Risk Assessment, Risky Projects

Agamedes believes that Peter Garrett has tripped over the same risk management challenges that trip up a large number of other project owners and managers.
..o0o..

Peter Garrett has copped flak for his inept -- or inexperienced -- handling of the risks of his home insulation project. Is he any different to any other project manager?

Do you need new -- lateral -- thinking for your own problems? email nick leth at gmail dot com. Need solutions? No worries. Now.

In projects, risk assessment is often seen as an essential but separate part of the project. There are project plans, project meeting, project reports. And -- separately -- there are risk management plans, risk management meetings, risk management reports. Yet risk -- the potential for things to go wrong in the future -- is an integral part of any project.

Garrett -- so we are told -- had plenty of warning of the potential risks. In particular, external consultants provided a report on project risks. Mistake number one: Garrett did not read the report until well after the risks became actual.

Let's call Garrett the "project owner". Somewhere in the department of the environment is a faceless bureaucrat who is the "project manager". Then there is the "consultant" who reported on project risk. And the "other stakeholders" who are said to have raised all sorts of risk-related warnings. Consider some questions of "risk":

• Was the project manager aware of the report from the consultant? If not: why was the report commissioned? Who was hiding the results? A project manager is responsible for successful conclusion of a project. If someone else was getting significant reports -- and not passing them to the project manager -- this smacks of intra-departmental politicking, or perhaps incompetence. The results included several deaths.
  
• If the project manager had the risk report from the consultant, were the risks -- and their mitigation -- included in the project plan? Or were they simply shoved aside, delegated to a risk management team, effectively ignored.
  
• What happened to the warnings from other stakeholders? Did they reach the project manager? If not -- why not? If the project manager did hear the warnings, were they incorporated -- as project risk -- in the project plan? Obviously not successfully -- unless four deaths were considered an acceptable risk.
  
• Back to the consultant's risk report: Were the risks stated clearly? Or were they hedged about with weasel words; written with the thought that the report recipient may wish to gloss over the risks... Did the report really say, don't do this or people will die! Or did the authors cover their backsides with obfuscation, statistics and deniably indirect indications.
  
• When the report finally reached Garrett, was there a clear statement of what it all meant? Yes, Garrett was in charge of the department. But that means that his mind was on a lot of separate issues. Every report needs an "executive overview". And that overview must clearly and concisely convey the essential message. Can you read the executive overview and see that, clearly, this project is likely to cause four deaths? If not -- why not?!
  

Okay, we have a minister who stuffed up. That's not all.

Will we learn these lessons?

Project management is a common responsibility for managers, in business and in government. We often stuff it up and suffer the consequences. Sometimes we stuff it up and other people also suffer the consequences.

1. Risk assessment and risk management are essential parts of project management. Risk mitigation will generate tasks and costs within the project. "Note that cost estimates come after the risk management plan. Risk management may cost money; that money is an integral part of the project cost." (I stripped project planning to its essentials; an overview is on my website.)
   
2. Project management is more than just filling in forms, allocating resources and spending money. The project manager is also responsible for delivering results.
   
3. A consultant's report may contain as many pages of detail as you like. It must also include an overview which clearly points out the key results and recommendations.
   
4. A senior manager -- or executive, or minister -- has limited time available to evaluate each project. Write your report overview with that in mind.
   
5. If you are too cautious, or too afraid, to clearly state the problems that you have identified -- do not write the report. You are being paid to give "expert advice". Provide expert advice -- or give back the money.
   
6. Make sure that all relevant information goes to the relevant project manager. This is the responsibility of stakeholders, of the project manager and of any other faceless bureaucrat who receives possibly important advice. If necessary, add a sentence highlighting why this information may be important. Then pass it on.
   
7. The project manager must think of everything. Tough. It's your job.
   
8. The project owner must check the project. Does it seem to be on track? Does it appear to cover major issues? Are you getting the updates you expect? Ask for them. Do you understand the information you get? Demand that it be written for its target audience -- you. If you want the project to happen -- then care enough to follow its progress.
   

Sure, the insulation project appears to have been run by incompetents who did not pass on relevant information. Or who ignored relevant information. So it was a typical project.

Transfer some of the guilty. Punish some of the innocent. Promote the uninvolved. But also learn how to successfully manage a project.

Independent thinking & independent analysis of your problems by Agamedes Consulting. Support for your thought: email nick leth at gmail dot com