Project and Program

UNIVERSIDAD DE BELGRANO
Depto de Estudios de Posgrado y Educaci6n Continua RISK MANAGEMENT
A Guide to Managing Project
LIBRO: ~\SK VI ,4NA- G~Y\EN I
AUTOR: IN \ de MO{'\ fY)~X Risks and Opportunities
DEVOLUCION I

Edited By:
R. Max Wideman
Fellow, PMI

A Publication of the Project Management Institute

Four Campus Boulevard
Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 USA
610/356-4600 Fax: 610/356-4647
E-mail: pmihq@pmi.org
Web: http://www.pmi.org
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Foreword
Edited by: Wideman, R. Max.
Project and program risk management: a guide to managing project risks This publication is the second in a series of nine handbooks devel-
and opportunities/R. Max Wideman oped by the Project Management Institute (PM!). The series is designed
p. cm .-(The PMBOK handbook series: v.no.6) to complement the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK)
Includes bibliographical references. as codified by PMI.
ISBN 1-880410-00-1 (10 vol. set).-ISBN 1-880410-06-0 (vol.6) This handbook deals with the function of Risk Management in the
1. Industrial project management. 2. Risk management. I. Title. II. Series. context of project or program management. It establishes the need for
HD69.P76W54 1992 examining risks and opportunities in project work and describes ap-
658.4'04-cic20 92-3336 proaches which can lead to significant reduction of the risks as well as to
CIP bett.er project performance. This is a sometimes overlooked aspect of
project management which can often result in significant improvements
ISBN 1-880410-06-0 (Volume 6) in the ultimate success of the project.
1-880410-00-1 (10 Volume Set) This handbook should appeal equally to those who are looking for a
summary of the basics of project and program risk management, as well
as to those who are studying for PMI's certification program. In addition,
the material in the handbook will benefit course developers, trainers and
acaden:ucs who are seeking guidance as to appropriate project and pro-
gram nsk management educational content.
In keeping with previous practice, this first printing of the handbook
is being made available as a "Preliminary Issue for Trial Use and Com-
ment." Since the content is tied specifically to the PMBOK, it is important
to ensure that PMI members support the material and its manner of
presentation. I hope, therefore, that readers will take a moment to contrib-
ute constructive suggestions for improving and upgrading the next issue
Copyright ©1992 by the Project Management Institute. All rights reserved.
by completing and returning the Comments page at the end of this book.
Printed in the United States of America. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic, manual, photocopying, recording, or by any information storage
The material in this handbook has been assembled entirely by volun-
tary PMI member effort and, as anyone knows who has been involved in
and retrieval system, without prior written permission of the publisher.
similar undeIi?kings, requires many hours of dedicated effort. In partic-
"PMI" is a federally registered trade and service mark; "PMP" and the PMP logo are federally
ular I would like to acknowledge the efforts of Max Wideman and the
registered certification marks; and the PMI logo, "PMBOK" and "Building professionalism in project
many people who provided comments and suggestions on the various
~raft.s. To all those who contributed their thoughts and writings to this
management." are trademarks of Project Management Institute.
first ISsue, I express our appreciation for a job well done!
PMI books are available at quantity discounts. For more information, please write to the Business
Manager, PMI Publishing Division, Forty Colonial Square, Sylva, North Carolina, 28779 USA. Or
Rodney J. Dawson
contact your local bookstore.
President, Project Management Institute

The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National
Information Standards Organization (Z39.48-1984).

10 9 8 7 6 5
 Preface Acknowledgments
Welcome to project and program risk management! Understandably, the risks associated with large and very large pro-
In a very real sense, progress is made by spotting opportunities and jects have received noteworthy attention in the literature, because of the
taking advantage of them. Once identified, the most aggressive way of taking substantial sums of money involved on the one hand, and the political
advantage of such opportunities is by establishing a project. Thus, the whole and professional reputations of the sponsors on the other. On lesser
point of a project is to introduce some change which will be beneficial in projects, however, aspects of the project which may be at risk are' fre-
financial or other ways to the sponsors and users of the project. quently submerged in an all-encompassing "contingency allowance" de-
However, introducing change means introducing something new, to termined as a result of some previous experience. For many, this approach
venture forth, to take some risks. So risks are the corollary of opportunity. They may be quite satisfactory, yet closer examination of the subject indicates
represent exposure to mischance, hazards, and the possibility of adverse that including risk as a pro-active management function provides project
consequences. They are the down-side of a project undertaking. While project management with an added management opportunity.
management is the best way of managing opportunity, taking risks has always Project and Program Risk Management furnishes the chance to better
been a fundamental part of the process, and this needs to be pro-activ~y' understand the nature of the project at hand, to involve team members in
managed through the function of Project and Program Risk Management. its strengths and weaknesses, and generally to integrate the core functions
Generally, when we speak of taking a risk we tend to think of those of Scope, Quality, Time and Cost with the interactive functions of Human
things which are at long odds, are highly chancy and poSSibly hazardous. Resources, Contract/Procurement, and Information/Communications
Yet many risks we take in everyday life are so commonplace that we scarcely management. For these reasons, PMI early recognized the importance of
give them a thought. Instead, we treat them as mere uncertainties and react this subject to the overall success of a project, no matter what its size or
to them subconsciously, taking precautions that experience has taught us are area of application, and so identified Project and Program Risk Manage-
only prudent. ment as a separate PMBOK topic.
However, in today's markets with more difficult economic conditions, Once again many PMI members, too numerous to cite all by name,
tougher competition, and ever advancing technology, project uncertainty have enthusiastically volunteered material, suggestions and encourage-
and risk have assumed significantly greater proportions. Indeed, in most ment for the development of this handbook. I would, however, like to
projects, not only are the uncertainties and risks numerous, but they are also mention a few who have been particular contributors or my mentors in
interrelated. This affects project results in complex ways, making it difficult this effort: Mike Curran, David Hamburger, and Bill Hosley for most
for management to be confident in forecasting the final results. helpful explanations, conversations and text; David Hulett for a copy of
Therefore, Project and Program Risk Management is seen as the formal an excellent Orange County Chapter workshop handout on Risk Manage-
process whereby the risks and opportunities are systematically identified, ment; Pat Buckley and Bill Duncan for a change in emphasis; Chris Quaife
assessed and appropriately provided for in the course of project planning for both written contributions and thorough and perceptive comments on
and implementation. It means taking a pro-active stance to cultivate an my original texts; and Davidson Frame for encouragement and testing the
environment in which project and program risks are significantly reduced, handbook in one of his classes. I am sure that readers will benefit greatly
if not eliminated entirely, and opportunities are cultivated. Project and from their work. Any errors of interpretation or omissions are, of course,
Program Risk Management should encompass the full spectrum of activities my own responsibility.
associated with the handling of project uncertainties. As always, my wife Audrey has been most supportive of this work
As one of project management's integrative functions (see PMBOK and patiently endured through many hours of moans and groans arising
Handbook Volume I, A Framework for Project and Program Management from the effort of putting pen to paper (or more contemporarily, fingers
Integration) Project and Program Risk Management is inextricably tied into to keyboard).
each of the other project management functions, especially the four basic
pro~t constraints .of Scope, Quality, TIme and Cost. It is, therefore, a key
R. Max Wideman, Fellow, PMI
function of the project management process. However, management's atti-
Editor
tude towards risk, in many cases, is governed by the extent of their under-
standing of the risk management process, their confidence in the associated
techniques and in the analytical results obtained. Others consider the subject
too mathematical, yet many risks relate to people and their attitudes. Hence
the need for this handbook.

