Unlocking Potential at Project X By Patrick Darnell
Risk Management Integration -- Managing Project Risk and Opportunities
Introduction
This paper introduces the work Project Risk Management Team is doing to analyze and mitigate risks on Project X. Comments are directed to stakeholders of the prototype early completion goal, thereafter continuing production of AMD. Please note unlocking risk is ongoing and determinant, and is supported by Performing Management Organization, PMO, who uses bodies of knowledge to identify, and qualify risks in each of the sub-processes.
Monitoring with tools of comparison, Risk Management will have determined risks most impacting life-cycle and put some heavier tools of quantitative analysis to work. This will have unlocked potential for increased probability and impact of events positive to the project’s realization.
Description: Task Detail
How will you address varied interests of stakeholders when you present your plan? Develop an idea or two for each stakeholder to "sell" them on your plan” (CTUOnline; 2006).
In concert effort scientists in PMO dedicate their efforts to principle that “projects have to meet all stakeholder expectations... [And] Identifying stakeholders is a primary task because all the important decisions during the initiation, planning and execution stages of the project are made by these stakeholders” (E-Coach; 2006).
Because “Projects and project management are carried out in environments broader than that of the project itself” (PMBOK Guide; 2004, p 19) at all times the PMO will:
· Apply basic competencies of project management in understanding and planning for risk
· Use effective, understandable communication techniques.
· Communicate risk effectively to all project stakeholders throughout life of Project X (CTUOnline; 2006)
Mitigating Materiel Substitutions Risk factor discussion relates to:
· Procurement and Resource Stakeholders
· Stakeholders in DOD, US Government Quality, and Expectations of Project X
· Design / build personnel
· Final documentation and Printing
In mitigated response to stakeholders we have looked at scope, budget and time for procurement of certain materiel. We made a Risk Log to identify, qualify and quantify risk of substitutions in metallurgy of the project. This scope risk involves either protecting specifications for the deliverables or reducing scope requirements.
In first two weeks of the Risk Management Plan, PMO gathered much information from supplier stakeholders who had been specified and identified in project design documents. The initial trend in shop drawing checking, PMO was to find, was numerous submittals of substitutions for those resources specified. Articles reviewed specified materials armor steel, stainless steel, and sheet metal manufacturing standards, and testing values.
PMO determined this risk to be immediate, and invited input from those suppliers. Resource stakeholders wanted to know what savings would be realized if substitutions were approved. Also, they wanted all test data on alternate materials in question. Using qualitative technique PMO qualified several non-issue risks. Yet with careful analysis of the inputs, PMO found there to be no significant savings by using substituted materiel in metals.
The PMO mitigated the risk by finding the tests and certifications of almost half of the alternate materials are non-existent, or pending. In interest of stakeholders, PMO suggested to DOD that there be no substitutions in metal resource scope materials. Also, “metrics drive behaviors ...provide information needed to improve processes and to detect when it is time to modify or replace existing” (Kendrick, Tom; 2003). Therefore, all substitutions are subject to metrics discovered in building the prototype.
To our stakeholders of resources and procurement in scope, PMO submits no changes in engineered design drawings in order to preserve anticipated performance, reliability, and effective deployment of AMD. PMO restriction on substitutions reduces time needed to check shop drawings. All risk mitigation will have been included in “as-built” documents.
Controllable and Uncontrollable
CommunicationsThis proactive risk discussion is for:
· All stakeholders Note: One special risk generating dynamic affects all stakeholders in Project X Prototype. Because, materials and components of Project X are technologies that were not available just five years ago,
communications plays pivotal role in entire project. The systems used to move project communications as pooled interdependencies between manufacturers’ are also interdependent systems in other branches of the DOD, and designed for optimum security available today.
It may be possible to avoid damage to overall planning and budgeting, “if communication knowledge base is consolidated on collaborative level” (Kendrick, Tom; 2003). PMO has put communications on its list of highest priority. Two categories are at stake:
· Communications used in interdependence of workers and supervisors
o New technology requires unanticipated skills
· Communications being tested and installed in the AMD itself
o Learning curve is too high
To compensate for unfavorable communication situations, such as security leaks, PMO is exploring assigning additional staff to avoid later critical path failure. Fortunately those personnel will come from lower priority tasks and will make little impact on budget and human capital.
Also, vendors are providing services to identify those risk areas that could jeopardize due date, assembly and security of Project X. Additionally, a proactive budget reserve has been requisitioned, in effect to add consulting partners introduced for training on the advanced communications testing and installations for Project X communication systems. Those vendors will be found in the listings of companies suitable for “working on these DOD projects” (US DOD; 2006).
At this stage PMO has not determined the risk trigger event, or when residual risk exposure could cause the use of contingency planning or fallback strategy. Most feel stakeholders throughout the project should first become very comfortable with the pipeline of communications in use, and security avoidance enhancements of the IT.
