Vmstandard SAVE

8/9/2019 Vmstandard SAVE

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/vmstandard-save 1/33

VALUE STANDARD and

BODY OF KNOWLEDGE

June 2007



Value Standard and Body of Knowledge

SAVE International Value Standard, 2007 edition 1

Table of Contents

Page No.

Acknowledgements...............................................................................................................2

Value Standard

Purpose and Scope of the Sta nd ard ............................................................................4

Va lue Stand ard..................................................................................................................5

Bod y of Know led ge

History .................................................................................................................................7

Overview ............................................................................................................................8

Applicability .....................................................................................................................10

Stud y Duration ................................................................................................................11

Job Plan Technique s.......................................................................................................12

Workshop Ac tivities.........................................................................................................13

Roles And Responsib ilities...............................................................................................20

Sta nd ard Revision Proc ess.............................................................................................23

Key Competenc ies fo r Prac tit ioners.............................................................................25

Glossary.............................................................................................................................21

References.......................................................................................................................................... 28

The SAVE International Standard’s Body of Knowledge will continue to be expandedto include information on the various tools and techniques used in the practice of Value



Value Standard and Body of Knowledge


Acknowledgements

SAVE Internationa l grate fully a c knowled ge s

the VP Educ ation team and , in p a rtic ular,

Fred Kolano , (SAVE Inte rna tiona l Direc to r of

Sta nd ards and Resourc es), Rand a ll

Sprague, and Dr. Roy Woo dhea d for their

c ontributions and a dd itions to the o rigina l

stand ard d eveloped by the Paul Revere

Cha pter and John W. Bryan t in Ma y, 1997.

Foreword

This Sta nd ard was originally drafted in Ma y1997. It has bee n upd a ted period ic a lly to

add ress c ha nges in the b usiness

environment and tec hnology and to mee t

future integ ra tion with the Internationa l

Sta nd ards Organiza tion . The Value

Sta ndard is intended to p rovide a prac tic a l

guide fo r app lying the p rinciples of the

value m ethod ology in a c onsistent m anne r.

It ma y be used by bo th prac titione rs and

management.

The value method olog y ca n be ap plied to

a w ide va riety of app lic a tions, including

industrial or consumer products,

c onstruc tion projec ts, ma nufac turing

p roc esses, b usiness p roc edures, servic es,

and business plans.

The va lue me thod ology is c om monly

app lied und er the nam es Value Ana lysis

(VA), Value Eng ineering (VE), and Value

Ma nage me nt (VM). These terms c an be

used interc hang ea b ly with value

method olog y throughout the stand ard a nd

this doc ument. Other value imp rovem ent

p roc esses also qua lify a s va lue stud ies as

long as they ad here to the Va lue

Standard ’s Job Plan a nd perform Func tion

Ana lysis as part of the ir tota l proc ess.

This Standard has been p rep ared by the

SAVE Inte rna tiona l Stand a rds and

Resourc es Direc to r, a m em ber of the SAVE

Internat ional’s Vice President of Educ a tion’s

tea m. It is app rove d by the SAVEInternat ional Certific a tion Boa rd a nd the

SAVE Interna tiona l Board o f Direc to rs. It

see ks to sta te the minimum tha t c lients and

provide rs should e xpec t whe n the va lue

method ology is ap plied to a projec t.

This Sta nd a rd w ill assist mana gers, va lue

prog ram manage rs, p rac titione rs, and

tra iners in app lying va lue metho dolog y in

the ir organiza tions in a c onsistent, sta nd ard

ma nne r. It may a lso a ssist tho se w hoproc ure value m ethod ology servic es to

deve lop p rop osa l req uests tha t ensure the y

rec eive co mp lete and useful value

me thod olog y servic es.

The no menc la ture used throug hout th is

Value Stand ard a nd Bod y of Know led ge is

as follows:

Value Study -- The o verarching o b jec tive o f

a va lue stud y is to imp rove the va lue o f the

project.

Job Plan – Provides the structure for the

Value Study whic h is pa rt of a three-stage

proc ess (see Figure 1, page 12):

1. Pre-Workshop preparation

2. Value Workshop which a pp lies the

Six Pha se Job Plan (see page 6)

3. Post-Workshop doc ume nta tion and

implementation

Value Methodology – Provides the p roc essand struc ture tha t is used to a pp ly the

Va lue Job Plan used in the Workshop .

Value Standard – Esta b lishes the spec ific six-

phase seq uentia l Job Plan p roc ess and

outlines the ob jec tives of eac h of tho se

pha ses. It doe s not sta nd a rd ize the spec ific

ac tivities that a re used to a c c om plish ea c h

phase.



Value Standard

SAVE International VM Standard, 2006 edition 3

Value Standard



Value Standard


Purpose and Scope of the Standard

The p urpo se o f this doc ument is to :

1) Define the step s and c om po nents that

c onstitute a va lid Value Stud y.

2) Doc ument supp orting informa tion that

defines a g eneric m ethod ology,

c om mon terminolog y, and stand ard

prac tic e to g uide prac titioners and

ma nagers in effec tively app lying va lue

method ology to imp rove the va lue of

the ir p rojec ts.

3) Guide the prac titioner and m ana ge r in

de termining a t wha t po int to a pp ly

value m ethodo logy to a projec t in orde r

to ma ximize:

a . the b enefits of tea m innovation

skills and

b . implementation of alternative(s)

that ad d va lue to the project.

This do c ument ma y be used by b oth

p rac titioners and ma nag ers as a guide for

ap plying value m ethodo log y.

The Value Stand a rd a llow s for the ta ilored

ap plica tion of value methodo log y and

relate d p rac tices to suit the intended

application.

The Value Standard has not beenp rep ared a s a lega l doc ument. If the user

intends to use the Va lue Standard for

procurement purposes the user should

c onsult expertise fam iliar with cont rac t

lang uag e, including seeking leg al

guidance.

Users of the Va lue Sta nda rd should b e

aw are tha t som e go verning bo dies req uire

that value engineering facilitator hold

spec ific lic enses or othe r c redentials not

ident ified by the Value Standard . If so, the

user should identify suc h c onsiderations

when solic iting and c ontrac ting for value

me thod ology servic es.

A Va lue Stud y is the forma l

application of a value

methodology to a project in

order to imp rove its va lue. This

application is also referred to as

value engineering, value analysis,

value planning, or value

ma nagem ent. For purposes ofthis standard, the subject of a

Va lue Stud y whether it is a

product, process, procedure,

design, or service will be referred

to a s the “ projec t.”



Value Standard


The Value StandardThe va lue me thod olog y is a system atic p roc ess tha t follow s the Job Plan. A va lue

me thod ology is ap plied by a m ultidisciplinary team to improve the value of a p roject

throug h the ana lysis of func tions.

The Job Plan c onsists of the following

seq uentia l pha ses. (See Figure 1, pag e 13):

1. Information Phase

The tea m reviews and defines the

c urrent c ond itions of the projec t a nd

identifies the g oa ls of the stud y.

2. Func tion Analysis Phase

The team d efines the p rojec t funct ionsusing a two -word ac tive verb/

me asurab le noun co ntext. The team

reviews and ana lyzes these func tions to

de termine w hich need imp rovement,

elimination, or creation to meet the

projec t’ s go a ls.

3. Creative Phase

The te am em ploys c rea tive tec hniques

to ide ntify other wa ys to p erform the

projec t’ s func tion(s).

4. Eva lua tion Phase

The tea m follow s a struc tured eva lua tion

proc ess to selec t tho se idea s tha t o ffer

the pote ntia l for value imp rovem ent

while delivering the p rojec t’ s func tion(s)

and c onside ring p erformanc e

requirem ents and resourc e limits.

5. Development Phase

The team de velops the selecte d ide as

into a lternat ives (or prop osa ls) with a

suffic ient level of do c umenta tion toa llow dec ision ma kers to d ete rmine if

the a lternative should b e impleme nted .