ii iii
 r

Contents Chapter VI Risk Response and Documentation

A. Response Options VI- 1
Foreword i VI-1
ii
B. System Standards
Preface VI- 2
iii
C. Insurance
Acknowledgments VI-3
D. Response Planning
E. Data Collection, Application and Documentation VI-3
Chapter I Introduction
A. Handbook Purpose and Content I-1 Chapter VII Management of Contingency Allowances
B. Why Project Risk Management? I-1 A. After the Known Risks, What Then? VII-1
C. Uncertainty, Opportunity and Risk 1- 3 B. Contingency Reserves? VII-2
D The Nature of Risk Management 1- 4 C. Application of Project Contingency Allowances VII-3
E. Project Risk Management is Pro-active 1- 4 D. Contingency Allowances for Project Implementation VII-3
F. Risk and Decision Makers 1- 5 E. Implementation Contingency Strategie VII-4
F. A Simple Tabular Calculatio VII-6
Chapter II Integration, General Approach and Definitions
A. Integrating Risk into Project Management -1 Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's Environment
B. The Natural Risk Management Sequence -1 A. What is the Project Environment? VIII-1
C. Risk Management - An Integrative Function -3 B. Problems are Caused by People VIII-2
D. Project Risk Management Definition -3 C. Risk and Safety VIII-3
E. Variation of Risk Factors Through the Project Ute Cycle -3 D. Principal Determinants VIII-5
F. Four-Phase Approach -6 E. Managing by Stakeholder Groupings and categories VIII-5
F. The Means and Value of Exercising Positive Influence VIII- 6
Chapter III Risk Identification
A. Risk in Corporate Business Management 111- 1 Chapter IX Dealing with Risks In Contracts
B. Risk in Project Management III - 1 A. Contract Strategy Considerations IX -1
C. Types of Risk III - 2 B. Suggested Risk Sharing Principles IX - 2
D. Project Risk Identification III - 3 C. Types of Contract IX-3
E. Project Risk Configuration 111-4 D. Different Contract Risk Implications IX-4
F. Risk Factors 111-6 E. More than One Contract IX-4
F. A Question of Attitudes IX-6
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Methodology
A. Risk Assessment Goals IV -1 Chapter X Summary/Conclusions
B. Assessment Methodology IV -2 A. Risk Management - The Present X -1
C. Advantages of Assessment Methodology IV -6 B. It's the Att~ude That Counts X-2
D. The Basics of Probability IV -6 C. Risk Management - The Future X-2
E. The Quality Risk IV -9
F. The Schedule Risk IV -9

Chapter V Computer Applications

A. Data Storage, Retrieval and Computation V -1
B. PERT and the Probabilistic Model V -1
C. Range Estimating V-2
D Risk Analysis. V-4
E. Knowledge-Based Risk Management V-5

iv v
 r

Appendices Illustrations
FIGURE Page
A. Typical Project Risks
1. How Does the Project Manager Know When There is a Project Risk? A- 1 1.1. The Uncertainty Spectrum I- 2
2. Specific Project Risks . A- 1 1.2. The Uncertainty/Opportunity/Risk Relationship I- 3
11.1. Integrating Risk With Other Project Management Functions 11-2
11.2. Typical Life Cycle Profiles - Risk vs. Amount at Stake 11-5
B. Impact Analysis Methodology 11.3. Risk Function Breakdown: Four Processes 11-6
1. Problem Structuring B-2 111.1. Risk Management: Identification III- 4
2. Risk Identification and Screening B-3 111.2. Risk Management: Mitigation III- 5
3. Risk Quantification B-4 IV.1. Comparing Severity of Project Risks IV - 3
4. Risk Combination and Modeling IV.2. Impact Analysis Matrix Sequence IV -4
B-4
5. Overall Evaluation IV.3. The Quality Risk: Difference Between Success and Failure IV -10
B-6
6. Project Risk Report IV.4. Simple Example of Network Completion Risk IV - 11
B-6
V.1. Probability Distributions: Two Projects With the Same Expected Values of Total Costs V- 3
V.2. Graphical Presentation of Analysis Results V-4
C. Other Risk Analysis Techniques V.3. Presenting Results of Anlaysis: Cumulative Risks vs. Criterion Value - Construction Project V -5
1. Brainstorming V.4. Breakdown Structure of Identified Risks V-6
C- 1
2. Sensitivity Analysis V1I1.1. Project Environment Process VIII-1
C- 1
3. Probability Analysis VII 1.2 Project Environment: Extemal Influences and Interfaces VIII- 2
C-2
4. Delphi Method VII 1.3. Managing the Environment: Public Relations Concept VIII-7
C- 2
5. Monte Carlo IX. 1. Contract Type vs. Risk Allocation IX - 2
C- 3
6. Decision Tree Analysis IX.2. Scope Definition - Risk - Contract Selection IX - 4
C- 3
7. Utility Theory C-4
B.1. Conceptual Relationship Between Risks, Damage Scenarios and Consequences B-5
8. Decision Theory B.2. Simplified Risk Analysis Program Structure B-7
C- 4
C.1. Decision Tree for Two Projects Showing Probabilities Assigned C- 4
0.1. Comparing Severety of Project Risks 0-4
D. Risk Applied to Schedule and Cost
TABLE Page

