This case study evaluates the approach used in the evaluation of tender submissions. The application is used successfully for large high technology procurements. It is basically a two part process or two phase system. In Phase I, the goal is to establish a risk baseline that individual tender responses can be compared to. Phase 2 builds on Phase 1 where the goal is to compare the individual tender’s approach to the potential effects of risk on the project. The two phase process is a systematic process which helps to ensure the greatest attention and effort is focused on the high risk areas for the project. 1. Which case study does a better job at identifying risks? Explain why. Phase 1 and Phase II use the same process for identifying risk; therefore there is an equal level of performance. Determining which case study does a better job of identifying risks is made much easier by applying the definition. “Risk identification determines what might happen that could affect the objectives of the project, and how those things might happen.” The process should be comprehensive to ensure all key elements have been identified. The preferred method for risk identification is brainstorming. In Phase I and II the project team uses a risk WBS as noted in figure13.2 for Phase I and figure 13.11 in the text. The risk WBS was developed using brainstorming as discussed in Chapter 2, and each risk WBS item is reviewed. Any required clarification is provided by the team member most familiar with the risk. The primary objective for Phase I is to establish and document “a risk baseline against which individual tender responses can be compared.” The primary “objective for Phase II is to provide comparative guidance to the tender evaluation team on the potential effects of risk on the project, given each tenderer’s approach.” Phase II builds on Phase I, but as previously noted,