6. Presentation Phase

The team lea de r develops a rep ort

and / or presentation that d oc uments

and c onveys the ad eq uac y of the

a lternative(s) deve lop ed by the team

and the a ssoc ia ted va lue imp rovem ent

opportunity.

In order to qualify as a Va lue Study , the

following conditions must be satisfied.

A. The Value Stud y Team follows an

organized Job Plan tha t inc ludes, a t a

minimum , the six pha ses identified in this

standard. Func tion Ana lysis, as defined

in this doc ume nt, is performe d on theproject.

B. The Va lue Study Team is a

multidisc iplinary g roup of experienc ed

p rofe ssiona ls and p rojec t sta keho lders.

Tea m mem be rs are c hosen b ased on

their expe rtise a nd expe rienc e w ith the

p rojec t. Som etimes ind ividua ls who have

releva nt expe rtise; but a re no t d irec tly

involved with the projec t are ad de d to

p rovide a d ifferent po int of view.

C. The Value Team Lea de r is tra ined in

value method ology tec hniques and is

qualified to lead a study tea m using the

Job Plan. The SAVE Inte rnationa l

Certification Board certifies, with the

designa tion Certified Va lue Spec ialists

(CVS), tho se ind ividua ls who ha ve m et

spec ified tra ining req uirem ents and

have d emo nstrated c omp etenc y in the

app lica tion of the Job Plan. The Tea m

Fac ilitator sha ll be a CVS, or a VM Pserving und er the guida nc e o f a CVS as

defined by SAVE Ce rtific a tion c riteria, or

sha ll be the ho lder other ac tive

c ertific a tion rec og nized by SAVE

International.



Body of Knowledge

SAVE International Value Standard, 2007 edition

Body of Knowledge

The informa tion c onta ined in this Bod y of Know ledge is a

general guideline and is not meant to be either fully inclusive

or exclusive of all possible techniques. Differences in the

application of techniques used to accomplish VE Phases will

be ba sed on the nature of the p rojec t and the preference ofthe va lue p rac titioner.



Body of Knowledge


History of the Value MethodologiesValue Ana lysis wa s c onc eived in the ea rly

1940s by Lawrenc e D. Miles while he w as

em ployed by Ge nera l Elec tric , a ma jordefense c ontrac tor which wa s fac ing the

sc arc ity of stra teg ic ma teria ls needed to

p rod uc e their p rod uc ts during World War II.

Mr. Miles rea lized tha t if value and relate d

innova tion imp rovem ents c ould b e

systema tic ally “ ma nag ed ,” then General

Elec tric wo uld have a c om petitive

adva ntag e in the marketplac e. With that in

mind, Mr. Miles ac c ep ted the c halleng e

and devised the func tion a nalysis c onc ep t,

which he integ ra ted into a n innova tiveprocess he later termed value analysis.

Mr. Miles understoo d tha t p rod uc ts a re

purc hased for wha t they c an d o—either

through the wo rk they perform o r the

p lea sing aesthet ic q ua lities they p rovide .

Using this as his foundationa l informa tion,

he foc used on und erstand ing the function

of the co mp onent be ing ma nufac tured . He

questioned whe ther the d esign c ould b e

improved o r if a d ifferent m ateria l orc onc ep t could a chieve the function.

To fo c us on the func tion itself, he used an

ac tive verb and a measurable noun in

c om bination to cha rac terize the benefit

tha t a p art’ s func tion provides. He then

sea rc hed for other wa ys or method s to

ac hieve the b enefit of that intended

func tion. From this resea rc h, func tion

ana lysis, the key fo undation o f va lue

method ologies, was de velop ed and hasbec ome a to ol to help individuals and

teams manag e the way a co ncep t is

understood.

These spec ialized teams typ ica lly ad d ress

p rojec t-rela ted issues suc h a s increa sed

sa les reve nue, imp rove d p rod uc t

pe rforma nc e, and red uc ed resource

usage.

The U.S. Army a nd Navy, and other

companies, soon realized the success of

Larry Miles’ me thod s. As the app lic a tion o f

va lue ana lysis expa nded , there was a lso a

c hange in c onte xt—from review of existing

pa rts to improving c onc ep tua l de signs. This

wa s one o f two fa c tors that m a rked the

em ergenc e o f value eng ineering. The o ther

wa s a desire by the U.S. Navy to use the

Va lue Ana lysis tec hniques for projec t

improvement in the ea rly 1950s whe n the rewa s a mo ra torium on hiring “ ana lysts.”

Since eng ineering positions we re ava ilab le,

individuals practicing this new discipline

we re emp loyed as “ Value Eng ineers.”

As the value metho do log y ga ined in

pop ula rity, a g roup of p rac titioners formed

a learning soc iety to sha re insights and

advanc e their innova tive c apab ilities. Thus,

in 1959, the “ Soc iety of Am eric an Va lue

Enginee rs” wa s inco rporate d in

Washington, DC.

Soo n, the va lue metho dolog y was used to

improve the va lue o f projec ts in

go vernment, the p rivate sec tor, and the

ma nufac turing the c onstruction industries

and value c onc ep ts spread worldw ide .

Conc urrent w ith this grow th, a numb er of

othe r va lue imp roving to ols, tec hniques,

and proc esses em erged , many of w hic h

were com plementary to and wereinteg ra ted w ith the value conc ep ts. In an

effort to a ttrac t the d evelope rs and

prac titioners of these eme rg ing me thod s to

our mem be rship, the na me of the soc iety

wa s c hanged to “ SAVE Internationa l” in

1996.



Body of Knowledge


Overview

The va lue me thodolog y is a systema tic

p roc ess used by a multidisc ip linary team toimprove the value of a project through the

ana lysis of its func tions. Value is defined as

a fa ir return or eq uiva lent in good s, service s,

or money for som ething excha nged . Value

is commonly represented by the

relationship:

Value ≈ Func tion/ Resources

where function is measured by the

performanc e req uireme nts of the c ustom er

and resources are measured in materials,

labor, price, time, etc. required to

accomplish that function. A value

methodology focuses on improving value

by identifying alternate ways to reliably

accomplish a function that meets the

performanc e expec ta tions of the c ustome r.

Function Analysis is the foundation of a

value methodology and is

the key activity that

differentiates this body ofknowledge from other

problem-solving or

improvement practices.

During the Function Analysis

Phase of the Job Plan,

functions are identified that

describe the work being

performed within the scope of the project

und er stud y. These func tions a re d esc ribed

using two word, active verb/measurable

noun pairings, for example one function ofa hammer is to apply force . The team

reviews the p rojec t’ s func tions to dete rmine

those tha t c ould b e imp roved . These m ay

be project functions that seem to be

performed inefficiently or with more than

expe c ted c ost. These func tions bec om e

the focus of the value methodology team

in their end ea vor to imp rove the p rojec t.

The identific ation a nd nam ing o f projec t

functions enables clear thinking by limitingthe description of a function to an active

verb that operates on a measurable noun

to communicate what work an item or

ac tivity p erforms. This na ming p roc ess he lps

multidisciplinary teams build a shared

understanding of the functional

req uirem ents of the p rojec t a nd , as a result,

it allows them to identify where

op portunities for va lue imp rove me nt e xist in

the p rojec t.

Function analysis can be enhanced

through the use of a graphical mapping

tool known as the Func tion Ana lysis Syste m

Tec hnique (FAST), which a llows team

members to understand how the functions

of a projec t relate to ea ch other.

A fundamental tenet of a value

methodology is that basic functions (the

necessary

purpose of the

project) must bepreserved . This is

because the

basic function

reveals the

usefulness of the

project and the

reason for its

existence. For example, the basic function

of a wristwatch could be “indicate time.”

Other secondary functions support the

basic func tion. These sec ond ary func tionstypica lly p rovide esteem , depe nda bility, or

convenience value for the user. An

examp le is a g old wa tc hca se tha t pe rforms

an aesthetic function which pleases both

customers and those whom they want to

impress.

Value is defined as a fairreturn or equivalent in goods,

services, or money forsomething exchanged.