E. AGlossary of Project and Program Risk Management Terminology 11.1 Typical Functional Distribution of Controllable Risk Items 11-4
IV.1. Network Activity Summary IV -11
IV.2. Network Path Evaluation IV -11
VI1.1 Contingency Allocation: Construction Project VII-5
VI1.2 Simple Tabular Calculation of Estimating Contingency VII-6
IX.1 Risk Implications of Different Types of Contract (from Clienfs perspective) IX -5

vi
vii
 Risk Management

Chapter Introduction

A. Handbook Purpose and Content

The purpose of this handbook is to provide a simplified under-
standing of the nature of project risk and opportunity, and a system-
atic approach to risk reduction. For brevity and ease of reference, it
is deliberately structured in simple and concise terms, often in bullet
format, or by graphic illustrations.
This handbook is one of a family of nine, designed to
provide a summary level review of each of the major functional
areas of project management. These functional areas are those
codified in the Project Management Institute's Project Manage-
ment Body of Knowledge (PMBOK). This handbook provides a
useful insight into the process of project risk management for
anyone contemplating a project, whether it is a small adminis-
trative project, a large capital works project, or anything in
between. It also provides an introduction for those intending
to study for PMI's Project Management Professional (PMP)
certification exam.
B. Why Project Risk Management?
Corporate management has the responsibility to make for-
mal judgments and appropriate decisions that will lead the
organization to a successful destiny. Ideally, such decisions
should be taken in an environment of total certainty, wherein all
the necessary information is available for making the right
decision, and the outcome can be predicted with a high degree
of confidence. In reality, most decisions are taken without com-
plete information, and therefore give rise to some degree of
uncertainty in the outcome. In the extreme case of complete
absence of information, nothing is known about the outcome
and total uncertainty prevails.
Organizational survival in today's world is achieved by pur-
suing opportunity within this spectrum of uncertainty and projects
are typically launched to take advantage of these opportunities.
Thus, the whole point of undertaking a project is to achieve or
establish something new, to venture, to take chances, so risk has
always been an intrinsic part of project work. However, in today's
markets, with heavy competition, advanced technology and
tough economic conditions, risk taking has assumed significantly
greater proportions.

1-1
Chapter I Introduction Risk Management

!he goals of risk management, therefore, are to identify proj- C. Uncertainty, Opportunity and Risk
ect nsks and develop strategies which either significantly reduce From the foregOing it will be seen that uncertainty, opportu-
them or take steps to avoid them altogether. At the same time, nity and risk are closely allied. It can be visualized that unknowns
steps should be taken to maximize associated opportunities. In about the future may tum out to be either favorable or unfavor-
essence, it involves planning which minimizes the probability and able, but lack of knowledge of future events constitutes uncertainty so
net effects of things going wrong, and carefully matches respon- that uncertainty is simply the set of all possible outcomes, both
sibility to residual risks which are unavoidably retained. It is a favorable and unfavorable. In this relationship, the probability of
very constructive and creative process. those outcomes which are favorable may be viewed as opportunity,
As a simple example, one way of avoiding a possible traffic while the probability of those outcomes which are unfavorable
jam while driving on the highway to a particular destination is to
represent rzs'k!
.
consider alternative forms of transportation. Granted that each Similarly, most opportunities when pursued carry with them
may have its own particular set of risks, but careful comparison associated risks and, generally speaking, the greater the opportu-
should identify the best set of alternatives with the lowest overall nity, the greater is the degree of uncertainty and the consequent
degree of uncertainty or risk of arriving late. However, the impact associated risk. Thus, opportunity and risk are also tied together
of each on the time and cost of the journey must also be taken into and, indeed, one may be seen as the corollary of the other. This
account if the best overall arrangement for a successful arrival is relationship is shown diagrammatically in Figure 1.2.
to be achieved. The selection may well depend on the relative
priorities given to the cost, schedule, and quality of the journey!
If the real objective of the exercise is to hold a meeting, then
perhaps the opportunity could be taken to hold the meeting at a
more favorable intermediate location? VENTURE OUTCOME
In short, the purpose of project risk management is to: (Project) (Products)

• Specifically identify factors that are likely to impact the project

objectives of Scope, Quality, Time and Cost
FAVORABLE

~----------------~~~
• Quantify the likely impact of each factor
(Opportunity)
• Give a baseline for Project Noncontrollables
• Mitigate impacts by exercising influence over Project Control- UNKNOWNS ..0lIl(
___________
lables
The scope for project risk management lies somewhere be-
tween the two extremes of total certainty and total uncertainty, as
shown in Figure 1.1.
(Uncertainty) ""IIIf~----------
..
..lIo...
UNFAVORABLE
(Risks)

THE GOAL: Proje?t Risk Management's function is to move uncertainty away

NO PARTIAL COMPLETE
from risk and towards opportunity
INFORMATION INFORMATION INFORMATION

(UNKNOWN (KNOWN Figure 1.2. The Uncertainty/OpportunitylRisk Relationship

UNKNOWNS) UNKNOWNS) (KNOWNS)
In the context of project management Project Risk is defined
• as follows:
TOTAL GENERAL SPECIFIC TOTAL
UNCERTAINTY UNCERTAINTY UNCERTAINTY CERTAINTY Project Risk is the cumulative effect of the chances of uncertain occur-

'
...-.--------+.,
SCOPE OF PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT*

·Note: In this range the information to be sought is known

rences adversely affecting project objectives.

In other words, it is the degree of exposure to negative events,

and their probable consequences impacting on project objectives,
as expressed in terms of scope, quality, time and cost. 2
However, just as risks are associated with pursuing opportu-
nities, so opportunities also flow from encountering risks. Indeed,
Figure 1.1 The Uncertainty Spectrum
many a risk which occurs in the event can, with a little foresight

1- 2 1-3
 Risk Management
Chapter I Introduction

and ingenuity, be turned into an 0pPQrtunity! Unfortunately, all Indeed, the term Project Risk Management itself tends to be
too often risks are either ignored or dealt with in a very arbitrary misleading because management implies complete control of
way so that such opportunities are overlooked. events. On the contrary, project risk management should be seen
The constant goal of project risk management should be to as advanced preparation for possible adverse future events, rather
move uncertainty away from risk and towards opportunity. than responding as they happen. With such advanced planning it
Consequently, when assessing overall impacts of uncertainty on should be possible to select an alternative action plan which will
a project, it is the net project risk which should be determined, i.e., still enable project objectives to be achieved successfully.
the cumulative net effect of the chances of both adverse and Consider this improbable, but quite possible, situation. You
favorable consequences affecting project objectives. are at risk of being shot at. You have four options.

