Risk Analysis Scoresheet
External Value Dependency Factor Multiple vendors / contractors? Y = 2, N = 0
Score Problem
Counter Measure
Poor vendor support?
Y = 1, N = 0
Critical dependence on external suppliers?
Y = 2, N = 0
Ensure adherence to standards, both technical and managerial. Emphasize the importance of regular status reporting. Time wasted waiting for response to Impose contractual queries or due to rework arising from constraints/safeguards. Request mistaken assumptions made by the documentation in advance. Ensure project team in the interim. effective account manager. Identify a user group with other clients. May miss milestones waiting for Ensure suppliers are aware of deliverables. schedule commitment. Request interim status reports and review of partially complete deliverables so that the project team can verify the supplier's estimates of the effort to go. Impose contractual obligations. Have a co-ordination project with the critical path specified in terms of projects. Recommend a strategic / architectural plan is produced. Parallel, or duplicate, development of Establish cross-project standards to similar areas with different ensure consistency. Establish approaches causing confusion and change control procedures to irritation to the user. manage the different changes proposed by different systems. Recommend a strategic/architectural plan is produced. Project initiated for no justifiable Ensure Project Board and Strategy reason, e.g., political. Committee are aware of the situation. Time and expense Investigate training current resources. Plan gradual take on to allow for familiarization and training. Investigate viability of using short term experienced contractors. 0 Low Risk Time wasted awaiting completion of other projects not within the stage manager's control.
Coordination.
Number of interproject dependencies? Overlapping scope with other projects?
< 3 = 0, 3-5 = 3, > 5 =5
Y = 3, N = 0
Contradicts LRSP Y = 10, N = 0 direction? Plan requires Y = 2, N = 0 extensive recruitment of resources?
External Dependency Total
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / External 1
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
Organizational Factor Number of user areas and decision makers? Multiple geographical locations?
Value Equal to number of user areas / decision makers. Equal to number of geographical areas divided by the number of implementation sites Y = 0, N = 1
Score Problem Not obtaining consensus.
Counter Measure
Identify key representative. Establish decision making process/responsibilities. Time to distribute deliverables and co- Select a pilot implementation site ordinate activities. then a phased implementation. Establish focal point for development activities. Schedule briefing and training sessions early in project. Increase user involvement/participation. Training requirements and implementation logistics. Consider phased implementation if selfcontained increments can be identified. Plan implementation as early as possible. When a problem arises, the sponsor Extend project board to include a may not have the authority, or more appropriate sponsor. perspective, to support the project adequately. Lack of understanding of Use techniques which are less requirements. Lack of involvement of dependent on user input, e.g., users in production of deliverables relational data analysis rather than with a consequential lack of data modeling. Use user commitment to project. representative on Project Board to "encourage" user participation. Extend review throughout project on Resistance to system by Hold briefings activities. organization. what the repercussions will be. Increase user involvement. Obtain top management commitment. Users inadequately prepared for a Increase level of user training, use of successful implementation and prototypes and presentations of the handover. new procedures, both system and manual. user participation in the Lack of commitment to assuring Increase quality of technical deliverables and technical activities by use of JAD, to plan. and the interactive sessions, to gather information and create models. Determine user roles in the project organization (Project Board, Project Coordinators). Inadequate budget and time frame for training. Include prior walkthrough of the training sessions and materials to gain commitment from user management. Unrealistic expectations. Lack of communication. Lack of knowledge of roles and commitment. (This is the number of people whose function will be changed as a consequence of the new system) Complexity of requirements and possibility of conflicts.
Previous user IS project experience? Size of departments impacted?
< 200 = 0, 200-500 = 1, 500-2000 = 3, > 2000 = 5
Inappropriate level of Y = 10 N = 0 sponsorship?
Key users unavailable?
Y = 5, N = 0
Organizational changes required (in terms of structure / responsibility)? Level of changes required to user procedures? Are users dually involved in the management and execution of the project?
