Comments for De-RISK Blog http://de-risk.com/blog Thoughts on risk management in the wider world Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:15:08 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Jon C http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-733 Jon C Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:15:08 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-733 Hey Keith, This reminds me of a large government program that I worked on some time ago. The program manager was the brains behind the deal and was generally acknowledged as the only person who might navigate the program through to a successful conclusion. The problem was that he had no people skills, did not believe in formal process and was the arrogant b'stard that I have ever worked with! The program limped along for a year before falling in a heap - to everyones surprise. The program manager then had a nervous breakdown. Go figure. Hey Keith, This reminds me of a large government program that I worked on some time ago. The program manager was the brains behind the deal and was generally acknowledged as the only person who might navigate the program through to a successful conclusion. The problem was that he had no people skills, did not believe in formal process and was the arrogant b’stard that I have ever worked with! The program limped along for a year before falling in a heap – to everyones surprise. The program manager then had a nervous breakdown. Go figure.

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Keith http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-731 Keith Sun, 27 Mar 2011 18:34:06 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-731 Hi Penny - would be delighted to - have emailed you.. Hi Penny – would be delighted to – have emailed you..

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Penny http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-730 Penny Sun, 27 Mar 2011 17:53:57 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-730 Hi Keith, Good to see you discussing many of the issues from my forthcoming book -A short guide to facilitating risk management (Gower June 2011) I'm wondering if you'd like to review it at some stage - perhaps send me an e-mail or have a look at www.facilitating risk.com Regards, Penny Hi Keith,

Good to see you discussing many of the issues from my forthcoming book -A short guide to facilitating risk management (Gower June 2011)

I’m wondering if you’d like to review it at some stage – perhaps send me an e-mail or have a look at http://www.facilitating risk.com

Regards,
Penny

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Keith http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-729 Keith Sun, 27 Mar 2011 17:21:39 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-729 Hi Ravi - been super busy but now time to blog again.... The answer to you question is to make sure that you have a robust process for your largest/most complex projects and then for the rest you have two choices. The most radical is to do no risk management - if they are not critical projects they cannot hurt your your business significantly if they fail? However, the pragmatic approach would be to use a simplified risk management process for the simpler projects - in ABCD we use the QAC (Quick Assumption Check). Feel free to call if you would like to discuss further... Hi Ravi – been super busy but now time to blog again….

The answer to you question is to make sure that you have a robust process for your largest/most complex projects and then for the rest you have two choices. The most radical is to do no risk management – if they are not critical projects they cannot hurt your your business significantly if they fail?

However, the pragmatic approach would be to use a simplified risk management process for the simpler projects – in ABCD we use the QAC (Quick Assumption Check). Feel free to call if you would like to discuss further…

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Ravi http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-728 Ravi Sat, 26 Mar 2011 11:14:01 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-728 Hi Keith, Good to hear from you again - it seems like a long time - you been busy? I have seen first hand what happens when an organisation tries to standardise on a single risk management process (and tool). In my experience the tendency is to over-simplify and then the larger projects can't use these processes for effective risk management. My question for you is, if you employ a more comprehensive project that effectively supports the larger project, then what should you do for the smaller projects, which do not justify such complexity? Hi Keith,

Good to hear from you again – it seems like a long time – you been busy? I have seen first hand what happens when an organisation tries to standardise on a single risk management process (and tool). In my experience the tendency is to over-simplify and then the larger projects can’t use these processes for effective risk management.

My question for you is, if you employ a more comprehensive project that effectively supports the larger project, then what should you do for the smaller projects, which do not justify such complexity?

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Keith http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-727 Keith Fri, 25 Mar 2011 20:06:32 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-727 Hi Bruce - thanks for your input. This is a touchy subject for me as I am always suspicious when RAG gets used for virtually everything. Sure its intuitive but it can also be confusing. The classic problem is that RAG is used to summarise too many things eg an overall status of Red can mean that the risk is critical or uncontrollable or both! In ABCD, RAG is used for the overall Criticality of the risk and ABCD is used for Controllability. These are very different dimensions of the risk and need to be kept separate in order that the subsequent Risk Plans can be targeted appropriately. I totally agree with you re senior management intervention. One of the critical success factors with ABCD is to get the senior management team totally bought into the process so that they act as "champions". This ultimately make the process deliver its benefits. Hi Bruce – thanks for your input. This is a touchy subject for me as I am always suspicious when RAG gets used for virtually everything. Sure its intuitive but it can also be confusing.