D. The Nature of Risk Management Reactive:

Generally, when we speak of taking a risk we tend to think only 1. You can move to avoid the bullet;
of those things which are highly chancy or hazardous. Yet many risks 2. You can deflect the bullet; or
are so commonplace in everyday life that we scarcely give them a 3. You can repair the damage done by the bullet.
thought. Instead, we react to them subconsciously, and take precau-
tions that experience has taught us are only prudent. Pro-active:
In crossing the road, we take the precaution of looking both 4. You can take steps to avoid being confronted by the person with
ways and only cross when the road is clear. If we are in a hurry, the gun.
we might "take a chance" (increase the risk) by crossing when we
see a sufficient gap in the traffic. If the traffic is heavy, and the risk Crisis management (reactive mode) consists of selecting the
appears to be extreme, then we might walk further to a designated appropriate response. However, if anticipation and planning
crossing area at an intersection with traffic lights, or even to a safer make it possible to avoid the situation in the first place (pro-active
overpass, if there is one (risk reduced by trading off time and mode) then this approach would obviously be better. Unless, of
energy). course, there are compelling reasons to the contrary such as con-
Rarely do we systematically identify all the risks involved in ducting a controversial political campaign! The point is: at no time
reaching our destination. Even less do we consider the conse- are you in control of the bullet (the risk event).3
quences should our chances fail to come off except, perhaps, once
a serious accident has actually occurred. Otherwise, we might F. Risk and Decision Makers
decide never to go anywhere at all! A risk should only be taken when the potential benefit and
When it comes to our own family, however, we are inclined chances of winning exceed the remedial cost of an unsuccessful
to take an entirely different approach. After all, we are now decision and chances of losing by a satisfactory margin. Therefore4
dealing with something very precious and with a lot of potential. the risk taker should obtain realistic answers to questions such as:
When our children are small, we admonish them not to go
near the road (risk identification and avoidance). When they must • Why should the risk be taken?
cross the road, say, to get to school, we examine the dangers and • What will be gained?
either teach them how to cross safely or direct them to the school • What could be lost?
crossing guard (risk assessment and planning or shift of respon- • What are the chances of success (and failure)?
sibility). When they get home at the end of the day, we ask them • What can be done if the desired result is not achieved?
"how they got on"?-perhaps we can do something more to help • Is the potential reward worth the risk?
them for tomorrow (information feedback and corrective action).
We also make a mental note for when our youngest reaches the Risk elements that tend to attract and/ or determine the re-
same age (building the data base). Thus, we have established the sponse attitudes of decision makers include: s
basic elements of managing project risk.
• Potential frequency of loss
E. Project Risk Management is Pro-active • Amount and reliability of information available
Project managers will recognize the classic systems method- • Potential severity of loss
ology outlined in the previOUS section. This consists of input, • Manageability of the risk
process, output and feedback loop, a basic model which is so vital to • Vividness of the consequences
the effective control of any project. Yet risk is somehow different. • Potential for (adverse) publicity
It has to do with uncertainty, probability or unpredictability, and • Ability to measure the consequences
contingent planning. • Whose money is it

1-4 1-5
Chapter I Introduction Risk Management

Severity of the potential loss appears to attract the most Here are some helpful rules-of-thumb for the project
attention because individuals appear to be willing to accept small manager.9 Don't take the risk if:
(even frequent) losses, but are averse to a risk which has high
stakes. Even so, a major thrust must be to minimize unwarranted • The organization cannot afford to lose;
optimism, prejudice, ignorance or self-interest. Good ways to do • The exposure to the outcome is too great; .
this include responding to the following issues: 6 The situation (or the project) is just not worth It;
• The odds are not in the project's favor;
• Has it been done before? • It is no more than a "fair bet";
• How close is the analogy? • The benefits are not identified;
and • There appear to be a large number of acceptable ~lternatives
(The greater th,e number, the more the uncertamty.);
• Seek out corroborative evidence. • The risk does not ~chieve a project objective;
• Get personal interviews with those with the experience. • The expected value from the baseline assumptions is negative
• Obtain alternative opinions. or is negative with small changes in assumptions;
• Insist on written assessments, quantitative if possible. • The data is unorganized, without structure or pattern;
There is not enough data to compute the results
Avoid creating additional risk by rushing, understaffing, un- (Get more data or do research.);
derfunding, or ignoring the obvious. Simply try to adopt well-es- A contingency plan for recovery is not in place should the
tablished good project management practices, and so escape the results prove to be less than satisfactory.
well-known adage: ''There's never enough time to do it right the
first time, but time enough to do it over if its wrong!"
But sooner or later a decision has to be made. Never lose sight
of the basic reason for taking a risk-to gain a specific reward.
Some typical project rewards (or benefits) include:

• Achieving a desired result using limited resources,

• Advancing the state-of-the-art,
• Meeting a required end date or improving a schedule,
• Enhancing profitability,
• Increasing a budget or schedule contingency,
• Saving money or offsetting a fiscal variance,
• Improving the firm's market position, or
• Ensuring customer satisfaction.

In each case, the potential reward must be accurately defined

and, if at all possible, measured in common terms such as cost. If a 1. Construction Industry Institute, Management of Project Risks and Uncertainties, The
finite dollar value cannot be assigned to a particular outcome (e.g.,
University of Texas at Austin, October 1989.
customer satisfaction), it may be necessary to assign an arbitrary
2. PMBOK, 3/28/87, P E-2.
value to the intangible benefit for purposes of risk/ reward evalua- 3. D.C. Fraser, Risk Minimisation in Giant Projects, International Conference on the
tion. This may be far more difficult than it seems as marketing's 978
Successful Accomplishment of Giant Projects, London, England, May 1 .
valuation of customer satisfaction, for example, will generally ex- 4. D. Hamburger, The Project Manager: Risk Taker and Contingency Planner, PM], June
ceed a judgment made by manufacturing or engineering. Decision
makers who use information from various sources in evaluating the 1990, p44. . . ' .
5. Construction Industry Institute, Management of Project Risks and UncertamtIes, The
risk must temper their biasedjudgments to ensure objectivity in the University of Texas at Austin, October 1989, p3-4. . .
risk assessment process. 7 So: 6. J.N. Brooke, Leveraged Risk Reduction, Proceedings PM] Semznar/Symposzum, Atlanta,
Georgia 1989, p302. .
• Make the best decision given the state of knowledge-even so, 7. D. Hamburger, The Project Manager: Risk Taker and Contingency Planner, PM], June
it may not work out.
1990, p45.
• Distinguish between a good decision and a good outcome. 8. D.T. Hulett, PMP Certification Workshop - Risk Management, PMI Orange County
• Since it is not possible to be certain of a good outcome, increase Chapter, 1991, p12
the probability of good outcomes by making good deciSions! 9. Ibid., pI and p58.

I· 6 1-7
 Risk Management

Chapter II Integration, General Approach and

Definition
A. Integrating Risk into Project Management
Experience on many projects reveals poor performance in
terms of reaching scope, quality, time and cost objectives. Many
of these shortcomings are attributed either to unforeseen events,
which might or might not have been anticipated by more experi-
enced project management, or to foreseen events for which the
risks were not fully accommodated.
Perhaps one of the biggest hurdles is that of management's
attitude to risk itself. Some have little understanding of the con-
cepts, while others lack confidence in the mathematical techniques
and results obtained, preferring to rely alternatively on aggressive
risk taking or undue caution. Or again, inherent risks may simply
be optimistically ignored. In reality, far better decisions with
higher chances of project success are reached by facing these
issues. For some project managers this may represent a new
working environment.
Figure 11.1 shows schematically how the function of project
risk management is inextricably tied into the remaining seven
PMBOK management functions. Note how specific areas of risk
are associated with each of the individual functions as shown on
the diagram. Each should be carefully evaluated as part of the risk
management responsibility.
A long list of potential project risks is provided in Appendix
A. Not all of these risks apply to all projects, of course, but many
do, and failure to manage risk in the manner described in the
following chapters can lead to significant and unnecessary losses.
Poor past track records should be significantly improved by a
generally better understanding and application of the project risk
management function.
B. The Natural Project Risk Management Sequence
The greatest degree of uncertainty about the future is encoun-
tered in the concept phase of a project. Directions taken by the
project sponsors in this phase have the greatest influence on the
ultimate scope, quality, time and cost of the project. Also, change
is an inevitable part of the iterative nature of managing projects,
yet its extent and effects are often under-estimated at this time.
Therefore, the need for a process for the realistic appraisal of factors
affecting the accomplishment phases of the project is essential.