Y = 2, N = 0
High = 3, Moderate = 2, Low = 1 Y = 0, N = 3
Will extensive Y = 2, N = 0 education be required to facilitate use of the system? Organizational Total
0 Low Risk
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Organization 2
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Organization 3
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
Planning Factor
Value
Score Problem Competition for resources or personnel with appropriate skills. Critical dependencies unknown, increased chance of slippage. May have to cut back on quality and/or functionality, or project discarded if date missed.
Counter Measure
Dependent on scarce Y = 5, N = 0 resources / skills? Complex task Y = 3, N = 0 dependencies? Critical Y = 5, N = 0 implementation date?
Informal control procedures?
Y = 5, N = 0
Effort versus elapsed Effort time/Elapsed time? time
Number of major subsystems?
< 3 = 1, >= 3 = 3
Subsystem more Y = 2, N = 0 than 3 elapsed years? Subsystem more Y=2 N=0 than 12 elapsed months? Level of confidence? >85% = 1, <85% = 3
Key dates set by Y = 0, N = 3 project team from the plan? Experience of project High = 0, Moderate manager? = 1, Low = 3, None allocated = 4 Planned resources Y = 0, N = 5 available? Planning Factor Total
Make resource requirements known as early as possible. Increase level of planning. Tighten project control. Verify significance of date. Ascertain which portions of system are required for that date. Consider incremental development. Plan and control at detailed level. Inaccurate Project Status Encourage take on of formal controls information. by training and provision of project management software. The greater this ratio, the greater the Increase control procedures and number of simultaneous tasks. introduce additional level of Increased staff associated with management. Divide into achievable development and associated sub-systems. overheads. Managing Interfaces. Have a co-ordination project. Establish overall architectural plan. Minimize project interdependencies. Increase the number or control points. Increased chance of slippage due to Increase the number or control possible changes in requirements or points. scope over longer elapsed time. Level of planning experience of Ensure management tolerances and unknowns within the plan may make contingencies are identified. estimates low. No commitment to plan, Verify significance and justification for unachievable date. dates. Produce a plan. Plans may not exist. Control procedures may not be adequate. New plan will be required to fit with maximum resource constraint or project could be canceled/postponed. 0 Low Risk Provide training and support from experienced project manager. Increase involvement by Project Board.
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Planning4
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
Business Case Factor Major increase in costs possible? Evolving business requirements?
Value Y = 3, N = 0
Score Problem If greater than +/-5%, then likely to miss stage end targets.
Counter Measure
Y = 5, N = 0
Incomplete definition Y = 5, N = 0 of scope / requirements? Ill-defined benefits? Y=2, N=0
Lead time for return on investment
Mission critical system? Fundamental to IS Y = 5, N = 0 strategy? Business High = 1, Low = 3 commitment to development? Business Case Total
Twice development time = 2, Five times or more the development time = 5 = 5, N = 0 Y
Set appropriate tolerance levels. Investigate mechanisms for further controlling costs. Do not know where project should be Use iterative development approach. heading, difficulty in justification, Establish detailed scoping study. significant rework likely. Increase user involvement. Cannot estimate effort as a lot of Involve more senior user rework is likely. representatives. Establish detailed scoping study. Increase time spent in analysis. Difficult to select optional solution, Use CRA to help define tangible potential for project being canceled. benefits. Establish focused sessions with user to evaluate benefits. May never achieve pay-back. Reduce scope of system to include most profitable segments.
Business may fail if project fails. Foundation system impacting other developments. System perceived as belonging to I.S. department. 0 Low Risk
Increase planning and level of control. Increase planning and level of control. Hold assessments requiring user sign-off. Increase user involvement. Produce detailed Business Case.
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Business Case 5
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
Technical (Environment) Factor Inappropriate development tools? New / unfamiliar technology? Stable development team?
Value
Score Problem
Counter Measure
Y = 2, N = 0
Required tools unavailable.
