When formulating MoV Study Plans, it is crucial to understand the external context, often analyzed using PESTLE (Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal, Environmental). Environmental influences, such as sustainability targets or carbon reduction policies, frequently create inherent conflicts with other project objectives, like minimizing cost or maximizing speed. The Management of Value (MoV) methodology provides a structured framework and specific techniques (e.g., Function Analysis, Value Trees) to explicitly identify, analyze, and reconcile these competing demands. By focusing on function and balancing benefits against resources and risks, MoV facilitates decision-making to achieve the optimal balance and deliver the best overall value.

B. Legal requirements are fundamental value drivers. Non-compliance can lead to severe penalties and reputational damage, thus heavily influencing and often defining minimum acceptable value criteria.

C. While uncertain, the potential impact of technology is a key area for value improvement. MoV studies actively explore technological developments to identify opportunities and threats, not dismiss them as unknown.

D. Understanding what other organizations are doing through benchmarking is essential. It provides context, identifies best practices, and helps set realistic targets for value improvement.

1. AXELOS. (2010). Management of Value (MoV). The Stationery Office.

Section 4.3.2, ‘Plan the MoV study: activities’: This section emphasizes gathering information on the subject of the MoV study, including the wider context and stakeholder perspectives, which encompasses environmental, legal, and technological factors (p. 39).

Appendix C, ‘PESTLE’: This appendix details the analysis of external environmental factors, stating that these influences "may constrain the project or programme or create opportunities" which MoV must address (p. 156).

Section 2.2, ‘What is value?’: The definition of value as the relationship between satisfying needs and the use of resources inherently involves balancing conflicting criteria, such as environmental performance versus cost (p. 9).