11-1
 r
Chapter II Integration, General Approach and Risk Management
Definition
and prioritizing the areas on which risk management should be
focused. A systematic approach is required to sort through the
PROJECT myriad of uncertainties, to pinpoint the truly critical ones, and to
MANAGEMENT identify effective ways of reducing those uncertainties, consistent
INTEGRATION with overall project objectives.
In practice, depending on the size and nature of the project,
)~ effective risk management may require some quite detailed quan-
titative assessment of the impacts of the various uncertainties.
INFORMATION! This data provides a basis for judging the reliability of the
SCOPE Life Cycle and COMMUNICATIONS original estimates, the effectiveness of possible alternative strat-
egies, and for planning the best overall responses.

t
ExpectatiO:nvironmT Variables Ideas, Directives,
C. Risk Management - An Integrative Function
Feasibility Data Exchange Accuracy
As noted in Section A, failure to give proper recognition to
risk management on a project can lead to unnecessary and often
substantial losses, or even complete project failure. The status of
QUALITY PROJECT ~~~. HUMAN risk on a project varies significantly during the course of its life
RISK RESOURCE cycle, and, as with most of the other project functions, the most
effective time for achieving the greatest impact on project results
is early on in the project development phase. Consequently, risk

i
Time Objectives,
management should be established as a continuing integrative
Services, Plant, Materials:
Restraints Performance
function throughout the project's life cycle.
Figure 11.1 illustrated schematically how risk management
Cost Objectives, integrates with each of the other project management functions,
Restraints CONTRACT! and Table 11.1 provides further examples of how some typical risk
TIME events (defined in Chapter III.F) can surface in anyone of these
PROCUREMENT
functional areas. 1 In the groupings tabulated, risk items are
associated with the headings in which the impact is most direct.
For example, poor organization is an indirect risk (threat) to
Quality, but is shown under Human Resources, which it affects
COST directly. Note that "contractor" is used in the broadest sense of
anyone, including an employee, who undertakes to perform
any work or service at a price, salary or wage.
Figure IT.l. Integrating Risk With Other Project Management Functions D. Project Risk Management Definition
After C. Cuaife, 1/11/90
This leads to the definition of Project Risk Management as
Project Risk Management is seen as a formal process whereby follows: 2
risks are systematically identified, assessed and provided for.
In other words, this function involves a deliberate sequence of Project Risk Management is the art and science of identifying, assess-
identification followed by mitigation. The latter calls for both as- ing and responding to project risk throughout the life of a project and
sessment and response, which may include such defensive ac- in the best interests of its objectives.
tions as risk avoidance or deflection by allocating appropriate risks
to insurers or by other contractual arrangements; a careful risk Figures 111.1 and 111.2 in Chapter III show a Risk Management
assessment or detailed impact analysis; response planning and con- breakdown structure follOwing the typical hierarchy of PMI's
tingency planning, such as the development of alternative work- Body of Knowledge Management Functions. That is to say the
arounds (discussed in Chapter VI.B); and the provision and function itself is levell, followed successively by processes, activ-
prudent management of a budgeted contingency allowance. ities, and finally techniques at level 4. As illustrated earlier, and as
Not only are the uncertainties in most projects numerous, but shown in the figures, the Risk Management processes are Risk
they may also be interrelated. This affects project results in Identification; Risk Deflection (Insurable), Impact Risk Assess-
complex ways. It tends to lead to under-estimation of risk which ment; Response Planning; the Response System; and the Applica-
makes it difficult for management to be confident in identifying tion of the resulting Data.

11-2 11-3
Chapter II Integration, General Approach and Risk Management
Definition
Table 11.1. Typical Functional Distribution of Controllable Risk Items E. Variation of Risk Factors Through the Project Life Cycle
As anyone who has been associated with any sizeable project
PM Integration Scope Quality well knows, the life cycle of a project is very dynamic, i.e., charac-
Risk Events Risk Events Risk Events terized by rapid change. It should not corne as a surprise to learn that
• Incorrect start of integrated • Changes in scope to meet • Performance failure, or the project risk factors are also subject to considerable change during
PM relative to project life cycle project objectives, e.g., regula- environmental impact
tory changes
the project life cycle. The nature of this project life cycle and some of
its special characteristics are discussed in detail in PMBOK Hand-
Risk Conditions Risk Conditions Risk Conditions book Volume 1, A Framework for Project and Program Management
• Inadequate planning, integra- • Inadequacy of planning, or • Poor attitude to quality Integration.
tion or resource allocation planning lead time • Substandard design/materials/ For purposes of this handbook, it is worth noting that a typical
(Anything which reduces the • Poor definition of scope workmanship
probability of properly deter- breakdown, or work packages project is made up of four generic phases, consisting of concept,
• Inadequate quality assurance
mining project objectives, i.e., • Inconsistent, incomplete or program development, implementation, and termination and that these in turn are
anything which directly or unclear definition of quality broken down into stages specific to the industry or area of project
indirectly reduces the requirements
probability of project success.)
application. In addition, the first two generic phases constitute proj-
• Inadequate scope control
• Inadequate, or lack of during implementation ect planning, while the last two constitute project realization or
post-project review accomplishment. The nature of this project time frame and some of its
special characteristics are discussed at greater length in PMBOK
Handbook Volume 1, A Framework for Project and Program Manage-
ment Integration, Chapters II and III.
Risk
The significance is that opportunity and risk generally remain
Time Cost
relatively high during project planning but, because of the relatively
Risk Events Risk Events Risk Events low level of investment to this point, the amount at stake remains
• Specific delays, e.g., strikes, • Impacts of accidents, fire, theft • The risk of overlooking a risk
labor or material availability,
low. In contrast, during project accomplishment opportunity and
• Unpredictable price changes, • Changes in the work
extreme weather, rejection of e.g., due to supply shortages necessary to achieve the risk progressively fall to lower levels as remaining unknowns are
work scope translated into knowns. At the same time, the amount at stake
Risk Conditions Risk Conditions Risk Conditions
• Errors in estimating time or • Estimating errors, including • Ignoring risk or "assuming it
resource availability estimating uncertainty away" I"-<~----- Total Project Life Cycle --------»~I
• Poor allocation and • Lack of investigation of predict- • Inappropriate or unclear
management of float able problems assignment of responsibility/ Plan Accomplish
• Scope of work changes • Inadequate productivity, cost, risk to employees/contractors ~-<r-----------------~~~ ~~~-------~------~>
without due allowance for time change or contingency control • Poor insurance management Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Phase 4
extensions/acceleration • Poor maintenance, security, • Inappropriate or unclear CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT IMPLEMENTATION TERMINATION
• Early release of competitive purchasing, etc. contractual assignment of risk Conceive Develop Execute Finish
product
(C) (D) (E) (F)
I
N Opportunity and Risk
C
R
Contract/Procurement Human Resources Communications E
$
A Period when
Risk Events Risk Events Risk Events S Highest Risks V
• Contractor insolvency • Strikes, terminations, • Inaction or wrong action due I
organizational breakdown are Incurred A
• Claims settlement or litigation to incorrect information or N
communication failure L
G
Risk Conditions Risk Conditions
• Conflict not managed
Risk Conditions R
~
Period of
Highest
I~ Risk Impact ~
I U
E
• Unenforceable • Carelessness in planning or in I
conditions/clauses • Poor organization, definition communicating Amount at StaKe
S
• Incompetent or financially or allocation of responsibility, • Improper handling of K L...-_ _ _ _ TIM E
unsound workers/contractors or otherwise absence complexity
• Adversarial relations of motivation • Lack of adequate consultation
• Inappropriate or unclear • Poor use of accountability with project's "publics"
contractual assignment of risk • Absence of leadership, or (internal/external)
vacillating management style
• Consequences of ignoring or Figure 11.2. Typical Life Cycle Profiles - Risk vs. Amount at Stake
avoiding risk A.M. Wideman. Project Management Course, 1990

