## PMP question - RISK quantitative analysis

Discuss PMP doubts, tips and lesson learned. iZenBridge makes PMP® Certification easy
PMPEngineer
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 12:29 am

### PMP question - RISK quantitative analysis

I'm trying to solve this question from HeadFirst Labs book, but I believe the answer the book is saying is incorrect. I think the answer should be a +30.7 and not -30.7, please let me know your thoughts on this:

Prob Imp
35% cost \$48 to replace equipment
5% lose \$750 in damage costs
15% save \$800 in battery costs
10% cost \$350 for last-minute rental

What is total EMV? The book says it should be a "-\$30.70" and that if you add \$30.7 to your budget you will account for risks? I am struggling with this, I think you should not reduce budget at all in this case since in fact you get a saving of \$30.7 cumulative EMV of the risks. Let me know your thoughts please.
manishpn
Expert
Posts: 2125
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 3:55 pm

### Re: PMP question - RISK quantitative analysis

Its EMV and not EV... please read it carefully and think through
Br,
Manish P
PMP, PMI - ACP, SAFe Agilist
http://www.izenbridge.com/blog/7-effect ... ification/
sm365
Beginner
Posts: 26
Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2017 2:24 pm
Location: Saudi Arabia

### Re: PMP question - RISK quantitative analysis

Hi - As per RITA's EMV calculation follow this approach.

Treat add every threat and remove every opportunity.

35% cost \$48 to replace equipment : THREAT : + \$16.8
5% lose \$750 in damage costs : THREAT : + \$37.5
15% save \$800 in battery costs : OPPORTUNITY : - \$120.0
10% cost \$350 for last-minute rental : THREAT : + \$35.0

Add them and you will get -\$30.7 as total EMV of the RISK. Therefore you should add \$30.7 to your contingency reserve.

Hope this helps.
Mohammed Shabbir
PMP, ITIL Expert
VCAB
Participant
Posts: 71
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2016 4:26 pm

### Re: PMP question - RISK quantitative analysis

Rita is somehow confusing, on page 424 (in the note below the practice table--top of the page), the book states, "Note that for opportunities, expected monetary value is often represented as a positive amount... whereas threats are usually presented as a negative number". T'his was used for decision making on alternatives, I guess.

Then on page 434 answer for the exercise, (used for risk reserve), threats are added (+) and opportunities are negative (-).

So my question, are EVM values labeled differently when selecting alternative then when calculating reserve? The same book, Rita seem contradictory or at best confusing...Please help