Body of Knowledge


The va lue m etho dolog y is app lied using a

p roc ess know n as the “ Job Plan.” The

purpose o f the Job Plan is to g uide the

Study tea m throug h the p roc ess of

ide ntifying and foc using on key projec tfunctions in order to c rea te ne w ide as that

w ill result in va lue imp rovem ents.

While a Value Study is gu ided by the

func tion-ba sed Job Plan, it can be further

supp orted b y many c om monly used

business improveme nt te c hniques (See

Ac tivities sec tion fo r examp les).



Body of Knowledge


ApplicabilityValue me thodo log ies ca n be ap plied

during a ny stage o f a projec t’s

development cycle, a lthough the greatestbene fit a nd resource savings a re typ ica lly

ac hieved ea rly in developm ent during the

c onc ep tua l stages. At this point, the basic

informa tion o f the p rojec t is estab lished , but

ma jor design a nd d evelopment resources

have not yet b een c om mitted. The reason

this is the best time to app ly a va lue

me thod ology is be c ause the m anner in

which the b asic function of the p rojec t is

performed has not b een estab lished , and

a lternative wa ys ma y be ide ntified andconsidered.

Examp les of these app lic a tions a re:

Construc tion p rojec ts co uld b enefit by

identifying imp rove ments for va rious

projec t p hases: co ncep t d evelop ment,

p reliminary de sign, final design,

proc urem ent and c onstruction.

Manufactured produc ts , whe ther

consumer, industrial, or defense, may be

stud ied w ith a foc us on either the design

or ma nufac turing proc ess of tha t

produc t. A p rod uct ma y be the subject

of a value study a t a ny time during the

produc t’s life. A value study c an be

ap plied at the o nset of the p rod uct

de velopm ent to be tter unde rstand the

c ustom er’s nee ds, identify the func tions

nec essary to sa tisfy tho se need s, and

develop the initia l conce pt . Throug hout

the d esign d evelop ment, value

method olog y ca n be used to refine andenhanc e the conc ep t, ba sed o n the

la test fac ts. Even a fter a p rod uc t has

be en introd uc ed and is in production, a

Value Study ca n be used to further

enhanc e the product a nd respo nd to

cha nging c ustomer and ec onomic

conditions.

A value me thodology c an b e used to

either develop new wa ys to

manufac ture a produc t or change anexisting p roc ess.

Business syste ms and p roc esses may also

be the sub jec t of Va lue Stud ies. Many

elem ents of a business or an

organization ma y be improved through

the ap plica tion of a value

me thodolog y. This ma y be from the

deve lop me nt o f business p lans and

organizational studies to improving

existing business p roc esses.

Service orga niza tions c an b enefit from

the use of va lue me thod olog ies. In the

pa st value metho dologies have b een

used to improve p roc esses and

proc ed ures in the m ed ica l industry

(operating rooms, emergency rooms,

etc .) and the lega l system (po lice

systems).

Value m ethodo log ies ma y be ap plied

more tha n onc e d uring the life of the

projec t. Ea rly ap p lica tion of a va luemethod olog y helps to g et the projec t

sta rted in the right direc tion, and rep ea ted

ap plic ations help to refine the projec t’s

direc tion b ased on new or chang ing

informa tion. The late r a Va lue Stud y is

c onduc ted in projec t developm ent, more

likely imp leme nta tion c osts will increa se.

A value me thodology ma y be a pp lied as a

quick response study to add ress a p rob lem

or as an integ ra l part of an ove ra llorga niza tiona l effort to stimula te innova tion

and imp rove pe rforma nc e c harac teristic s.

Value methodo log ies ma y be used to

enha nc e a n orga nization’ s quality

program s, new p rod uct d evelop ment

activities, manufacturing processes, and

architec tural a nd eng ineering de sign.



Body of Knowledge


Study Duration

A va lue stud y ge nerally enc om passes three

sta ges. (See Figure 1, page 13):

1. Pre-Workshop (Preparation)

2. Workshop (Exec ution of the six phase

Job Plan)

3. Post-Workshop (Doc ume nta tion a nd

Implementation)

The dura tion for exec uting the Job Plan in a

va lue study dep end s on seve ra l fac tors: the

size a nd c om p lexity of the p rojec t, thestag e of projec t deve lop ment, the

estima ted c ost of the p roject , etc .

A typ ic a l duration for the Workshop Stage is

five-days, which d oes not inc lude the Pre-

Workshop and Post-Workshop efforts.

Projec ts with a c onc ise sc op e o r a low level

of c om plexity ma y be pe rformed in lesstime. Suffic ient time should be a llotte d to

ad eq uately ap ply the value methodo log y

proc ess and do c ument the tea m’ s findings.

Shortening the time need ed to exec ute the

Job Plan phases may result in a less-than-

op tima l result.

Projec ts of ve ry la rge sc op e or com p lexity

ma y req uire 10-15 days or more to ac hieve

the stud y’s objec tives. Consideration of

these fac to rs is imp ortant to ensure tha t theproper time is alloc ate d a nd ne ed s to b e

addressed as part of the up front p lanning

for a va lue study.



Body of Knowledge


Job Plan Techniques

The va lue me thod olog y is a structured ,

d isc iplined proc ed ure a imed a t imp rovingva lue. Tha t p roc ed ure is c a lled the Job

Plan. The Job Plan ou tlines seq uentia l

phases to b e follow ed which supp ort team

synergy within a struc tured p roc ess, as

op po sed to a c ollec tion of individual

op inions. The ac tivities c ond uc ted during

ea c h phase o f the Job Plan will stimula te

the tea m to identify idea s and de velop

them into a lternatives to the origina l

c onc ept or design.

The te am a nd the p roject stakeholde rsshould ide ntify and und erstand the

project’s basic and secondary functions.

Basic func tions must b e ma intained ,

othe rwise the intend ed stud y go a ls will not

be a cc omp lished.

Sec ond a ry functions are ana lyzed and

eva luated with reg ard to their c ontributions

to the p rojec t ob ject ives. By ma king

func tiona lity exp licit (via func tion a na lysis

and FAST), organiza tions c an ma nage

innovat ion to p rovide a susta inab le

c omp etit ive ad vantag e that leads to

suc c ess.

Figure 1 illustrates the Job Plan p roc ess flow .

Eac h o f the Job Plan p hases must b e

pe rformed in seq uence be ca use ea c h

phase p rovide s informa tion andund ersta nd ing ne c essa ry for the suc c essful

execution of the next pha se. As the te am

ga ins ad ditiona l know led ge a bo ut the

projec t, a p revious phase m ay be revisited.

No

Results

OK?

Workshop/Study (Value Job Plan)

Post Workshop/Study

Pre Workshop/Study

PreStudy

ActivitiesStage 1 -

Stage 2 -

Function

AnalysisPhase

InformationPhase

CreativePhase

EvaluationPhase

ImplementationPhase

Follow UpActivities

DevelopmentPhase

Yes

No

Yes

PresentationPhase

Stage 3 -

ResultsOK?

Value StudyPhases

AdditionalActivities

Figure 1.Value Study Process Flow Diagram





Body of Knowledge


Workshop (Job Plan) Activities

Information Phase

Purpose:

Understand the c urrent sta te o f the p rojec t

and c onstra ints that influenc ed p rojec t

dec isions.

Funda mental Question:

What is rea lly go ing on in the tac tica l and

op erationa l c ontexts?

Common Activities:

Ob tain projec t da ta a nd informa tionand key doc uments suc h as sc op e o f

work definition, drawings, specifications,

rep orts, deta iled p rojec t c ost

informa tion, qua lity da ta , ma rketing

informa tion, proc ess flow c harts, etc .

Tools: Qua lity Func tion Deployment,

Voic e o f Custom er

Identify and prioritize strategic issues of

c onc ern. Further de fine the sc op e and

objectives (management expectations)

of the stud yTools: SWOT (Streng ths, Weakne sses,

Op portunities and Threa ts); Pro jec t

Charter

Projec t Tea m presents the original

and/or present design/product/process

concepts

Perform c om pe titive be nc hma rking

analysis

Tools: Benc hmarking , Tea r Dow n

Analysis, Pareto Analysis, Design for

Assembly Determine the study sc hed ule; da tes,

times, loca tion and othe r log istica l

needs

Distribute informa tion ab out the p rojec t

for tea m m emb er review

Understand project scope, schedule,

bud get , costs, risk, issues, non-mo neta ry

performance.

