when the decision-maker is risk neutral where VoC can be simply computed as VoC = "value of decision situation with perfect information" - "value of current decision situation". This special case is how expected value of perfect information and expected value of sample information are calculated where risk neutrality is implicitly assumed. For cases where the decision-maker is risk averse or risk seeking, this simple calculation does not necessarily yield the correct result, and iterative calculation is the only way to ensure correctness. Decision trees and influence diagrams are most commonly used in representing and solving decision situations as well as associated VoC calculation. The influence diagram, in particular, is structured to accommodate team decision situations where incomplete sharing of information among team members can be represented and solved very efficiently. While decision trees are not designed to accommodate team decision situations, they can do so by augmenting them with information sets widely used in game trees. Examples VoC is often illustrated using the example of paying for a consultant in a business transaction, who may either be perfect (expected value of perfect information) or imperfect (expected value of imperfect information). In a typical consultant situation, the consultant would be paid up to cost c for their information, based on the expected cost E without the consultant and the revised cost F with the consultant's information. In a perfect information scenario, E can be defined as the sum product of the probability of a good outcome g times its cost k, plus the probability of a bad outcome (1-g) times its cost k'>k: E = gk + (1-g)k', which is revised to reflect expected cost F of perfect information including consulting cost c. The perfect information case assumes the bad outcome does not occur due to the perfect information consultant. F = g(k+c) We then solve for values of c for which F<E to determine when to pay the consultant. In the case of a recursive decision tree, we often have an additional cost m that results from correcting the error, and the process restarts such that the expected cost will appear on both the left and right sides of our equations. This is typical of hiring-rehiring decisions or value chain decisions for which assembly line components must be replaced if erroneously ordered or installed: E = gk + (1-g)(k'+m+E) F = g(k+c) If the consultant is imperfect with frequency