11-4 11-5
Chapter II Integration, General Approach and Risk Management
Definition
steadily rises as the necessary resources are progressively invested Phase Two· Assessment
to complete the project. Having identified the range of possible risks, the next step is
These trends are shown graphically in Figure 11.2. The figure to assess them. The purpose is to determine their ranking or status
also shows that the period of highest vulnerability to risk occurs in terms of type, impact and probability. This may range from a
during the last two phases. At this time, adverse conditions may simple attempt at subjective evaluation to a more serious attempt
also be discovered as a result of acceptance testing and start-up of at measurement. Due to their nature, or simply through lack of
the project. The purpose of risk management must be to influence relevant data, however, it may be found that many of the risks defy
the project planning such that both uncertainty-risk and amount- direct measurement and a more in-depth impact analysis becomes
at-stake are reduced to acceptable levels throughout the project necessary.
life cycle. Risk assessment typically involves input from all of project
management functions, as shown in Figure 11.1. Consequently, a
F. Four-Phase Approach
major benefit of risk management, particularly early on in the
In its most simplistic form, project risk management consists project, is the integrating and team-building effect experienced by
essentially of four process phases as shown in Figure II.3, namely: members of the project team.
Risk assessment methodology is discussed in Chapter Nand
• Identification impact analysis is described in some detail in Appendix B. In
• Assessment addition, many sophisticated techniques have been developed in
• Response, and support of these processes, a number of which are briefly de-
• Documentation scribed in Appendix C.

Phase Three· Response

Mitigating project risk requires, first, establishing an appro-
RISK priate system strategy, then taking out insurance as appropriate
MANAGEMENT
against those risks that are insurable, and finally, planning specific
1 actions to deal with the remainder. These may range from simple
decisions to accept the risks as they are, especially on a small
I I 1 I project, to a comprehensive plan for deployment of resources to
control a risk event, should it occur, where the event may be far
IDENTlFICAnON ASSESSMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENTATION
reaching (e.g., labor strife) or urgent (e.g., fire, accident).

Phase Four· Documentation

Final documentation is a vital part of any project activity,
though re&retfully often overlooked. This is just as true of risk
Figure n.3. Risk Function Breakdown: Four Processes
management. The purpose is to build a data base of reliable data
Phase One· Identification for the continuing evaluation of risk on the current project, as well
This phase consists of identifying all the possible risks which as for improving the data base for all subsequent projects.
may significantly impact the success of the project. Conceptually, Each of these phases are discussed in greater detail in the
these may range from high-impact/high-probability, through following chapters.
high-impact/low-probability, low-impact/high-probability to
low-impact/low-probability. Obviously, the high and medium
risks, including accumulations under anyone item of risk, should
receive the most attention. Moreover, combinations of risk which
together pose a greater threat than each individually should not
be overlooked.
In order to identify all the potential risks to a particular
project, it may be necessary to undertake a risk identification
program. This might involve soliciting the considered opinions of
knowledgeable persons associated with the project or similar
projects, or conducting a "brain-storming" type of workshop
amongst the project team. But always remember, "the alligators 1. C. Quaife, text contributed September, 1989.
that you do not see, are the ones, that bite you!" 2. PMBOK, 3/28/87, P E-2.

11-6 11-7
 Risk Management

Chapter III Risk Identification

A. Risk in Corporate Business Management
In corporate business management, risk is typically divided
into two basic types. The first of these, Business Risk, includes the
inherent chances of both profit or loss associated with the partic-
ular business endeavor. Business entities employ staffs of spe-
cially trained managers, professionals, technicians, and skilled
workers in order to increase the chances of profit and reduce the
chances of loss. The essential purpose is to maximize profits.
The second type of risk is usually called Pure, or Insurable Risk.
Insurable risk differs from business risk in that it involves only a
chance for loss and no chance for profit. For example, insurable·
risks can be further divided into four general categories relating
to the chances of loss: direct property, indirect property, liability,
and personnel.
Obviously, direct property loss involves the destruction of
property such as by fire, flood or wind storm. Indirect loss is
somewhat more subtle and involves, for example, the extra ex-
penses associated with renting alternative temporary accommo-
dation or equipment following its damage or destruction, or the
loss due to business interruption if operatiOns cannot be contin-
ued because the replacement is not immediately available.
Liability loss, of course, involves the chance of a member of
the public filing a lawsuit for bodily injury, personal injury, or
property damage against the contractor. Finally, personal losses
generally involve injuries to employees such as those contem-
plated by Worker's Compensation Laws.
B. Risk in Project Management
On most projects, responsibility for Project Risk is so pervasive
that it is rarely given sufficient central attention. Moreover, the
reader is reminded that not all risk events are independent. In-
deed, the total amount at stake on a project may be highly depen-
dent upon a series of interacting events. The old adage "It never
rains but it pours!" is not an uncommon experience. In addition,
a series of risk events can, and frequently do, cross traditional
functional responsibility boundaries, which, with their classic
difficulties of coordination and rapid response, can lead to disas-
trous consequences.
Ultimate responsibility for identifying risks to a project and
their subsequent treatment must rest with the project sponsor.
The very threat posed to the successful achievement of project

