Finance wants estimated primary loss captured on a payment-outage risk alongside qualitative ratings. Which configuration awareness is correct?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Sometimes you want both a weather word—High—and a dollar estimate. Turn on quantitative fields like estimated primary loss where the methodology supports them, and keep the qualitative scale too.
Full Explanation
Finance may capture estimated primary loss on a payment-outage risk alongside qualitative ratings when quantitative fields are configured on the risk or assessment where the methodology supports numeric loss estimates. Hybrid qualitative-plus-quantitative capture lets civic finance discuss both rating language and dollar exposure without forcing a false choice. Methodology support is the gating concept—not an ERP-only rule and not a ban on numbers in IRM.
Claiming primary loss estimates belong only in a separate ERP with no IRM fields unnecessarily fragments the risk record executives use. Asserting quantitative loss fields are illegal in IRM and must never be enabled is false for methodologies that support them. Replacing all qualitative scales with a single currency field named Priority destroys likelihood×impact qualitative method and misnames money as priority.
Exam caveat: quantitative fields complement qualitative scoring when enabled by methodology; they do not automatically replace it, and Priority is not a currency synonym.
Operational check: enable estimated primary loss on the payment-outage methodology path; record both qualitative residual and a loss estimate; confirm reports can show both; do not rename qualitative scales to a lone currency Priority field.