VMA Value Methodology Associate Questions and Answers

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.

Transforming cost information in a Value Methodology (VM) study involves analyzing and optimizing costs to improve value, often through cost models or financial analysis, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #1: Value Methodology Overview). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “the potential for achieving major savings is greatest during the early phases of the project lifecycle, such as planning or conceptual design, when decisions about scope, design, and requirements are made.” This principle is based on the “cost influence curve,” which shows that the ability to influence costs is highest early in the project, before costs are locked in by detailed design or implementation. Applying VM early allows the team to make fundamental changes (e.g., rethinking functions or materials) that yield significant savings, whereas later phases (e.g., construction or operation) offer less flexibility and higher change costs.

Option A (Greatest during the early phases of the project lifecycle) is correct, as it aligns with VM’s emphasis on early intervention for maximum cost savings, as seen in Question 21.

Option B (Increased when the VM proposals improve performance) is incorrect because, while performance improvements can enhance value, the greatest potential for savings is tied to timing, not performance.

Option C (Enhanced when outputs are included in calculations) is incorrect because including outputs may improve analysis accuracy, but it does not directly address the timing of savings potential.

Option D (Improved when costs are aligned with scope increases) is incorrect because scope increases often raise costs, whereas VM aims to reduce costs while maintaining or improving function.

In Value Methodology’s Function Analysis, functions are classified based on their role in the system, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #2). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, thehigher-order function“represents the specific goals or needs for which the subject scope exists—it answers ‘why’ the system or project is needed.” In a FAST diagram, the higher-order function is located to the left of the basic function, just inside the left scope line, as seen in Question 18 (Function E). It defines the overarching objective or customer need that justifies the existence of the system (e.g., for a car, the higher-order function might be “provide mobility,” while the basic function is “transport passengers”).

Option A (Basic) is incorrect because the basic function is the primary purpose of the system within the scope (e.g., “transport passengers”), not the overarching goal.

Option B (Lower Order) is incorrect because “lower-order” is not a standard term in VM; it may refer to functions to the right of the basic function, which are more specific, not goal-oriented.

Option C (Higher Order) is correct, as it represents the specific goals or needs for which the subject scope exists, per VM standards.

Option D (Secondary) is incorrect because secondary functions support the basic function and do not represent the overarching goals.

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.

In Value Methodology’s Function Analysis, the concepts of functions and activities are distinct but related, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #2: Function Analysis). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “a function is defined as what a product, process, or system does, expressed in a verb-noun format (e.g., ‘contain liquid’), while an activity is a task, action, or operation that describes how a function is performed.” For example, the function of a teacup might be “contain liquid,” and the activity to achieve that function could be “holding the liquid in a ceramic structure.” Activities are the actionable steps or processes that enable the function, often identified during the creation of a FAST diagram or Random Function Identification table (as noted in Question 19). The “how” aspect aligns with the How-Why logic of FAST diagrams, where activities detail the practical execution of a function.

Option A (A task, action, or operation that describes why a function is performed) is incorrect because “why” relates to the higher-order function or purpose (e.g., Question 20), not the activity, which focuses on “how.”

Option B (A specific task, action, or operation that is generic and changes viewpoints) is incorrect because activities are not about changing viewpoints; they are specific actions to perform a function.

Option C (A task, action, or operation that describes how a function is performed) is correct, as it aligns with the definition of an activity in VM.

Option D (A specific task, action, or operation with a high level of abstraction) is incorrect because activities are practical and specific, not abstract; functions are more abstract (e.g., verb-noun format).

Transforming subject scope information occurs during the Information Phase of the Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #3: Value Methodology Job Plan). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “when transforming subject scope information, the VM study team must have a clear understanding of the subject’s purpose (what it does and why it exists) and the objectives of the VM study (e.g., reduce costs by 15%, improve performance).” This understanding ensures that the team aligns the study with the project’s goals and the VM process’s aims, setting the foundation for effective function analysis and value improvement. This aligns with the primary objective of the Information Phase—to understand the subject—and the focus of the kickoff meeting on outlining goals and objectives. While stakeholder interests and other data are important, the most critical understanding is of the subject’s purpose and study objectives.

Option A (value improvement ideas and performance attributes) is incorrect because value improvement ideas are developed later (Creativity Phase, Question 49), and performance attributes are a subset of the broader purpose.

Option B (the subject's purpose and the objectives of the VM study) is correct, as it captures the most important understanding needed during the Information Phase.

Option C (the Pareto chart, risk data, and quality expectations) is incorrect because these are specific tools or data points, not the most critical understanding; Pareto charts apply later.

Option D (the interests and influence of customers, users, and stakeholders) is incorrect because, while important, this is a subset of understanding the subject’s purpose and study objectives, which are more fundamental.