Confirm the m ost c urrent p rojec t

concept Identify high-leve l p rojec t func tions

Visit site or fac ility

Confirm suc c ess parame ters

Typic al Outcom e:

This pha se b rings a ll team me mb ers to a

c om mon, basic level of unde rstand ing o f

the p rojec t, inc luding ta c tic a l, op erationa l,

and spec ific s of the sub jec t. The func tional

understand ing e stab lishes the base c ase to

ide ntify and be nc hma rk alternatives andmisma tc hes and set the age nda for

innovation.

Function Analysis Phase

Purpose:

Unde rstand the p rojec t from a functional

perspe c tive; what must the p roject do ,

ra ther than ho w the p rojec t is c urrentlyconceived.


What are the functions and how a re they

related?

Common Activities:

Identify the p rojec t functions (tea m

forma t strong ly enc ourage d)

Tools: Random Func tion Identific a tion

Classify project functions

Develop func tion mod els

Tools: Func tion Ana lysis Syste m

Tec hnique (FAST), Func tion Tree

Dime nsion the mo del with c ost d rivers,

pe rforma nc e attributes and user

a ttitudes to selec t value misma tc hed

func tions to foc us the c rea tivity phase

Tools: Cost to Func tion Ana lysis



Body of Knowledge


(Func tion Ma trix), Fa ilure Mea surement

Error Ana lysis (FMEA), Performanc e to

Function Analysis, Relate Customer

Attitude s to Func tions

Estima te w orth of func tions to selec tvalue-misma tc hed functions on which

to foc us the c rea tivity pha se.

Tools: Value Index (func tion

c ost/ function wo rth)

Typic al Outcom e:

This pha se foc uses the team on va lida ting

tha t the p rojec t sa tisfies the ne ed and

ob jec tives of the c ustom er. It p rovides a

more c om prehensive und erstand ing of the

p rojec t by foc using on w hat the p rojec tdoe s or must d o rathe r tha n wha t it is. The

tea m identifies va lue-misma tc hed

func tion(s) on w hich to foc us in order to

imp rove the p roject .

Creative Phase

Purpose:

Generate a quantity of idea s related toother wa ys to pe rform functions


How else m ay the func tions be pe rformed?

Common Activities:

Cond uc t c rea tive w a rm-up exercises

Esta b lish rules tha t p rotec t the c rea tive

environment be ing de velop ed

Tools: Creativity “Ground Rules”

Emp loy g roup idea stimula tiontechniques

Gene rate a lternate ideas that ma y

imp rove va lue.

Tools: Brainsto rming , Gordon Tec hnique ,

Nom ina l Group Tec hniq ue , TRIZ, Syne tic s

Typic al Outcom e:

The tea m d evelops a b roa d a rray of ide as

tha t p rovide a wide va riety of po ssib le

a lterna tive wa ys to perform the func tion(s)

to improve the value of the p rojec t.

Evaluation Phase

Purpose:

Red uc e the qua ntity of ide as that ha ve

bee n identified to a short list o f idea s with

the g rea test p otential to imp rove the

project


Of a ll these ide as, which a re w orth

spe nding qua lity time to further develop?

Common Activities:

Clarify and c ate go rize ea c h ide a to

de velop a shared unde rstand ing

Disc uss how idea s a ffec t p rojec t c ost,

and pe rforma nce pa ram eters.

Tools: T- Cha rts

Selec t a nd p rioritize idea s for furthe rdevelopment

Tools: Pug h Ana lysis, Kepne r-Treg oe, Life

Cyc le C osting , Choosing by

Advantages (CBA), Value Me trics

Exp lain how ide as a re to be w ritten as

sta nd -alone risk-rewa rd investment

proposals

Typic al Outcom e:

The te am p rod uc es a foc used list of

c onc ep ts that w arrant q uality time todeve lop into va lue-based solutions tha t

c an b e impleme nted into a projec t or a

p roject fea ture.



Body of Knowledge


Development Phase

Purpose:

Further ana lyze a nd develop the short list of

idea s and d eve lop those w ith merit intova lue a lternatives.

Fundamental Questions:

What is an informed desc ription of ea c h

selec ted idea ? Wha t is the rationa le for

ma king this c hange ? Whic h one s a re

mutua lly exclusive a nd a re inde pe nde nt?

The selec ted idea s a re deve lop ed into

va lue a lternatives tha t a re c lea rly written so

that the o wner and other projectstakeholde rs understand the intent of the

a lternative and how it benefits the p roject .

Write-ups a lso ident ify any p ote ntial

negative factors associated with the

a lternative. The a lternative should include

text, sketc hes, d iag rams, assumptions,

supporting calculations, vendor

information, cost comparison work sheets,

and o ther informa tion which ma y be

nec essary to c onve y the intent o f the

a lternative . The text should a lso identifyother alternatives which ma y be e nhanc ed

or comp lemented b y acc eptance of an

a lternative . Issues addressed includ e

reliab ility, custom er co nvenienc e, qua lity

c ontrol, c ap ital c ost, O&M c ost, life c ycle

c ost, sc hedule, risk, ava ilab ility, politic a l

ramific a tions, and perce p tion. Idea lly, an

ac tion p lan is de velop ed for ea ch

a lternative. The a c tion p lan should , at a

minimum, inc lude wha t need s to be d one,

who will do it, and when it will ge t d one.

Common Activities:

Comp are the study co nc lusions to the

suc c ess requirem ents esta b lished during

the Informa tion a nd Func tion Ana lysis

Phases

Prep are a written va lue a lternative for

ea c h ide a selecte d fo r further

development

Assess and a lloc a te risk judg me nts and

c osts, whe re a pprop ria te Conduct cost-benefit analysis

Generate sketches and information

needed to c onvey the conc ept

Confirm tha t an a lternative should b e

further deve lop ed

Finish initial alternative development

Develop an a ction plan to d efine

implem enta tion step s, da tes, and

responsibilities for ea c h va lue a lternat ive

Typic al Outcom e:

The Value Stud y tea m c rea tes a lterna tives

and low -, med ium-, and high-risk sc ena rios

and offe rs these a lternat ives to senior

ma nag em ent a s op tions that add ress the

Pre-Workshop strate g ic o b jec tives.

Presentation Phase

Purpose:

Present va lue a lterna tives to m anage ment

tea m a nd other projec t stakeholde rs or

dec ision makers.


How c an we help the p roject team and

senior managers ma ke more informed

dec isions so tha t they ca n selec t ideas tha t

fit their strate g ic p lans?

Common Activities:

Prep are p resenta tion a nd supporting

documentat ion

Comp are the stud y co nc lusions to the

suc c ess req uirem ents esta b lished during

the Information a nd Func tion Ana lysis

Phases



Body of Knowledge


Offer to ma nag eme nt “ risk-rew ard”

innova tion sc ena rios to selec t va lue

a lterna tives for imp lem enta tion

Exc hang e informa tion with the p roject

team Ensure ma nage ment ha s full and

ob jec tive informa tion upon which they

c an make dec isions

Outline an anticipated implementation

plan

Prep are fo rma l rep ort

Com mon Value Study p rod uc ts include a

b riefing doc ument, risk ana lysis; c ost vs.

worth c om parisons; Presen t wo rth a na lysis;

adva ntag es vs. d isad vanta ge s

Typic al Outcom e:

Ensure m anag em ent a nd other key

stakeholde rs understa nd the ra tionale o f

the va lue a lternatives. Also ge nerate

interest to sanc tion imp lementa tion.



Body of Knowledge


Post-Workshop Activities

Implementation Activities

Purpose:

Ensure a c c ep ted va lue alternatives a re

imp lemented and that the benefits

p rojec ted by the Value Study have b een

realized.


