Focus on the Management of Uncertainty and Risk webinar

Today I listened to the PMI Risk CoP webinar on Focus on the Management of Uncertainty and Risk.

The presenter covered the worst offenders in risk management, in particular not looking far enough (being too conservative), not looking at opportunities (having only dark glasses), and making risk management a once a project activity.

As a corollary, some takeaways are that:

• You also need to look at the bright side of risk management and at opportunities.
• You need to look deep for risks.  The tsunami in Japan proved this as three mitigation strategies (at least) failed in Fukushima.  If you use a checklist for risk management, it should be only a starting point, not the end of the effort.  If a risk cannot be mitigated, transferred, etc. it still need to be on the register or you will be blindsided.
• Be disciplined; review risk management at each team meeting without fault.

On other topic that was discussed is the confusion that often happens between risks and decision that have already been taken.  Nothing that has already been decided in a project is a risk, it may not happen; it HAS happened.  Many manager keep on monitoring their projects for things that have already happened.  That is a waste of time and the item should be moved off the risk registry.

Another way of getting in trouble is devoting the same effort to a risk with a low impact as to a risk with a high impact.  A bet the company risk should get much more of your attention.

Of course the webinar did not limit itself to these so I encourage you to listen to the recording.

What do you think?  As always questions and comments are welcome.

Connect with me on LinkedIn.  I am a LinkedIn Open Networker (LION); you can use “Friend” to add me to your network.

 

Comments

[Pw002662]

Hi,
just listening, liked it in general, missing points like:
- Risk Review with Steering Team : What is their level of risk appreciation to start / continue / terminate the Project ?
But always good to get outside views...

[Patrick Richard]

Werner,

Very true. Many projects descend in "troubled" status yet they don't get killed even if they should. Maybe a reason for that is lack of appreciation.

[Glen B. Alleman]

Fukushima had more than it's share of poor risk management. Putting the generators in the basement of Units 3 and 4 was a general bad idea, even if it did save money.

But the "killer" problem was that right before the wave rolled over the sea wall the operators had stopped the gravity feed cooling system because was cooling too much, which would have damaged the structure of the core. So they closed the valves.

When the wave came, it knocked out the power and of course the valve actuators were electrically powered. It went down hill from there.

Nice article in IEEE Spectrum of all the "bad luck," "bad design," and "bad operations."

[Patrick Richard]

Hey Glen,

Thanks for the write up. Is that IEEE Spectrum available to all? I'd like to read it.