111-1
Chapter III Risk Identification Risk Management

objectives, as expressed in terms of scope, quality, time and cost, By their very nature projects are risky business. T~s interesting
should be sufficient reason for the sponsor to recognize this but simplistic approach is hardly adequate for project purposes,
responsibility. but it does underscore the fact that once all the risks seem to have
A particular case of risk is where the project leader must take been thought of there may still be a few remain.ing! ..
steps to keep the project on schedule, but must act with insufficient Another approach is to classify risks accordmg to theu Impact
information to make a sound decision. Such risks should be on the project. For example:
calculated, not reckless, and the absence of the requisite informa- • Scope risks - risks associated with changes of scope, or the
tion clearly recognized. It may be that the collection of the infor- subsequent need for "fixes" to achieve the required technical
mation is either too costly, too time consuming, or simply
deliverables
unavailable. In such situations it is advisable to have a contin- • Quality risks - failure to complete tasks to the required level of
gency plan prepared so that when the information or results do technical or quality performance
become available, and they prove to be negative (Le., bad news), Schedule risks - failure to complete tasks within the estimated
there is a "fall-back" position to tum to. time limits, or risks associated with dependency network logic
In Research and Development projects, for example, unknowns • Cost risks - failure to complete tasks within the estimated
that can tum into unpleasant surprises may include technical solu-
tions that do not work as expected; experiments that fail; un- budget allowances
anticipated by-products or side-effects, such as the undesirable side Unfortunately, many identifiable risks will have an impact on
effects of a new drug; being eclipsed by an unanticipated superior two or more of these areas, particularly both schedule and cost, so
product announcement, or by an overriding patent application by that this leads to significant overlapping and potential double
a competitor; market research indicating lack of customer accep- counting when it comes to making offsetting provisions.
tance; escalating product development costs; or Simply product Yet another way of classifying risks is to separate them ac-
reliability, quality or producibility difficulties. cording to their nature. For example, discrete one-time risk events
In R&D, some of these risks may be mitigated by conducting such as fire and theft may be distinguished from those" that are
parallel development paths, with the view that if one approach time-scaled, such as with flooding or earthquakes, because in the
does not work, then perhaps another will. This may cost more, but latter case the probability and magnitude of occurrence varies
may be worth it in order to maintain flexibility, and so reduce the with the period of time selected. Such risks are typically insurable,
overall risk and elapsed development time. 1 and corporate management usually draws a distinction between
insurable risk and business risk, where business risk is risk arising
c. Types of Risk from the business venture itself.
Risks may be classified in a number of different ways. For Deliberately chosen risks, such as correctly identifying proj-
example, one way is to describe uncertainties (and hence oppor- ect objectives for a venture opportunity, may be distinguished
tunities and risks) in terms of knowns, known-unknowns, and un- from those which are latent, Le., inherent in a situation or product,
known-unknowns. such as changes in market conditions or a faulty mechanical part.
A known is an item or situation containing no uncertainty. An Again, for any particular project, some risks may be consid-
example of a known in our personal lives is death-it will happen ered to be sufficiently remote or catastrophic as to be outside of
and there is no uncertainty about it. Unknowns are those things the realm of project responsibility. Obvious examples include a
which we know exist but do not know how they will affect us. A change in political direction or the financial collapse of the spon-
known-unknown is an identifiable uncertainty. An example of a soring organization.
known-unknown is our electricity bill-we know that we shall get
one next month but do not how much it will be. Another example D. Project Risk Identification
is cancer. We know that cancer exists, but do not know if we shall In order to deal systematically with the variety of risks en-
fall victim to it. An unknown-unknown is simply an item or countered in project work, a more useful approach to risk identi-
situation whose existence we cannot imagine. For example, before fication is to classify the types of project risk according to primary
the first case was reported, AIDS was an unknown-unknown. source (rather than effect). This will also facilitate more effective
Now, however, since we know that AIDS exists, it is a known-un- management. The PMBOK categorizes sources of risk as follows:
known like cancer. ObViously, there can be no example of an
unknown-unknown since, by definition, its existence cannot be • External, but unpredictable
imagined. 2 • External predictable, but uncertain
The spectrum of risk events will obviously vary between • Internal- non-technical
projects, but projects are launched to take advantage of opportu- • Technical
nities and, as explained earlier, opportunity and risk go together. • Legal

111- 2 111- 3
 r
II
Risk Management
Chapter III Risk Identification

It will be seen that this form of classification also provides the • Maximize reliability with minimum production downtime, as
opportunity to rank the various risk groupings according to abil- with a public utility;
ity to manage effective response (Le., theirrelative controllability). • Maximize safety with minimum environmental impact, as
The degree of ability to manage the response is, of course, inde- with a public transportation service; or
pendent of probability, amount at stake and, hence, risk event • Maximize flexibility and use of internal resources, as in the case
status, discussed in Chapter II. This part of the risk management of a commercial service to the public?
breakdown structure is shown in Figure 111.1, with the groupings
generally arranged from low ability to high. More detailed listings Such questions must be established at a very early stage of
within these typical groupings are given in Appendix A. the project, and the answers and resulting decisions themselves
The sequence of mitigation activities form the remainder of often must be made in a high degree of uncertainty requiring
the risk management breakdown structure as shown in Figure qualitative judgement. In any case, the results will have a consid-
111.2. These activities are discussed in subsequent chapters. erable effect on the risk characteristics of the project. These deci-
sions, properly handled, typically involve multidisciplinary
E. Project Risk Configuration effort, and perhaps specialists who are required to examine the
Identification of risks associated with a particular project project in detail.
commences with an understanding of the project itself. What is In a significant and beneficial integrative risk management
the project scope, i.e., the project deliverables, and indeed what effort, information flows from one group to another in the form of
are the underlying project objectives? Answers to these questions most-likely estimates of project parameters. Gradually, an overall
will have significant impact on the selection of probable risks to approach is built up around these estimates, which may then be
be considered on the project, and, in particular, will impact deci- tested against other possible criteria, such as sensitivity to eco-
sions on alternative project strategies and work-arounds for iden- nomic conditions, including prices and demand; competition; life
tified problems. cycle economics; other project alternatives; and so on.
For example, in selecting a system for project delivery, e.g., The technical configuration of the project may also be subject
in-house resources or outside single or multiple contracts, is the to design alternatives, in which appropriate questions would be:
underlying objective to:
• With respect to which project parameters is this design feature
• Maximize return on investment, as in a commercial venture to required?
supply goods; What is the likelihood of variation of the referenced parame-
• Minimize cost and financial risk, as in the case of a project ters, and hence the need of the design feature as described?
undertaken by a non-profit organization;