What a re the p rogram cha nges, and ho w

will the projec t team ma nag e them?

Follow ing d elivery of the va lue studyp reliminary rep ort, ma nag em ent a nd the

p rojec t team should c onside r and ag ree

upo n the va lue a lterna tives to b e

imp lemented a nd then ho w and by when

the imp lem enta tion will oc c ur. In som e

instanc es, ad d itiona l stud y and information

ma y be required . Imp leme ntation of

alternatives is the responsibility of

ma nag em ent with assistanc e from the

p roject and value tea ms.

Common Activities:

Review the p reliminary repo rt

Cond uct a n imp lementa tion mee ting to

dete rmine the d isposition of eac h value

alternative.

Establish action plans for those

alternatives ac ce pted and d oc ument

the rationale for the rejecte d

alternatives

Ob tain com mitments for

implementation Set a timeframe for review and

imp leme ntation o f eac h value

alternative

Trac k va lue ac hievem ent resulting from

imp lem ented alternatives

Sign off de liverab les

Valida te b enefits of implemented

change

Ensure tha t new p rac tic es be c om e

emb ed de d b y estab lishing andma nag ing a n imp lementa tion p lan

Typic al Outcom e:

The p rojec t stakeholde rs dete rmine w hat

will be c hang ed in the p roject as a result o f

the Value Study. These a re c hanges to the

original co nc ep t or ba se c ase o f a study,

resulting from the value alternatives, that

the p rojec t de velopm ent will inc orporate in

future d esign o r p rod uct d evelopment

activities.

Value Study Follow-Up Activities

Purpose:

Follow up on imp lem enta tion o f the Va lue

Stud y results and improve the a pp lica tion

of a va lue metho dolog y for future stud ies.


What ha ve we lea rned ab out how b est to

c rea te o r imp rove va lue of the subjec t

under study?

Common Activities:

Prep are a rep ort of the results of the

study, lessons learned, or other items to

be recorded a nd/ or trac ked through

implementation

Identify where op portunities we remissed

Identify roadblocks to innovation and

understand why they e xisted

Debrief and record lessons learned

Inte grate Va lue Stud y results into

organization’ s lessons learned or

program rep orting



Body of Knowledge


Reflec t on the va lue stud y and c onsider

how the experienc e has de veloped

new ca pa bilit ies

Typic al Outc ome :Individua ls be c om e b etter value c rea tors

by reflec ting on theories they held b efo re

the va lue study, comp aring the wa y things

turned out, and asc ertaining how that

know led ge affec ts the wa y they believed

the ir own theories in the first p lac e. This is a

key step in lea rning w ha t w ill help theorga nization bec ome be tter at m ana ging

innovation.



Body of Knowledge


Roles and Responsibilities

Management

The a im o f a va lue m etho dolog y is to

increase o rganiza tional va lue through a

union of strategy, tactics, and operations

with em pha sis on “ c ustome r need ,” c ost

effe c tivene ss, and / or p rofitab ility. The link

betwe en the Value Study and the

orga nizat ion is the role of ma nage me nt in

value imp rovem ent. Two key ma nag eme nt

roles exist: Senior Ma nage me nt a nd the

Value Ma nag er.

Senior Management responsibilities are to

p rovide c lea r lea dership and ma ke

stra teg ic expec ta tions explic it in a

purposeful and p rioritized ma nner. Senior

ma nag em ent should understand the

potential b enefit from a Value Study,

app rove the expenditure o f resources

nec essary to support the study, and guide

the imp leme ntation for ap prova l of

req uired funding nec essary to

realize the recommendations.

The roles and responsibilities of

the Value Manager (an

organization’s designated

manager of value) vary

throughout the life of the p roject.

At all times the Value Manager

should confirm that value

methodology activities are

coordinated and performed effectively in

order to meet the goals and objectives of

the organiza tion. A value metho dologycan be used throughout project

de velop ment with a d ifferent foc us at ea ch

stage.

At the c onc ep tual stag e, a va lue

method olog y ca n be used to d etermine

the c ost versus the wo rth o f basic p rojec t

func tions. At th is ea rly stage it is the Va lue

Manager’s responsibility to ensure that allpa rties who have a vested interest in the

projec t p artic ipate in the Value Study,

inc lud ing sup p liers, c ustomers, c lients, end

users, and possibly outside interests, in o rde r

to g ain the tota l pe rspe c tive o f rea l ‘ne ed s’

vs. ‘wants’ so as to p rovide the ma ximum

value for the projec t being studied .

As the p roject app roa c hes the d esign

pha se, a value m ethod ology foc uses more

on the functions of ea c h elem ent or

c om po nent within the d eta iled design, withthe results of func tion a na lysis and c rea tivity

being mo re limited sinc e resource s have

be en a lloc a ted and money spe nt. It is

senior mana ger’s responsibility during a

Value Stud y at t his stage of the p rojec t to

assess which va lue a lternat ives a re

ec onomica lly fea sible ba sed upo n the

req uirem ents of the

c ustom er or client.

As a p rojec t mo ves intothe implementa tion p hase

(construc tion or

produc tion), a va lue

method ology p roc ess

wo rks to ensure c hanges

are mad e. Although ma ny

projects can still benefit

from a Value Stud y at this

sta ge o f a p rojec t, it is the responsibility of

the Value Ma nag er to enc ourag e ea rly

involvem ent o f the o rganizat ions tha t a re

a ffec ted by the c hang es to ensure the

ma ximum b ene fit for any Value Study. For

any given p rojec t, it is impo rtant tha t the

senior ma nag ement team b e ma de a wa re

that the ea rlier a Va lue Study c an be

pe rformed , the mo re p otentia l be nefit

there w ill be fo r the c lient o r c ustom er.

The roles andresponsibilities of theValue Manager vary

throughout the life of the project.



Body of Knowledge


Another role of the Va lue Ma nage r is to

ensure tha t the p rop er amo unt of Pre-

Workshop ac tivities take p lac e p rior to any

Va lue Workshop . These Pre-Worksho p

ac tivities ma y not need the a ttention o f thewho le tea m. How eve r, a suc c essful Va lue

Stud y is unlikely without p rop er p lanning

and informa tion sha ring so a ll interested

parties have a c lea r unde rstanding o f the

purpose a nd deta ils of the p rojec t. This,

aga in, is the responsibility of the Value

Ma nag er in c harge of the projec t. If these

deta ils are p rop erly co mm unic ate d with

the c lients and c ustom ers involved , the

potential for a suc c essful Value Stud y is

greatly increased.

Exec utive Review Board: Senior ma nage rs

set the initia l strate g ic goa ls for the Va lue

Study and , at a late r date , de c ide which

outp uts will be invested so the y ca n be

imp lem ente d . These ma nagers do not

a lwa ys pa rtic ipa te in the day-to-da y

wo rking o f the Value Study but a re p art of

the overall va lue p rog ram .

Som etimes ma nage rs a re d esigna ted as

Sponsors or Cha mp ions to sup port a va luestudy a nd/ or the value program w ithin an

organization.

Tec hnica l Cham pions: Those me mb ers of

the Va lue Study tea m w ho a re selecte d

bec ause of the ir tec hnica l expe rtise.

Value Team Members

Value Tea m m em be rs are expec ted toparticipa te in a Va lue Stud y in the fo llowing

ways:

♦ Participa te in all meetings

♦ Ga ther information as req uested

♦ Ana lyze information

♦ Identify functions

♦ Contribute ideas

♦ Evaluate ideas using their experience

and expe rtise

♦ Develop a lterna tives

♦ Present results

Team Members’ Responsibilities

1. Keep ac c ura te note s as assigned by

team lead er

2. Consult with tea m lea der on any

problem that ma y handica p progress

3. Show respec t throug h time ly

at tendance

4. Sha re wo rkloa d eq ua lly whe neve r

possible5. Be willing to admit if they don’ t know;

but strive to get the answe r. Don’ t be

afraid to ma ke mistakes

6. Stay foc used - avoid tang ents - follow

the basic prob lem-solving step s and

ge t help from Value Tea m Lea de r on

wha t tec hnique s ma y be most suitab le

for the p a rtic ular p rob lem

7. Don’ t w aste time d isc ussing w hethe r or

not a step should b e used ; do it and

eva lua te it a ll a fter the entire w orkshop8. Unde rstand the ap proac h being

taught and its purpose, inc lud ing the

rea son for eac h step and the

technique be ing a pp lied

7. Do the job together as a team . Don’t

force individua l solutions - sell them !

