Risk ownership: contractor role was chromatic/consultant showed less participation. This criterion is defined in the contract. For instance, strategic-level uncertainties are owned by the owner

Workforce competency is satisfactory based on defined criteria (experience, track record and education)

Team member's role: Defined roles for uncertainty management (besides their primary role in the project team) based on the Anslag method but not dedicated just to UM

Effective communication: mostly between owner and contractor confirms their active role. Consultants have less participation, communication and involvement in UM process

Risk ownership: owner and contractor both were active, but this criterion is mainly defined in the contract. Low level of ownership by consultants confirmed

Workforce competency: It was at a satisfactory level based on (experience and track record)

Team members' role: Defined roles for uncertainty management (besides their primary role in the project team) but not dedicated just to UM

Effective communication: High level of communication and information sharing based on collaboration level and contract type (collaborative)

The documentation level is high based on the guidelines of owners and interviews

Formal or informal: highly structured and following a formal process

Ability to support risk prioritisation/assign resources to critical risks: process with the involvement of people in different positions, strategic and operational and facilitates the opportunity for prioritising risks

Usability: It is not easy to measure the usability of the process, but from a qualitative level, based on interviews was efficient and could support the project objective

Participants (owner, contractor and designer) collaboration level/information exchange: In comparison with Case 2 has a low level of information exchange based on the contract type. Culture has an important role, such as the leadership and support of managers

Documentation level: high level of documentation based on interviews and observing the system

Formal or informal: level of the formal process is less than Case 1, but they follow a structured process

Ability to support risk prioritisation/assign resources to critical risks: Risks and opportunities were evident from the owner side, and better collaboration between actors facilitated this work

Usability: Same as Case 1, this measure could be confirmed by interviewees but not quantitatively. They mentioned that it could help avoid many risks and discover opportunities

Participants (owner, contractor and designer) collaboration level/information exchange: Participants' collaboration level was significant compared to Case 1

Complex or simple: Anslag method in Case 1 is flexible for complexity level according to the project's complexity level but working with it has some complexities base on the interviews. This complexity might reduce work efficiency

Precise or imprecise: Theoretically used tools had a good score in preciseness based on previous experience/but how much they help to reach for intended results in not measured

Resource demanding or less resource demanding: In comparison with the level of the total cost of the projects is not significant monetary. Still, the owner confirmed it needs much time and energy to calculate and estimate the uncertainty value

Visualisation capability: It is satisfactory based on an interview with the contractor, but in an interview with the owner, they mentioned it has room for improvement. From the document study of the tool, it is evident that the tool has a good level of visualisation

Documentation capability: Documentation is part of the process and tool (Anslag) in Case 1. Based on the document study, there are strict instructions for data documentation in the uncertainty management process according to owner guidelines

Complex or simple: The tools used for uncertainty management are not as complex as in the first project. The interviewee did not mention the tool's difficulties or intricacy

Precise or imprecise: Theoretically used tools have a good score in preciseness based on previous experience/but how much they help to reach for intended results in not measured

Resource demanding or less resource demanding: In comparison with the level of the total cost of the projects is not significant

Visualisation capability: High level of visualisation capability based on observation of the web-based tools during an interview with the owner and contractors' confirmation

Documentation capability: Like visualisation, web-based tools improve documentation capability, which is high in Case 2