You are on page 1of 10

Risk Analysis Scoresheet

External Value Dependency Factor Multiple vendors / contractors? Y = 2, N = 0

Score Problem

Counter Measure

Coordination.

Ensure adherence to standards, both technical and managerial. Emphasize the importance of regular status reporting. Impose contractual constraints/safeguards. Request documentation in advance. Ensure effective account manager. Identify a user group with other clients. Ensure suppliers are aware of 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. Establish cross-project standards to ensure consistency. Establish change control procedures to manage the different changes proposed by different systems. Recommend a strategic/architectural plan is produced. Ensure Project Board and Strategy Committee are aware of the situation. Investigate training current resources. Plan gradual take on to allow for familiarization and training. Investigate viability of using short term experienced contractors.

Poor vendor support? Y = 1, N = 0

Time wasted waiting for response to queries or due to rework arising from mistaken assumptions made by the project team in the interim. May miss milestones waiting for deliverables.

Critical dependence on external suppliers?

Y = 2, N = 0

Number of interproject dependencies? Overlapping scope with other projects?

< 3 = 0, 3-5 = 3, > 5 =5

Time wasted awaiting completion of other projects not within the stage manager's control. Parallel, or duplicate, development of similar areas with different approaches causing confusion and irritation to the user.

Y = 3, N = 0

Contradicts LRSP direction?

Y = 10, N = 0

Project initiated for no justifiable reason, e.g., political. Time and expense

Plan requires Y = 2, N = 0 extensive recruitment of resources?

External Dependency Total

0 Low Risk

56871689.xls / External

1

04/27/2011

Project Coordinators). Counter Measure Identify key representative. Lack of commitment to assuring quality of technical deliverables and to plan. Lack of understanding of requirements. N = 0 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? High = 3. Schedule briefing and training sessions early in project. 500-2000 = 3. Size of departments < 200 = 0. Obtain top management commitment. Hold briefings throughout project on what the repercussions will be.. to gather information and create models. Lack of communication. use of prototypes and presentations of the new procedures. Include prior walkthrough of the training sessions and materials to gain commitment from user management. both system and manual. Plan implementation as early as possible. 0 Low Risk 56871689. Establish decision making process/responsibilities. Increase user involvement. Unrealistic expectations. 200-500 = impacted? 1. Moderate = 2. Low = 1 Y = 0. > 2000 = 5 Inappropriate level of Y = 10 N = 0 sponsorship? When a problem arises.Risk Analysis Scoresheet Organizational Factor Number of user areas and decision makers? Value Equal to number of user areas / decision makers. Resistance to system by organization. Key users unavailable? Y = 5. (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. the sponsor Extend project board to include a may not have the authority. Use user representative on Project Board to "encourage" user participation. N = 1 Time to distribute deliverables and co-ordinate activities. Multiple geographical Equal to number of locations? geographical areas divided by the number of implementation sites Previous user IS project experience? Y = 0. Determine user roles in the project organization (Project Board. Establish focal point for development activities. N = 3 Users inadequately prepared for a successful implementation and handover. Training requirements and implementation logistics. Consider phased implementation if selfcontained increments can be identified. Increase user participation in the technical activities by use of JAD. Will extensive education be required to facilitate use of the system? Organizational Total Y = 2. e. Lack of knowledge of roles and commitment. Select a pilot implementation site then a phased implementation. Use techniques which are less dependent on user input. and the interactive sessions. or more appropriate sponsor. to support the project adequately. perspective. Increase level of user training. Score Problem Not obtaining consensus.g.xls / Organization 2 04/27/2011 . Increase user involvement/participation. relational data analysis rather than data modeling. Lack of involvement of users in production of deliverables with a consequential lack of commitment to project. N = 0 Inadequate budget and time frame for training. N = 0 Organizational Y = 2. Extend review activities.

xls / Organization 3 04/27/2011 .Risk Analysis Scoresheet 56871689.