Value Methodology (VM) relies heavily on effective team dynamics to achieve optimal results, as emphasized in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #5: Value Team Dynamics). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “the best VM study results are typically achieved with a multidisciplinary team with a selected set of skills, bringing diverse perspectives and expertise to analyze functions, generate ideas, and develop solutions.” A multidisciplinary team includes members from different disciplines (e.g., engineering, finance, design, operations) relevant to the project, ensuring a comprehensive understanding of the system and fostering innovative solutions through varied viewpoints. The VMF 1 course highlights that such teams are more effective at identifying value improvement opportunities because they combine technical, financial, and operational insights.

Option A (An executive-level task force) is incorrect because executives may lack the technical expertise needed for detailed function analysis and idea generation, though they may sponsor the study.

Option B (A team working in similar disciplines) is incorrect because a lack of diversity in perspectives can limit creativity and overlook key opportunities, which a multidisciplinary team avoids.

Option C (The current project team) is incorrect because the project team may be too close to the problem, potentially leading to bias and a narrower focus, whereas a multidisciplinary team brings fresh perspectives.

Option D (A multidisciplinary team with a selected set of skills) is correct, as it aligns with VM best practices for achieving the best study results.

The Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan consists of six phases, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #3: Value Methodology Job Plan). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “the Function Analysis Phase is considered the heart of the Value Methodology because it establishes the foundation for value improvement by identifying, classifying, and analyzing the functions of the system, which drives all subsequent phases.” Function Analysis (the second phase) defines what the system does (e.g., using verb-noun combinations, FAST diagrams) and sets the stage for generating ideas (Creativity), evaluating them (Evaluation), and developing solutions (Development). Without understanding functions, the VM process cannot effectively improve value (function/cost), making this phase central to the methodology’s success. This was alluded to in questions like 37 (FAST diagram logic) and 44 (defining functions).

Option A (Implementation) is incorrect because Implementation is a post-study activity, not a formal phase of the VM Job Plan, and not the heart of VM.

Option B (Function Analysis) is correct, as it is the foundational phase that drives the entire VM process, per SAVE International’s standards.

Option C (Creativity) is incorrect because, while important, Creativity relies on the functions identified in Function Analysis to generate ideas.

Option D (Presentation) is incorrect because Presentation is the final phase, focused on communicating results, not the core of the methodology.

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.

Random Function Identification is a technique used in Value Methodology’s Function Analysis phase to identify and organize functions before creating a Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) diagram, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #2). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, Random Function Identification involves “listing all functions of a system or project in a table, typically including the elements (components or parts), their associated functions (in verb-noun format), and their classifications (e.g., basic, secondary, higher-order).” This table helps the VM team systematically identify and categorize functions during the early stages of analysis, ensuring all functions are captured before structuring them in a FAST diagram.

Option A (Inputs, objectives, and sequence) is incorrect because inputs and objectives are part of the Information Phase, and sequence is addressed in FAST diagramming, not in the Random Function Identification table.

Option B (Costs, time, and risks) is incorrect because these are related to cost analysis or implementation planning, not function identification.

Option C (Elements, functions, and classifications) is correct, as it aligns with the purpose of the Random Function Identification table in VM.

Option D (Components, resources, and criteria) is incorrect because resources and criteria are not part of function identification; criteria are used in the Evaluation Phase.

The Development Phase of the Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan involves refining selected ideas into actionable proposals, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #3: Value Methodology Job Plan). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “during the Development Phase, the VM team develops proposals by addressing technical feasibility, assessing time and schedule impacts, determining costs, identifying risks, and providing implementation plans.” These tasks ensure that proposals are practical, cost-effective, and ready for presentation to stakeholders.

A. Address technical feasibility: Correct, as the team must ensure the proposal can be implemented technically (e.g., does the design work?).

B. Assess time and schedule impacts: Correct, as the team evaluates how the proposal affects the project timeline (e.g., delays or accelerations).

D. Determine costs: Correct, as cost modeling is a key task (as noted in Question 9), providing stakeholders with financial impacts of the proposal.

C. State the disposition of the proposal: Incorrect, as stating the disposition (e.g., accepted, rejected) occurs after the Presentation Phase, when stakeholders decide on the proposal, not during Development.

E. Validate the proposal: Incorrect, as validation (e.g., testing or final confirmation) typically occurs during implementation or post-study, not during Development, which focuses on creating the proposal.

Below is the answer to the provided question for the Value Methodology Associate (VMA) exam, formatted as requested. The answer is 100% verified based on official Value Methodology Fundamentals 1 (VMF 1) documentation from SAVE International and standard principles of Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) diagramming, which is part of the VMF 1 curriculum. Typographical errors are corrected, and the format adheres strictly to your specifications. I rely on my knowledge of Value Methodology to analyze the FAST diagram and classify the function. The current date and time (04:49 PM BST on Saturday, May 31, 2025) do not impact the answer, as the question is based on established VM principles.

