Trying to understand why Risk ranks are backwards and the numbering is inconsistent across the platform. Here are my issues with this.
First is that generally accepted project management best practice, let's say from the PMBOK on a 3x3 risk matrix, is that a high risk value is 9. Low is 1. For a 5x5, high=25, and so on. Within SPM however, a low risk value is 9, the exact opposite.
Secondly, this might be acceptable, however even SN flip flops this within their Score tab in SPM. Higher values indicate higher risk, lower values lower risk (which aligns with best practice). Here's the article for that if you're interested.
https://www.servicenow.com/community/spm-articles/how-risk-value-and-size-are-calculated-in-a-demand...