Remem be r, there c an be more than

one solution to a prob lem

8. Be a goo d listener; don’ t c ut pe op le off

and do n’t sec ond guess what other

pe op le a re g oing to say and what theyare thinking



Body of Knowledge


9. Bring all da ta that bea rs on the

p rob lem – som e ob jec tive, som e

subjec tive. Keep an o pe n mind and

don’ t be a roadb lock

10. Be enthusiastic ab out the p rojec t andwha t it is tha t you a re d oing

11. Do not attemp t to take over as a Tea m

Lea der – be a s he lpful as possible.

Rem em be r, the lea der alrea dy ha s a

d iffic ult job in trying to g uide, co ntrol

and c oo rdinate the o vera ll effort

Team Leader

The Value Tea m Lea der will plan, lead , and

fac ilitate the Va lue Stud y. Othe r keyresponsibilities are noted below.

This individua l is a lso e xpec ted to ha ve

num erous skills and experienc e tha t a re

listed in Key Competencies for Value

Prac titioners (See Key Com petenc ies for

Va lue Prac titioners). To ensure tha t the

Tea m Lea der is trained a nd qua lified to

lea d the tea m, that p erson shall be a CVS

(Ce rtified Value Spec ialist) as c ertified by

SAVE Inte rnationa l, or eq uivalent, as

defined elsew here in this Standard .

Team Leader’s Responsibilities

1. Ensure p rop er ap p lic a tion of a va lue

method ology a nd follow the Job

Plan

2. Guide the team thorough the the

ac tivit ies need ed to c omp lete the

p re-stud y, the Value Stud y and the

post stud y sta ges of a Va lue Stud y.

3. Deleg a te responsibilities as

appropriate

4. Sc hed ule follow -up tea m m eetings

and p repa re the agenda

5. Keep tea m foc used on spec ific

topic

6. Keep tea m m em be rs involved in thed isc ussion and the w ork tha t needs

to be done

7. Keep a ll tea m me mb ers tog ether

whenever possible. It is desirab le tha t

eve ryone b rea ks tog ethe r, to

ma intain team c ontinuity

8. Be a c a talyst to keep te am moving

and mo tivate d. Be d iploma tic ; not

dictatorial.



Body of Knowledge


Standard Revision Process

The SAVE Inte rnationa l Value Sta ndard is

intended to p rovide a p rac tica l guide toapp ly the p rinciples of a value

me thod olog y in a c onsistent ma nner. It

ma y be used by b oth p rac titioners and

management.

The Va lue Sta nd ard, orig inally d rafte d in

Ma y 1997, has been through a p roc ess of

period ic upd a tes to a dd ress c hang es in the

business environm ent a nd tec hnolog y, and

to meet future integration with the

Inte rna tiona l Sta nd ards Orga niza tion. Priorto 2007, a forma l p roc ess for review ing a nd

updating the Standard d id not exist. As part

of the 2007 Value Standard up da te, the

follow ing proc ess wa s de veloped and

ado p ted to a dd ress future upd ate s.

Standard Responsibility

The SAVE Inte rnationa l Direc to r of

Sta nd ards ha s the p rima ry responsibility for

ma nag ing the review p roc ess and

upd a ting the Value Stand ard a nd Bod y of

Know led ge. The Direc tor of Standards

app oints and ma intains a Standa rds

Review Tea m o f expe rienc ed p rac titione rs,

one m em be r of which (exc luding the

Direc tor) should b e a Fellow of SAVE

Internationa l who is ac tively prac ticing a

value me thod ology full time. Anothe r

mem be r will be a memb er of the

Certifica tion Boa rd . The tea m sha ll have a

minimum of three me mb ers (inc luding the

Direc tor of Standards) and a m aximum ofseven me mb ers. This team will perform a

review o f the do cum ent and recom mend

imp rovem ents/ c hang es to the Boa rd of

Direc to rs.

The Sta nda rd and Bod y of Know led ge w ill

be reviewed for possible up da ting everyfour years, concurrent with the installation

of a new SAVE Inte rnationa l Preside nt. The

Direc tor of Standards and the Standards

Rev iew Tea m w ill review the c urrent

Sta nda rd and rep ort to the Exec utive Boa rd

any a c tions nec essary to up date the

Sta nda rd . This ac tion will be c om plete d by

the fall Boa rd of Direc tors Meeting follow ing

the installation of the new President.

SAVE Inte rna tiona l mem bers in goodstand ing c an, at a ny time , provide the

Direc to r of Sta nd ards with a written request

to mo dify or upd ate the Value Stand ard or

Bod y of Know led ge . When this oc c urs, the

Direc tor of Standards and the Standards

Rev iew Tea m w ill review the request and

provide a rec omm ende d p lan of ac tion to

the Boa rd of Direc to rs.

Onc e the Boa rd o f Direc tors approve s an

ac tion to upda te the Value Standa rds and

Bod y of Know ledg e, the follow ing p roc esswill be used to a mend the w ording o r

c ontent of this do c ument:

1. The Board of Direc to rs app roves the

spec ific a rea s of the Value

Standards and Bod y of Know ledg e

to mo dify.

2. The m embership o f SAVE

Internationa l is notified of t he sc op e

of c hang es unde r review viaInteractions , a ma ga zine pub lished

by SAVE Inte rnationa l. The

memb ership will direc t a ll co mme nts

to the Direc tor of Standards.

3. The Direc tor of Sta nda rds ma y add

up to a tota l of seven m emb ers to

the Sta nd ards Review Tea m in order



Body of Knowledge


to e nsure the p rop er expe rtise is

present on the tea m to de velop the

changes.

4. The Direc to r of Sta nd ards and theSta nd ards Rev iew Tea m w ill:

a . Develop spe c ific c hang es to

the Sta nda rds to add ress the

areas ap p roved by the SAVE

Board.

b . Review the rest o f the

Standa rd to e nsure tha t the

c hang es do not c onflic t with

the rest of the doc ument.

5. A Boa rd of Direc tor’s Oversight Tea m

c om prised of the President,

Exec utive Vice President, and VP of

Educ a tion w ill review, provide

c om me nts, and issues a p reliminary

ap proval of the c hange.

6. Onc e the Ove rsight tea m has

ap proved the cha nges, the chang es

will be submitted to the Certific a tion

Boa rd , whose m em bers will rev iew,provide co mments, and a pp rove

the c hange s.

7. Any cha nges rec omm ende d b y the

Certific ation Boa rd are to b e a greed

to b y the Direc tor of Standards,

Sta nd ards Rev iew Tea m, and Boa rd

Oversight Tea m b efore the c hang es

a re taken to the SAVE Internat iona l

Boa rd for final app rova l

8. The SAVE Interna tiona l Board o f

Direc to rs will review, prov ide

c om ments, and issue the final

ap proval of the chang e after any

c om me nts a re addressed . Any

c hang es ma de by the SAVE

Inte rnationa l Boa rd o f Direc tors will

be resubm itted to the C ertific ation

Boa rd for approval.

9. If, afte r going throug h this p roc ess,

full agreeme nt has not b een

rea c hed , a spe c ia l c om mittee will

be formed to resolve this issue . This

c om mittee, cha ired by the Preside nt

and c om prised of the C ertific ation

Boa rd Cha ir, the Exec utive VP, the

VP of Educ a tion, the Dea n of the

Co lleg e o f Fellow s, and the Direc tor

of Sta nd ards, will resolve any

disputes.

10. Final revision w ill be posted on theSAVE Inte rnationa l website fo llow ed

by memb ership notific ation o f the

change.