Y = 5, N = 0 Y = 0, N = 5
Time required for learning curve during development. Lost information. Time required for handover. Increased reliance on users. If the balance of expertise is low, then there is an increased risk of defects.
Low team knowledge Y = 1, N = 0 of business area? Project team skills? Expert = 0, Balanced = 1, Trainee = 5.
Use of development Y = 0, N = 2 method / standards? Technical (Project) Factor Complexity of functions? Complexity of database? Low = 0, Moderate = 2, High = 5 Low = 0, Moderate = 2, High = 5
Project team does not know what to do. Tasks may be duplicated or omitted. Increased risk of defects.
Review tools and associated justification. Evaluate other productivity areas. Conduct training. Recruit experienced staff. Obtain vendor support. in standard format as Document project progresses. Increase attendance at reviews to spread knowledge. Increased user participation. Increase frequency and formality of reviews. the frequency of Quality Increase Assurance Reviews and Project Checkpoints. Include experienced staff as specialized technical support. Account for experience levels when planning. Implement a standard approach to development, ensure staff familiarity.
Performance problems.
Database to be shared by a number of applications? Number of physical system interfaces? Clearly specified requirements? Number of design decisions at discretion of systems architect (no user involvement)? Is a package solution available?
Y = 3, N = 0
Difficult to tune successfully in Physical Design. Increase risks of systems failure.
< 3 = 0, >= 3 = 3.
Y = 0, N = 3 0-25% = 0, 25-60% = 3, 60%+ = 5
Rework may be necessary as systems may not meet users' needs. Rework may be necessary as system Increase user involvement. may not meet user's needs
Increase effort in Logical Design to validate. Increase level of reviews. Use formal techniques. Increase data validation steps throughout. Ensure thorough Physical Design Tuning. Increase DBA involvement. Attempt to establish overall volumes and requirements. Keep design flexible. Increase time in defining interfaces in detail. Involve experts from associated systems. Increase user involvement.
Y = 0, N = 3
Effort required in design, construction Ensure buy/build option is and testing. appropriately conducted.
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Technical 6
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
If using a package, was the package evaluated and selected, based upon detailed specifications and requirements? If using a package, were package changes required? Complex on-line networks?
Y =0, N = 3
Mismatch likely.
Carry out evaluation if cost justified.
0-5% = 0, 5-15% = 3, over 15% = 5 Y = 2, N = 0
Multi-level hardware Y = 2, N = 0 requirement? Technical (Operational) Factor Upward compatible hardware? Y = 0, N = 3
Required information may be difficult Contract vendor to do changes. to obtain, or not supported. Evaluate alternative solutions. Minimize changes to front/back ends. Increased risk of technical problems Add activities to prototype the on-line (incompatibility, etc.) architecture. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Interfaces, data distribution. Separate technical feasibility project started early. Ensure availability of required skills.
24 hour availability?
Y = 3, N = 0
Rapid response time Y = 3, N = 0 (below 2 seconds) ?
Small batch window? Y = 3, N = 0
High-volume throughput?
Y = 3, N = 0
Very large database? Y = 3, N = 0
Short recovery cycle?
Y = 3, N = 0
Technical Total
Increase time scheduled for physical design and construction stages. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. construction. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. construction. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. construction. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Tighter performance constraints will Increase time scheduled for physical increase problems in physical design design and construction stages. and construction. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Performance and storage constraints Increase time scheduled for will increase problems in physical designing the database and for design and construction. storage and performance predictions. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Tighter recovery constraints will Increase time scheduled for physical increase problems in physical design design and construction stages. and construction. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. 0 Low Risk
Hardware constraints will increase problems in physical design and implementation.
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Technical 7
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Technical 8
8/12/2008
Risk Analysis Scoresheet
External Dependency Factor External Dependency Total Organizational Total Planning Total Business Case Total Technical Total Overall Project Total
Score
Risk
0 0 0 0 0 0 Low Risk
8656ba12-bcb9-4250-a7e9-aba5b2e2a65f.xls / Total Risk 9
8/12/2008