The classic problem is that RAG is used to summarise too many things eg an overall status of Red can mean that the risk is critical or uncontrollable or both!

In ABCD, RAG is used for the overall Criticality of the risk and ABCD is used for Controllability. These are very different dimensions of the risk and need to be kept separate in order that the subsequent Risk Plans can be targeted appropriately.

I totally agree with you re senior management intervention. One of the critical success factors with ABCD is to get the senior management team totally bought into the process so that they act as “champions”. This ultimately make the process deliver its benefits.

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Keith http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-726 Keith Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:59:19 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-726 Hi Don - I have seen this "swamped with data" also - many times. And the point you make about the PMO "making up the risks" is exactly the point of this post - if the risks do not come from the front-line troops and they do not have confidence in the integrity of the system, then risk management will inevitably fail. Hi Don – I have seen this “swamped with data” also – many times. And the point you make about the PMO “making up the risks” is exactly the point of this post – if the risks do not come from the front-line troops and they do not have confidence in the integrity of the system, then risk management will inevitably fail.

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Project Management Tools That Work (Bruce) http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-725 Project Management Tools That Work (Bruce) Thu, 24 Mar 2011 16:27:27 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-725 We had a simple color coding for all the projects at the senior management reivew. Green was on track. Yellow was off track but recoverable. Red was off track, non recoverable, being replanned. With time, Green became "new project," yellow was "project in progress" and red was "project trying to complete." The color codings still indicated the overall status of the project, it was only that senior management was not effective at intervening to make a difference on the projects (i.e., corporate culture of late and buggy projects). Good to great techniques make a difference, if there is a team of folks capable of taking action on the information they get. If a good technique doesn't work, there is often a more fundamental issue that needs to be fixed first. Good technique. Brucce We had a simple color coding for all the projects at the senior management reivew. Green was on track. Yellow was off track but recoverable. Red was off track, non recoverable, being replanned.

With time, Green became “new project,” yellow was “project in progress” and red was “project trying to complete.” The color codings still indicated the overall status of the project, it was only that senior management was not effective at intervening to make a difference on the projects (i.e., corporate culture of late and buggy projects).

Good to great techniques make a difference, if there is a team of folks capable of taking action on the information they get. If a good technique doesn’t work, there is often a more fundamental issue that needs to be fixed first.

Good technique.

Brucce

]]> Comment on Risk Management – I just don’t get it… by Don http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199&cpage=1#comment-724 Don Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:30:45 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=199#comment-724 Hi Keith A thought provoking post as usual. I have seen this "swamped with data" on too many large programmes. It simply causes management to give up on risk management in despair as they can't see the wood for the trees, to coin a phrase. On one particular programme I worked on a few years ago, the PMO were completely overwhelmed by the risks submitted by each project. It was so bad that the PMO resorted to re-creating a programme risk register from scratch that was then rejected by the senior management (correctly) as it didn't come from the projects! Hi Keith
A thought provoking post as usual. I have seen this “swamped with data” on too many large programmes. It simply causes management to give up on risk management in despair as they can’t see the wood for the trees, to coin a phrase. On one particular programme I worked on a few years ago, the PMO were completely overwhelmed by the risks submitted by each project. It was so bad that the PMO resorted to re-creating a programme risk register from scratch that was then rejected by the senior management (correctly) as it didn’t come from the projects!

]]> Comment on Avoiding Black Swans by Don http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=12&cpage=1#comment-713 Don Fri, 18 Mar 2011 17:34:59 +0000 http://de-risk.com/blog/?p=12#comment-713 Just picking up on Paul's point re inadequate sea defences around nuclear power stations. Surely its not that difficult to raise the business end of the power station by (say) 30m to reduce the impact of potential tsunamis. Sort of build it on a podium? An idea for future nuclear power station construction perhaps? Just picking up on Paul’s point re inadequate sea defences around nuclear power stations. Surely its not that difficult to raise the business end of the power station by (say) 30m to reduce the impact of potential tsunamis. Sort of build it on a podium? An idea for future nuclear power station construction perhaps?

]]>