Which is the correct order of steps in establishing evaluation criteria?

The Evaluation Phase of the Value Methodology (VM) Job Plan involves assessing ideas using established criteria, as taught in the VMF 1 course (Core Competency #7: Evaluation and Selection of Alternatives). According to SAVE International’s Value Methodology Standard, “establishing evaluation criteria follows a logical sequence: first, identify the context of the study (e.g., project goals, constraints); then define the criteria (e.g., cost, performance, risk); next, determine the importance of each criterion (e.g., weighting, as noted in Question 11); and finally, determine the range or scale for measurement (e.g., 1-5 scale for scoring).” This process ensures that criteria are relevant, prioritized, and measurable, enabling systematic evaluation (e.g., using coarse-medium-fine filters, as in Question 33).

Identify context: Understand the study’s goals and constraints (e.g., budget limits).

Define criteria: List specific criteria (e.g., cost savings, quality).

Determine importance: Assign weights to criteria (e.g., cost is 40% of the score).

Determine range/scale: Set a measurement scale (e.g., 1-10 for each criterion).

Option A (Identify context, define criteria, determine importance, determine range/scale) is correct, as it follows the logical sequence for establishing evaluation criteria.

Option B (Identify context, define criteria, determine range/scale, determine importance) is incorrect because determining importance (weighting) should precede setting the range/scale to ensure the scale reflects the criteria’s relative importance.

Option C (Define criteria, identify context, determine range/scale, determine importance) is incorrect because the context must be identified first to ensure criteria are relevant.

Option D (Define criteria, identify context, determine importance, determine range/scale) is incorrect because defining criteria before identifying the context risks missing the study’s specific needs.