Body of Knowledge


Key Competencies for Value Practitioners

A Va lue Prac titioner should und erstand the follow ing princ iples and b e a b le to effec tively

c omm unic ate them to ma nag eme nt and team mem be rs. Mastery of these c omp etencies willhelp ensure e ffec tive lea dership o f a w ide rang e o f multid isc iplina ry Value Study tea ms.

Value Principles

Historic a l deve lop me nt of the Va lue

Methodologies

The relationship b etw een an

orga niza tion's stra teg ies and a va lue

methodology

Fund ame nta l va lue p rinciples, methods,

and job plans

The relationship b etw een va lue,

functions, and solutions

Func tion ana lysis

Types of va lue

Value d rivers (e.g ., c ost, sc hedule,

quality, risk, user attitudes etc.)

Investment appraisal techniques

Key tho ught-provoking questions

Value Job Planning

Ma jor phases and ac tivities in a Va lueJob Plan

Purpo se a nd ob jec tives of ea c h p hase

of the job plan

Overview of tec hnique s in a typica l job

plan

Strategic Problem/Opportunity Framing

Reviewing the business case

Discounted cash flow modeling

Ana lysis throug h key financ ial ra tios

Strate g ic m od els, dec isions, cho ices,

and unce rtainties

Identific a tion o f c ausa l relationships and

their mo deling

Identific a tion of attributes and va lue

drivers

Ana lysis of performa nc e a ttributes (non-moneta ry fac tors that a ffect va lue)

Defining the base c ase and

benchmarking

Determining w hethe r the rema ining

pha ses of the va lue stud y can justify the

c lient’ s investme nt or whethe r wha t they

have is goo d , as understoo d within the

terms and refe renc es used

Function Analysis

Purpose and ne ed

A “ thing” , “ process” , “ product” or

“ projec t” and their functions



Body of Knowledge


Defining func tions with ac tive verb a nd

measurab le noun co ntext

Func tion c lassific a tion

Levels of a bstrac tion

Func tion Ana lysis System Tec hnique

(using how-why log ic )

If-Then a nd Ca used -By log ic flow s of

c lassica l and tec hnica l FAST mo dels,

often termed “ When”

The d ifferenc es among va rious FAST

d iagrams and models (custom er,

tec hnica l, c lassic a l, hiera rc hica l)

Function, Performance, Worth, Cost and

Customer Attitude

Purpose and need

Co st as resourc e expend iture

Performance-to-cost relationshipshitchhiking

Cost-to-worth relationships

Cost-to-function allocation

Func tion worth identific a tion and

understanding

Co st-va lue rela tionships

Cost-value misma tc hes

Pareto ana lysis of ma jor co st d rivers

Creativity

Purpose and need

Ma nag ing diverge nt thinking

Brainstorming techniques

Unrestric ted idea ge neration

La rge quantity of ideas is the g oa l

Suspend ing judgm ent until the

eva luation p hase

Other ide a gene ration tec hniques

Evaluation

Purpose and ne ed

Ma nag ing c onvergent thinking

Building g rea ter unde rstand ing of othe r

pe op le's idea s

Evaluation methods and tec hniques

VM Study Recommendation

Documentation

Doc ument the key information related

to a Value Study rec om mend ations

♦ Original Conc ep t

♦ Prop osed Cha nge

♦ Disc ussion of b enefits of the c ha nge

♦ Cost impac t a na lysis

♦ Sketc hes

♦

Imp lem enta tion c onsiderations♦ Follow-up actions

Investme nt a pp ra isa l

Tec hnica l imp lem enta tion feasib ility

Political implementation feasibility

Initia l and subseq uent revenue imp ac ts



Body of Knowledge


Initia l and subseq uent c ost imp ac ts

Initia l and subseq uent sc hed ule impac ts

Life cyc le c ost a na lysis

Initia l and subseq uent imp ac ts on o ther

key attributes

Sketches and other co mm unic ation a ids

Presentation

Purpose and need

The relationship b etw een a va lue

me thod ology and the need s of senior

management decision makers

Presenta tion skills

Conte nt o rga nization

Imp leme ntation plan

Change ma nag ement strateg ies

Exp lana tion of va lue trac king p roc ess

Management of Value Programs

Ma nagem ent roles and responsib ilities

Reporting responsibilities

Esta b lishing links betwee n Va lue Stud youtc om es and orga niza tiona l results

Value training

Fac ilita tion skills tra ining

Organizing and imp leme nting Value

programs

Tea m Lea der skill deve lop me nt

Strate g ic d iag nosis and

prob lem / op po rtunity identific ation

techniques

Selec ting and lea d ing Value Stud ies

Coordinating Value Study logistics

Fac ilita to r skills

Trac king Value Study imp lem enta tion

results and othe r reports as nec essa ry

Coo rd inating with other orga nization o r

c lient q uality imp rovem ent p rog ram s

Educ ating the o rga niza tion in the va lue

methods

Recognizing Value success and failures

and how to lea rn as a team

Sha ring va lue insights with the

c om munity and stakeholde rs

Period ic Va lue Prog ram review for

c ontinuous imp rovem ent



Body of Knowledge


VM Glossary

In 1985, the Lawrenc e D. Miles Found ation

c rea ted the Colleg e o f Fellow s of theSoc iety of Am eric an Va lue Eng ineers

(SAVE), now SAVE Inte rnationa l, with the

spec ific intent of d eve loping a Glossary of

Terms relate d to va lue. Over a tw o yea r

period, approximately 10 Fellows worked

individua lly and in teams to define, refine

and finalize a glossary of value relatedte rms. In 2006, the Glossary wa s review ed

by the Certific a tion Boa rd a nd those

definitions mo st essential to the c urrent

ap plic ation of value method ologies we re

ident ified and refined w here nec essa ry.

ASSOCIATE

VALUE SPECIALIST

(AVS)

AVS is a rec og nition d esigned for ind ividua ls who a re ne w to the va lue

me thod olog y. An AVS is enc ourag ed to p rog ress to VMP or CVS

certification.

CERTIFIED VALUE

SPECIALIST (CVS)

CVS is the h ighest level of certific a tion a tta inab le through SAVE

Inte rna tiona l. Designa tion is reserved for Va lue Spec ialists and Value

Prog ram Ma nag ers who have de monstrate d expert level experienc e a nd

knowledge in the p rac tice of the value method olog y.

COST: The expe nd iture of resource s nee ded to p rod uc e a p rod uc t, servic e, or

p roc ess.

COST, LIFE

CYCLE:

The sum o f all deve lop me nt ac quisition, prod uc tion or co nstruc tion,

op eration, ma intenanc e, use, and d isposa l c osts for a p rod uc t or p rojec t

over a spe c ified pe riod of time.

COST MODEL: A financ ial rep resenta tion suc h as a sprea dshee t, c ha rt, and / or diag ram

used to illustrate the to ta l cost o f families of systems, comp onents, or pa rts

within a tota l co mp lex p rod uc t, system , struc ture or fac ility.

FUNCTION: The o rigina l intent o r purpose tha t a p roduc t, service or proc ess is

expec ted to p erform. It is expressed in a two -word a c tive

verb/measurable noun structure.

FUNCTION

ANALYSIS SYSTEM

TECHNIQUE

(FAST):

A g rap hic a l rep resenta tion o f the d ep end ent relationships be twee n

func tions within a p rojec t.

Classica l FAST Model: A func tion d isp laying the interrelationship of

functions to e ac h othe r in a “ how-why” log ic . This wa s de veloped by

Charles Bytheway.



Body of Knowledge


Hiera rc hy Func tion Model : A ve rtic a l “hierarchica l” c hart of func tions.

This p lac es the b asic func tion a t the top . The func tion of ea c h ma jor

system is p lac ed bene ath the basic func tion. The func tions tha t

support eac h of these func tions a re then plac ed on the next row . This

proc ess is c ontinued until the team feels the level of d eta il is sufficient

for the intent o f the study.

Tec hnic a l FAST Mo del : A va riation to the Classica l FAST tha t a dds “ a ll

the time ” func tions, “ one time” func tions and “ sam e time ” or

“ c aused b y” functions.