Control procedures may not be adequate. >= 3 = 3 The greater this ratio. N = 0 Inaccurate Project Status information. Increased staff associated with development and associated overheads. Y = 2. N = 0 implementation date? Informal control procedures? Y = 5. Moderate manager? = 1. the greater the number of simultaneous tasks. increased chance of slippage. Effort versus elapsed Effort time/Elapsed time? time Number of major subsystems? Subsystem more than 3 elapsed years? Subsystem more than 12 elapsed months? < 3 = 1. May have to cut back on quality and/or functionality.Risk Analysis Scoresheet Planning Factor Value Score Problem Competition for resources or personnel with appropriate skills. N = 0 Critical Y = 5. Managing Interfaces. 0 Low Risk Level of confidence? >85% = 1.xls / Planning 4 04/27/2011 . None allocated = 4 Planned resources available? Planning Factor Total Y = 0. N = 5 56871689. Plans may not exist. Critical dependencies unknown. N = 0 Y=2 N=0 Increased chance of slippage due to possible changes in requirements or scope over longer elapsed time. <85% = 3 Key dates set by Y = 0. New plan will be required to fit with maximum resource constraint or project could be canceled/postponed. No commitment to plan. Level of planning experience of unknowns within the plan may make estimates low. N = 0 resources / skills? Complex task dependencies? Y = 3. unachievable date. Low = 3. Dependent on scarce Y = 5. or project discarded if date missed. N = 3 project team from the plan? Experience of project High = 0.

Consider incremental development. Minimize project interdependencies.Risk Analysis Scoresheet Counter Measure Make resource requirements known as early as possible. Encourage take on of formal controls by training and provision of project management software. Divide into achievable sub-systems. 56871689. Increase control procedures and introduce additional level of management. Have a co-ordination project.xls / Planning 5 04/27/2011 . Produce a plan. Increase involvement by Project Board. Increase the number or control points. Establish overall architectural plan. Provide training and support from experienced project manager. Increase the number or control points. Increase level of planning. Tighten project control. Verify significance of date. Ascertain which portions of system are required for that date. Plan and control at detailed level. Verify significance and justification for dates. Ensure management tolerances and contingencies are identified.

Counter Measure Set appropriate tolerance levels. Low = 3 Mission critical system? Fundamental to IS strategy? Business commitment to development? Business Case Total Business may fail if project fails. department. potential for project being canceled. difficulty in justification. significant rework likely. 0 Low Risk Increase planning and level of control.S. Lead time for return on investment Twice development time = 2. Establish detailed scoping study. Increase user involvement. then likely to miss stage end targets. N = 0 Y = 5. Increase user involvement. Produce detailed Business Case. System perceived as belonging to I. Establish detailed scoping study. Five times or more the development time = 5 Y = 5. Increase planning and level of control. Increase time spent in analysis. N = 0 Do not know where project should be Use iterative development approach. N=0 Difficult to select optional solution. Hold assessments requiring user sign-off. N = 0 of scope / requirements? Ill-defined benefits? Y=2. Reduce scope of system to include most profitable segments. N = 0 Score Problem If greater than +/-5%. heading. Incomplete definition Y = 5.xls / Business Case 6 04/27/2011 . Use CRA to help define tangible benefits. Y = 5. Involve more senior user representatives. Investigate mechanisms for further controlling costs. Foundation system impacting other developments. Cannot estimate effort as a lot of rework is likely. N = 0 High = 1. 56871689. May never achieve pay-back.Risk Analysis Scoresheet Business Case Factor Major increase in costs possible? Evolving business requirements? Value Y = 3. Establish focused sessions with user to evaluate benefits.

