Explanation:
1. Review information # 2. Create matrix or table # 3. List elements or components # 4. Brainstorm functions
# 5. Identify basic function(s)
The correct sequence follows the Function Analysis Phase logic used in Value Methodology. The team must first review information so that the subject under study is understood before any function statements are generated. SAVE's VMF curriculum places Random Function Identification directly within the Function Analysis Phase, after defining functions and before FAST diagramming and function-resource matrices. ( SAVE International Online Courses ) After reviewing the available data, the facilitator creates a matrix or table to organize the analysis. The team then lists the physical or process elements/components being examined. Once the elements are visible, the team can brainstorm functions using the required active verb and measurable noun format. SAVE's Value Methodology Standard states that the Function Analysis Phase begins by identifying and defining work and sell functions using active verbs and measurable nouns, and notes that this is often called Random Function Definition . ( courses.washington.edu ) The final step is to identify the basic function(s) because basic-function classification can only be done after candidate functions have been generated. This aligns with the Standard's sequence: define functions first, then classify them as basic or secondary. ( courses.washington.edu ) References/topics: Function Analysis Phase; Random Function Identification; Function Definition; Basic Function Classification.

The correct answers are A, C, and D because the Presentation Phase is focused on communicating developed VM results in a form that enables decision makers to understand, judge, and act on the team's recommendations. SAVE's Value Methodology Standard describes the Presentation Phase as the point where the team leader develops a report or presentation that "documents and conveys the adequacy" of the developed alternatives and their value improvement opportunity. ( ) Therefore, tailoring the material to the participants is essential. Executives, technical reviewers, owners, cost specialists, and implementation personnel require different levels of detail and emphasis. Timing of the presentation is also critical because VM results should be presented while the study findings are current, decision attention is active, and implementation momentum has not been lost. Level of development of proposal write-ups is equally important because weak or incomplete write-ups reduce credibility and make approval difficult.
Option B is incorrect because the team should not present every idea generated in Creativity; only evaluated and developed alternatives should advance. The Evaluation Phase selects ideas with value potential, and the Development Phase turns selected ideas into documented proposals for decision making. ( ) References/topics: Presentation Phase; Development Phase; VM Proposal Write-Ups; Decision-Maker Communication; VM Results Presentation.

The correct answers are A and C . Once the decision-makers have approved a VM proposal, the facilitator should not automatically reopen or reassess the recommendation. The implementation responsibility has moved into the post-study/implementation environment, where the primary objective is to "assure the implementation of the approved value study change recommendations." The SAVE VM Standard also states that the VM Team Leader may track the progress of implementation , while the design professional or assigned management personnel are responsible for executing the approved change. ( UW Courses ) Therefore, if the project manager resists an approved change, the facilitator should first treat the resistance as an implementation barrier. This requires identifying potential threats to implementation , such as technical objections, schedule concerns, stakeholder resistance, contractual constraints, or organizational politics. The Standard also requires implementation planning to account for risk, uncertainty, schedule impact, and unique project conditions. ( UW Courses ) Documenting the resistance to decision-makers is also appropriate because implementation status must remain visible to management. Reassessing the VM proposal is not appropriate unless new facts invalidate the approved recommendation. Additional information may be useful later, but the immediate facilitator actions are documentation and threat identification.
References/topics: Implementation Phase; Post-Study; Implementation Monitoring; Management Reporting; Implementation Risk.

The correct answers are A. Presentation environment and location and C. The technical experience of the audience . In the Presentation Phase, the facilitator must shape the format so the VM results can be clearly understood by decision-makers and stakeholders. SAVE's Value Methodology Standard states that the team leader develops a report and/or presentation that documents and conveys the adequacy of the developed alternatives and their associated value improvement opportunity. ( ) The presentation environment and location matter because format choices depend on whether the presentation is in-person, virtual, formal, informal, executive-level, workshop-style, or held in a room with limited display or discussion capability. The facilitator must ensure the setting supports clear communication, graphics, interaction, and decision-making.
The technical experience of the audience is also essential. Highly technical reviewers may need detailed assumptions, calculations, drawings, and risk explanations. Senior executives may need a concise value case, cost impact, implementation effect, and decision options.
Option B concerns presenter assignment, not presentation format. Option D is too narrow; PowerPoint is only one possible delivery tool and does not define the proper VM presentation format.
References/topics: Presentation Phase; VM Report and Presentation; Audience Analysis; Presentation Environment; Decision-Maker Communication.

The correct answers are A and D . In a VM study, assumptions must not be accepted automatically as fixed requirements. Many projects begin with assumptions about user needs, design criteria, operating conditions, owner preferences, codes, capacities, materials, schedules, or performance expectations. Over time, these assumptions may become treated as mandatory requirements even when they have not been tested. The VM study team's responsibility is to examine them objectively.
The team should challenge assumptions with facts because unsupported assumptions can restrict creativity, increase cost, and prevent better value solutions. Challenging does not mean rejecting them blindly; it means asking whether the assumption is true, current, measurable, and necessary to perform the required function.
The team should also verify assumptions through project data, stakeholder input, customer needs, technical criteria, codes, standards, cost information, and performance requirements. Verified assumptions may remain as valid constraints or criteria. Unverified assumptions should not control the study.
Option B is incorrect because assumptions should not simply be replaced without analysis. Option C is incorrect because accepting assumptions as facts can cause the team to preserve unnecessary cost and miss value-improvement opportunities.
References/topics: Information Phase; Assumptions; Criteria and Requirements; Fact-Based Analysis; VM Job Plan.