Custo mer-Oriented FAST Mo del: This va ria tion o f the FAST d iag ram

wa s de velope d to b ette r reflect t hat it is the c ustom er that

determines va lue in the func tion a na lysis p roc ess. Custome r-oriented

FAST adds the sup porting func tions: a tt rac t users, sa tisfy users, assure

dep end ab ility, and assure c onvenienc e. The projec t func tions that supp ort these c ustom er functions a re dete rmined by using the how -

why log ic .

FUNCTION

ANALYSIS:

The p roc ess of d efining, c lassifying a nd eva luat ing func tions.

FUNCTION,

BASIC:

The spec ific purpose(s) for which a p rod uc t, fac ility, or service exists and

c onve ys a sense o f ‘ne ed ’ . In ‘ c ontinuous innova tion’ p rojec ts the b asic

func tion must a lwa ys exist, althoug h metho ds or de signs to ac hieve it ma y

va ry. In ‘ d isc ontinuous innova tion’ p rojec ts, which seek to c rea te ne w

industries, the existenc e and persistenc e of the basic func tion is itself the

foc us of c halleng e.

FUNCTION COST: The e xpend iture o f resource s to perform the func tion.

FUNCTION,

HIGHER ORDER:

The spec ific goa ls (nee ds) for which the basic func tion(s) exists.

FUNCTION,

LOWER ORDER

(ASSUMED or

CAUSATIVE):

The func tion tha t is selec ted to initia te the p rojec t a nd is outside the stud y

scope.

FUNCTION,

SECONDARY:

A func tion tha t supports the basic func tion a nd results from the spec ific

de sign a pp roa ch to a chieve the b asic function.



Body of Knowledge


FUNCTION, SELL: A func tion tha t p rovides a sub jec tive expression of som ething tha t is to be

ac hieved . In Func tion Ana lysis, sell func tions a re q ua lita tive a nd a re

desc ribed using a passive ve rb and a non-me asurab le noun. Sell func tions

are a lso som etimes refe rred to as “ aesthetic ” func tions.

FUNCTION,

WORK:

A func tion tha t p rovide s an ob jec tive expression of som ething tha t is to b e

ac c om plished . In Func tion Ana lysis, work func tions a re quantitative a nd

are d esc ribe d using a n ac tive verb a nd a mea surab le no un. Work

func tions a re a lso som et imes refe rred to a s “ use” func tions.

FUNCTION

WORTH:

The lowest ove ra ll c ost to p erform a func tion without regard to c riteria or

codes.

JOB PLAN: A seq uentia l approa c h for c ond uc ting a va lue study, c onsisting of step s or

phases used to m anage the fo c us of a tea m’ s thinking so tha t they

innovate collectively rather than as uncoordinated individuals.

PERFORMANCE: The c apac ity of a p rod uc t to fulfill its intended func tion. Fac tors suc h as

reliability, maintainability, quality and appearance are some examples.

PROJECT: A temp orary ende avo r unde rtaken to c rea te a unique p rod uct , servic e, or

result. For the purpose o f Va lue Stud ies, a p rojec t is the sub jec t o f the

study. It m ay b e a physic a l prod uc t suc h a s a ma nufac tured item , or a

structure, system, procedure, or an organization.

PROCESS: A seq uenc e of a c tivities that de livers a produc t o r projec t.

SAVE

INTERNATIONAL

CERTIFIED

PROFESSIONAL:

For the purpose o f a Value Study, the Job Plan sha ll be fa c ilitated by a

Certified Value Spec ialist (CVS), or a Value M etho dolog y Prac titione r

(VMP) w orking und er the supervision o f a CVS. SAVE Inte rna tiona l

Certifica tion requirem ents a re identified by the SAVE Inte rna tiona l

Certifica tion Boa rd , which ma inta ins a list o f c urrently c ertified ind ividua ls.

SCOPE: The p ortion o f the o vera ll p rojec t tha t is selec ted for the va lue stud y. The

ana lysis ac c ep ts eve rything w ithin the d efined sc op e in order to foc usattention on the functions within those limits.

VALUE: An expression of t he relationship betw een func tion a nd resources whe re

func tion is me asured by the pe rformanc e req uirem ents of the c ustom er

and resource s a re me asured in ma teria ls, labor, pric e, time, etc . req uired

to ac c om plish that function.



Body of Knowledge


VALUE ANALYSIS: The a pp lic ation of va lue me thod ology to a n existing p rojec t, produc e o r

servic e to ac hieve va lue imp rovem ent.

VALUE ANALYST: See VALUE PROFESSIONAL.

VALUE ENGINEER: See VALUE PROFESSIONAL.

VALUE

ENGINEERING:

The ap plica tion of a va lue method ology to a p lanned or c once ptua l

projec t or servic e to ac hieve value imp rovem ent.

VALUE INDEX: A rat io tha t expresses func tion c ost ÷ func tion worth. This rat io is used to

dete rmine the op portunity for value improveme nt, which is usua lly

identified in the Func tion Ana lysis Pha se.

VALUE

MANAGEMENT:

The a pp lic ation of value metho dology by an organization to a c hieve

strate gic value imp rovem ent.

VALUE

METHODOLOGY:

A system atic p roc ess used by a multid isc iplina ry tea m to imp rove the va lue

of p ro jec ts throug h the ana lysis of func tions. See Value Eng ineering, Value

Analysis and Value Ma nag em ent.

VALUE

METHODOLOGY

ALTERNATIVE (orALTERNATIVES):

An a lterna tive o r alterna tives p rep a red by the va lue study team and

presented to ma nag eme nt to p rovide financ ial and / or performa nce

imp rovem ents and which is within a c c ep table terms and c ond itions of theVa lue Stud y.

VALUE

METHODOLOGY

PRACTITIONER

(VMP):

VMP rec og nizes individua ls with b asic va lue tra ining a nd som e expe rience

in the applic ation of the method ology. Value method ology prac titioners

participa te in or lea d Value Stud ies.

VALUE

PROFESSIONAL:

One who app lies the va lue m ethod ology p rinc iples to study a nd sea rc h for

va lue imp rove me nt. Synonymous with va lue a na lyst, value e ng ineer, va lue

practitioner, or value specialist.

VALUE

PRACTIONER:

See VALUE PROFESSIONAL.

VALUE STUDY: The a pp lica tion of a va lue m etho dolog y by SAVE Internationa l c ertified

profe ssiona ls using the Value Job Plan.



Body of Knowledge

References

Pub lic a tions Ca ta log , SAVE Internat iona l:

Desc ribes textbo oks anded uc ationa l mate rials on Value

Methodo log ies and rela ted

prog rams. This c a ta log includes

videota pes and informa tion on

Value World , SAVE International’s

pe er-reviewed , tec hnic a l journa l.

Annua l Co nferenc e Proc ee d ings, SAVE

International: Inc lude s a ll

presenta tions given at e ac h annua l

c onfe renc e. Also a va ilab le is a va luebibliog raphy, a c om pila tion of a ll

p resenta tions since 1980, and a rticles

from Value World . Eac h p resenta tion

shows title , autho r, ab strac t, and

source. Papers may be individually

ordered from SAVE Inte rna tiona l.

SAVE Internat iona l we bsite:

http://www.value-eng.org

“ Standard Prac tice for Performing Va lue

Ana lysis (VA) of Buildings and

Building Systems,” Am eric an Soc iety

for Testing and Ma terials, Pub lic a tionE-1699.

Value Certific at ion Ma nuals (on SAVE

International

website/home/certification)

Certification/Recertification

Manual

Certified Workshop Ma nua l

Ce rtific a tion Examinat ion Stud y

Guide

SAVE International Internet Web

Site: http :/ / ww w.va lue-eng .org

Lawrenc e D. Miles Va lue Found ation

Inte rnet we bsite :

http://www.valuefoundation.org

Tec hniques of Va lue Ana lysis and

Engineering , Lawrenc e D. Miles

Documents

Vmstandard SAVE