Lost information. then there is an increased risk of defects. Increase frequency and formality of reviews. appropriately conducted. Implement a standard approach to development. >= 3 = 3. Increase DBA involvement. 60%+ = 5 discretion of systems architect (no user involvement)? Is a package solution Y = 0. Conduct training.Risk Analysis Scoresheet Technical (Environment) Factor Inappropriate development tools? New / unfamiliar technology? Value Score Problem Counter Measure Y = 2. Difficult to tune successfully in Physical Design. 25-60% decisions at = 3. Increase time in defining interfaces in detail. Increase attendance at reviews to spread knowledge. Increased reliance on users. Moderate = 2. systems may not meet users' needs. Use of development Y = 0. Involve experts from associated systems. N = 3 Rework may be necessary as Increase user involvement. construction Ensure buy/build option is and testing. Moderate = 2. High = 5 Low = 0. Database to be Y = 3. Balanced = 1. Evaluate other productivity areas. Recruit experienced staff. N = 0 Time required for learning curve during development. N = 0 Required tools unavailable. High = 5 Project team does not know what to do. Increase level of reviews. ensure staff familiarity. 56871689. Include experienced staff as specialized technical support. in standard format as Document project progresses. N = 0 of business area? Project team skills? Expert = 0. Increased risk of defects. N = 3 available? Effort required in design. Stable development Y = 0. the frequency of Quality Increase Assurance Reviews and Project Checkpoints. N = 2 method / standards? Technical (Project) Factor Complexity of functions? Complexity of database? Low = 0. Tasks may be duplicated or omitted. Increase risks of systems failure. Ensure thorough Physical Design Tuning. Attempt to establish overall volumes and requirements. may not meet user's needs Number of design 0-25% = 0. N = 5 team? Low team knowledge Y = 1. Obtain vendor support. Use formal techniques. Keep design flexible. Y = 5. Increase data validation steps throughout. If the balance of expertise is low. Time required for handover. Trainee = 5.xls / Technical 7 04/27/2011 . Increased user participation. Y = 0. Performance problems. Increase effort in Logical Design to validate. Account for experience levels when planning. Review tools and associated justification. N = 0 shared by a number of applications? Number of physical system interfaces? Clearly specified requirements? < 3 = 0. Rework may be necessary as system Increase user involvement.

N = 0 requirement? Technical (Operational) Factor Upward compatible hardware? Y = 0. Increased risk of technical problems Add activities to prototype the on-line (incompatibility. data distribution. 0 Low Risk Rapid response time Y = 3. Separate technical feasibility project started early. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. N = 0 Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. N = 0 Mismatch likely. construction. N = 0 (below 2 seconds) ? Small batch window? Y = 3. to obtain. construction. Performance and storage constraints Increase time scheduled for will increase problems in physical designing the database and for design and construction. Tighter recovery constraints will Increase time scheduled for physical increase problems in physical design design and construction stages. Y =0. Increase time scheduled for physical design and construction stages. Evaluate alternative solutions. based upon detailed specifications and requirements? If using a package. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. N = 0 Short recovery cycle? Y = 3. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. or not supported. 0-5% = 0. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Ensure availability of required skills. and construction. Minimize changes to front/back ends. N = 0 Very large database? Y = 3. Tighter performance constraints will Increase time scheduled for physical increase problems in physical design design and construction stages. N = 3 was the package evaluated and selected. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. over 15% = 5 changes required? Complex on-line networks? Y = 2. Interfaces.xls / Technical 8 04/27/2011 . and construction. 5-15% = were package 3. N = 0 High-volume throughput? Y = 3.) architecture. 24 hour availability? Y = 3. Required information may be difficult Contract vendor to do changes. storage and performance predictions. Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. Multi-level hardware Y = 2. Tight timing constraints will increase Increase time scheduled for physical problems in physical design and design and construction stages. etc. N = 0 Technical Total 56871689. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Involve technical experts in physical design stage. Carry out evaluation if cost justified. construction. N = 3 Hardware constraints will increase problems in physical design and implementation. Involve technical experts in physical design stage.Risk Analysis Scoresheet If using a package.

xls / Technical 9 04/27/2011 .Risk Analysis Scoresheet 56871689.

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 56871689.xls / Total Risk 10 04/27/2011 .