option B (A drain on resources) is incorrect because all-the-time functions are not necessarily resource-intensive; they are simply continuous.

Option C (Continuous) is correct, as it matches the definition of all-the-time functions in VM.

Option D (Undesirable) is incorrect because all-the-time functions are not inherently undesirable; they may be essential (e.g., “provide safety”).

The Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) diagram is a key tool in Value Methodology’s Function Analysis phase, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #2). FAST diagrams map the relationships between functions, with the horizontal axis showing the “how-why” logic (critical path) and vertical lines called scope lines defining the study’s boundaries. According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “the left vertical line in a FAST diagram is a scope line, and the function immediately to its right is typically the higher-order function, which represents the overarching goal or need for the system.” The functionto the leftof the left scope line is outside the study’s scope and often represents an even broader objective or external assumption that drives the higher-order function. However, in standard FAST diagramming, thehigher-order functionis the closest function to the left scope line within the scope, and functions to the left of the scope line (e.g., P in the diagram from Question 30) are external.

In the context of the VMA exam and VMF 1, the question likely tests the understanding of the higher-order function’s position relative to the scope line. As established in Question 18, Function E (just inside the left scope line B) is the higher-order function. Functions to the left of the left scope line (e.g., P) are typically external assumptions or broader objectives, but the options provided (A, B, C, D) refer to standard function classifications within the FAST framework. Thehigher-order function(C) is the most relevant choice, as it is the function closest to the left scope line within the study’s scope, and the question may be interpreted as asking for the function type associated with that position.

Option A (Basic Function) is incorrect because the basic function is typically more central on the critical path, not at the far left.

Option B (Secondary Function) is incorrect because secondary functions are vertical (supporting the critical path), not on the main path near the left scope line.

Option C (Higher Order Function) is correct, as the higher-order function is located just to the right of the left scope line (e.g., Function E), and the question may be interpreted in this context based on standard FAST conventions.

Option D (Lower Order Function) is incorrect because lower-order functions are to the right of the basic function, representing more specific outcomes, not near the left scope line.

In Value Methodology, cost analysis often involves financial metrics like the payback period to evaluate the economic feasibility of alternatives, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #4: Cost Analysis). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, the payback period is “the time required for the cumulative savings or benefits from an investment to equal the initial cost, calculated as Initial Investment ÷ Annual Savings.” Here, the organization invests $160,000 in a software system that saves $3,000 per year.

Payback Period = Initial Investment ÷ Annual Savings

Payback Period = $160,000 ÷ $3,000 = 53.333 years

Rounding to the nearest whole number, the payback period is approximately 53 years.

The question does not specify adjustments for the time value of money (e.g., discounting), which aligns with the simple payback method commonly used in VM for straightforward analysis.

Option A (45 years) is incorrect because 160,000 ÷ 3,000 = 53.333, not 45.

Option B (50 years) is incorrect because it underestimates the payback period (53.333 years).

Option C (53 years) is correct, as it matches the calculated payback period when rounded.

Option D (56 years) is incorrect because it overestimates the payback period.