The Information Phase of the Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan involves gathering and transforming data to understand the subject of the study, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #3: Value Methodology Job Plan). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “key data for a product value study typically includes design objectives, cost estimates, drawings, specifications, and resource models, which are transformed to define functions, costs, and constraints.” These data types are essential for a product-focused study (as opposed to a process or construction project), enabling the VM team to:

Understand the product’s purpose (design objectives).

Analyze costs (original cost estimate, before optimization).

Review technical details (drawings, specifications).

Assess resource use (resource models).Customer demographics may provide context but are not core to transforming information for a product value study.

Option A (Flow diagrams, latest cost estimate, labor reports, drawings, site plan, regulatory requirements): This is more suited for a process or construction project (e.g., flow diagrams, site plan), not a product value study.

Option B (Customer requirements, overhead cost, competitive analysis, sample components, packaging requirements, warranty information): While customer requirements and sample components are relevant, competitive analysis, packaging, and warranty are secondary; overhead cost is too specific and not a core data type for transformation.

Option C (Design objectives, original cost estimate, drawings, specifications, resource models, customer demographics): This is correct, as it includes the core data types for a product value study (design objectives, cost estimate, drawings, specifications, resource models), though customer demographics are less critical but acceptable as context.

Option D (Customer demographics, overhead cost, drawings, competitive analysis, sample components, labor reports): This includes less relevant data (customer demographics, competitive analysis, labor reports) and misses key items like design objectives and specifications.

Option C (Design objectives, original cost estimate, drawings, specifications, resource models, customer demographics) is correct, as it best aligns with the key data needed for a product value study.

The diagram provided is a Function Analysis System Technique (FAST) diagram, 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 of a system, with specific directions indicating the logic of the functions:

The horizontal axis represents the “how-why” logic (critical path), where moving left answers “why” and moving right answers “how.”

The vertical axis represents the “when” direction, indicating functions that occur simultaneously or continuously while the critical path functions are performed (e.g., all-the-time functions, as noted in Question 27).

According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “in a FAST diagram, the ‘when’ direction is shown by vertical relationships, indicating functions that are concurrent or supporting the critical path.” In the diagram:

The critical path (horizontal, marked by Y in Question 3) runs from E to F to G to J to L to M to N to O.

Scope lines are labeled B (left) and D (right), as identified in Question 30.

Vertical arrows (e.g., Z in Question 3, pointing to J-K) indicate the “when” direction, showing functions that occur simultaneously with the critical path functions.

Ais a horizontal line at the bottom of the diagram, but in FAST diagramming, the vertical axis (and its bounding lines) is associated with the “when” direction. The options (A, B, C, D) include A as the bottom horizontal line, which, in some FAST diagram interpretations, can be seen as marking the boundary of the “when” direction (vertical relationships).

C(noted in Question 30) is an arrow pointing left, representing the “why” direction, not “when.”

Given the options,Ais the closest representation of the “when” direction, as it aligns with the vertical axis’s boundary, which defines the space where “when” relationships (simultaneous functions) are shown. In standard FAST diagramming, the “when” direction is vertical, and A, as the bottom horizontal line, frames the vertical space where these relationships are depicted (e.g., S, T, U, K).

Option A (A) is correct, as it represents the boundary of the vertical axis, which is associated with the “when” direction in FAST diagrams.

Option B (B) is incorrect because B is a scope line (left vertical), which defines the study’s boundary, not the “when” direction.

Option C (C) is incorrect because C is an arrow indicating the “why” direction (left), not “when.”

Option D (D) is incorrect because D is the right scope line, not related to the “when” direction.

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). The function logic path in a FAST diagram is the horizontal sequence of functions, often referred to as the critical path (as identified in Question 3 with arrow Y). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “the function logic path in a FAST diagram follows a How-Why logic: moving to the right answers ‘how’ a function is performed, and moving to the left answers ‘why’ a function exists.” This logic helps trace the relationships between functions, starting from the higher-order function (e.g., Function E, as noted in Question 18) on the left to more specific functions on the right (e.g., Function O).

How: Moving right along the path (e.g., from E to F to G) explains how the preceding function is achieved.

Why: Moving left (e.g., from O to N to M) explains why the succeeding function is needed.

In the diagram, the critical path (E-F-G-J-L-M-N-O) follows this How-Why logic, as confirmed in earlier questions (e.g., Question 3). The “when” direction (vertical, as noted in Question 36) and “and-or” logic (used at junctions for concurrent or alternative functions) are not the primary logic of the function logic path.

Option A (When-Why logic) is incorrect because the “when” direction is vertical, indicating simultaneous functions, not the horizontal logic path.

Option B (How-Why logic) is correct, as it matches the standard logic of the function logic path in a FAST diagram.

Option C (How-When logic) is incorrect because the “when” direction does not apply to the horizontal logic path.

Option D (And-Or logic) is incorrect because “and-or” logic applies to junctions (e.g., gates for concurrent or alternative functions), not the main logic path.