Qualitative survey will follow employee usage to determine further risk avenues. But note security leaks are out of the hands of PMO. Those uncontrollable risks are part of the stakeholders’ responsibilities to mitigate or resolve; “provide prevention or recovery” (Kendrick, Tom; 2003).
Because the far reaching nature of unlikely-to-happen, worst case risk in communications security, all stakeholders must be on high alert throughout manufacturing and assembly all the way to closure. Stakeholders could introduce effective opportunistic incentives for its workers as each increase skill set to include the communications objective.
Customer Relations Management
The stakeholder addressed in this section is the US citizen. The root basis for customer relations in this project is fourfold:
· Avoidance
· Transfer
· Contingency planning
· Passive acceptance
As any process, “any brainstorming process will be effective so long as it is successful in determining conditions or events that may lead to risk” (Kendrick, Tom; 2003) It became more evident in qualitative study that the US clientele is very interested in a passive defense system, land based or otherwise. Since the Star-Wars initiative in the Reagan presidency, the major cause for this type defense has not been fully understood by the larger external stakeholder, the taxpaying US citizens.
Moreover, in initial brainstorming where the risk steering team applied scope, budget, schedule, resource and other root cause descriptors, the ubiquitous stakeholder US citizenry kept coming up. Then in the recent elections of 2004, the legislature was swept with a majority of chair changes. In use of its opinion to act with balance of power, voting public is watching the scale of measured consequences of war more closely than could be predicted. Also, if public opinion sways future defense developments with budget cuts, interruptions, Key contributors will be unable to complete critical activities. The project could be abandoned because technology supplanted the designed systems.
This risk can be mitigated with stakeholders’ providing public access to limited and less secure aspects of the project. Public Tours or internet news releases could help spread out the risk of uncontrollable risks popping up. When elections are held, contributing parties could add urgent support work in CRM. Tom Kendrick begins discussion of Project risk Management: “Far too many technical projects retrace the shortcomings and errors of earlier work.” Macro-risk management of the US citizenry is effective technique to avoid those errors of the past (Kendrick, Tom; 2003).
Loss of Key Personnel
This section addresses the employees who as stakeholders identify skill sets on the project.
Loss of personnel can affect internal workings dramatically:
- Reciprocal interdependence
- Pooled interdependence
According to PMBOK Guide: Quality risk management also is paramount to end-users’ enduring stability. Cross-functioning influences of multiple categorical stakeholders will play heavily in the “acquisition and final use of the war machine developed” (2004).
PMBOK Guide claims the “key stakeholders on every project include:"
· Project Manager
· Customer/ End-users
· Performing management organization
· Project team members
· Project Management team
· Sponsors
· Influencers
Also, as described in section 2.2 PMBOK Guide, the interdependence of the project management and the stakeholders is prevailing, and immediate (2004, p 25-26).
Kendrick has generalized in his book that “Mitigation strategies that reduce probability and impact of potential problems are best described:”
· Good communication
· Using specialists and generalists
· Strong sponsorship
· Continuing user involvement
· Clear decision priorities (Kendrick, Tom; 2003)
The best of class shown here is obviously a list of the risks that have been fully identified in risk management registers. Qualitative and quantitative analysis proves the mitigation strategy. Why mitigate? Most employee involvement is already well entrenched in the internal aspects of projects. Mitigation is a proactive technique that could delay employee attritions, when used by skilled functional managers.
Stakeholders can release through clear communication “unambiguous project documentation that is easily accessible by the whole team. Communication can significantly reduce risk probabilities,” concludes Kendrick (2003).
References
E-Coach (n/d) Project Stakeholders, their Roles and Contribution (2006) by E-Coach, retrieved from the World Wide Web 11-27-06 from 1000ventures com business guide crosscutting project stakeholders
Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, A 3rd Edition (2004) Project Management Institute, Newtown Square, PA
Kendrick, T; (2003) Identifying and managing project risk New York, NY: American Management Association
US DOD; US Department of Defense (2006) Contracts, Retrieved Dec 15, 2006 from defense link mil Contracts Contract 3386
Transgenerationals Deconstructing America
Department’s top legal pick, there’s a focus on what can only be described as the ideology of “transnationalism.” [HERE]
and what happens is, the international norms take over the U.S. norms...In recent days and weeks, watching broadcasts of our new President speaking, I experienced the first flicker - barely a flicker, even - of my pre-election concerns reviving. I thought, It's just me. But it isnt't just me, I see now, after reading the transcript of Sekulow's interview with Glenn Beck. There is not always a place for a spirit of 'co-operation'. Sometimes open-minded, boundary-blurring initiatives can allow for the swallowing up of that which should not be swallowed up.