RISK RISK
MANAGEMENT MANAGEMENT
-tc TWO KINDS:
» DISCRETE EVENTS I .\ I
I I
.~ CONTINUOUS SCALE I
RISK -cc r I I
IDEtmFICAnON RISK RISK RISK
ASSESSMENT RESPONSE DOCUMENTAnON
I
r I I I I I
EXTERNAL EXTERNAL INTERNAL
• Baseline & Structuring I I I • Historical Database
• Current Project
TECHNICAL LEGAL • Screening
UNPREDICTABLE PREDICTABLE NON-TECHNICAL • Quantification SYSTEM PLANNING Database
INSURANCE ALTERNATIVES
• Modeling STANDARDS • Post Project
Assessment and
•
•
Regulatory
Natural Hazards
• Market Risks
• Operational
• Management • Changes in
Technology
• Licences · OveraU Assessment
• Report Findings Archive Update
• Schedule • Patent Rights • Definitions • Direct Property • Avoidance
• Postulated Events • Environmental • Cost • Performance • Contractual • PolicieslProcedures Damage • Absorbtion
• Side Effects Impacts • Cash Flow • Risks Specific to • Outsider Suit • Responsibility • Indirect • Dellection
• Completion • Social Impacts • Loss 01 Potential Technology • Insider Suit Allocation Consequential Loss • Contingent Planning
• Currency Changes • Design • Force Majeure • Monitor & Review • Legal Liability • Unforeseen Allowance
• Inllation • Sheer Size or • Risk Model Update • Personnel Related
• Taxatior. Complexity 01 Project • System Adjustments

Figure m.l. Risk Management: Identification Figure m.l. Risk Management: Mitigation

111- 4 111- 5
 r
Chapter III Risk Identification f Risk Management

• What is the likelihood that this design feature will perform as

expected?
• What are the implications of this feature on project parameters
and objectives which constitute project success?

From these questions, the costs, benefits and risks of a partic-

ular design feature can be evaluated under various scenarios and
the relative benefit determined.
None of these questions can be answered properly, however,
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and
unless they have been dealt with early in the project planning and Methodology
evaluation phase, and explidt estimates made of the implications.
F. Risk Factors A. Risk Assessment Goals
All project risks are characterized by the following three risk The goals of risk assessment are to:
fadors:3
• Increase the understanding of the project in general.
1. Risk ev~nt - precisely what might happen to the detriment of • Identify the alternatives available in delivery and methods.
the project; • Ensure that uncertainties and risks are adequately considered
2. Risk probability - how likely the event is to occur; and in a structured and systematic way, which allows them to be
3. Amount at stake - the severity of the consequences. incorporated into the planning and project development
process.
With this data, the risk event status (criterion value or ranking) • Through direct examination of these uncertainties and risks,
of a given risk event can be determined by the following relation- establish the implications of these on all other aspects of the
ship: project.

Risk Event Status = Risk Probability x Amount at Stake Major benefits of these goals include:

Some risk events are characterized by low probability and • Greater information is made available during the course of
high severity, while others are the reverse. Clearly, the most seri- project planning and decision making; for example, estimates
ous risks are those involving both high probability and high of uncertainty of project performance and viability should
severity. As noted earlier, many risk events cannot be treated as evolve;
simply discrete and independent as the total amount at stake may • The project objectives themselves may be called into question,
increase substantially as a result of a series of interacting events. and hence improved upon;
Such a situation calls for careful examination and spedal analyti- • Improved communication between members of the project
cal techniques. team, and other project stakeholders, where appropriate;
• Confidence that the true implications of uncertainties and risk
have been examined and incorporated into the project plans;
• Documented support for the project contingency allowance,
and a basis for its application management;
• Reduced probability that the realization of the project will be
sub-optimal, either by identifying weaknesses or by forcing
improvements during the project planning phases;
• Consequently, a reduced likelihood of disruptive changes
during implementation;
• Hence, substantially increased chances of project success.

Properly handled, the risk assessment process should pro-

1. W.N. Hosley, All-Tech Project Management Services, in letter dated April 19, 1990. mote the language of probability and the use of its associated
2. M.W. Curran, Decision Sciences Corporation, in letter dated November 26,1990. mathematics in risk analysis. It is best handled by examining the
3. D.C. Fraser, Risk Minimisation in Giant Projects, International Conference on the individual elements of the project in some detail and determin-
Successful Accomplishment of Giant Projects, London, England, May 1978. ing their relationships, because most people are more able to

III· 6 IV ·1
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology
comprehend the parts than the whole. In a formal quantitative risk PROJECT RISKS
assessment, i.e., a risk impact analysis, a mathematical means is
developed to integrate the complex relationships between the
detailed elements of available information and the information
possessed by numerous experts while preserving the experts' RECURRING NON-RECURRING
uncertainty of opinion.1 CONDITIONS EVENTS
Bear in mind that the objective of project management is always
to achieve project success through "participant satisfaction." Since
the long-term viability of the resulting product is often a key element
of success, it may also be necessary to conduct a comprehensive
t
OBJECTIVE
+
SUBJECTIVE
HIGH
product life cycle risk analysis during the conceptual phase of the
project. This would be particularly true if the project is large and / or
ANALYSIS ANALYSIS
P
1!. . ~. . ··"'~. .
,
:;J HIGH RISK •,~
.
II!..... ••.... II!..... t .... '!..... '!.... '!.... II!.... \

R ?• :; (PRIORITY)'~
complex, the product has an extended life as in building and engi-
neering works, or is part of an extended program of projects. In this
0
B
,~, ~
•·.... .I.r• .I."• .I."....,.".. ,.·
.I •
.
case the project risk assessment, which essentially covers the func- PROBABILITY OF A
tions of technical scope, quality, time and cost, may form part of this OCCURRENCE ~ B
I
more comprehensive product risk analysis. L
I LOW
B. Assessment Methodology T RISK ?•
Y

Selection LOW
Perhaps the greatest impediment to the acceptance of risk
management as a normal part of project management is the real- SEVERITY OF CONSEOUENCES

ization that project risks are so many and various that more than
superficial traditional attention might thwart the project at the RISK CRITERION VALUES
outset. This attitude denies the contribution that closer examina- (RISK EVENT STATUS)
tion of some of the risks to a particular project can bestow on its
ultimate success. The issue is: Having identified possibly a large Figure IV.I. Comparing Severity of Project Risks
A.M. Wideman, Project Management Course, 1991
number of risks, which should receive attention?
In fact, no risks should be entirely ignored, but many of the Simple Assessment Development
lesser risks can be provided for by the conventional contingency A simple risk assessment may be conducted by stepping
allowance approach. Clearly, the risks that should receive the through the sequence shown in Figure IV.2. As a prelude to a
closest attention are those that could have both the greatest impact better understanding of the relative significance of the findings,
on the project as well as the most likely probability of occurrence. however, a Risk Baseline should be established based on the
To some extent, the selection of these particular risks is an iterative organization's external "status quo." This will establish the risks
process in which preliminary analysis may indicate the need for to the sponsoring organization associated with not carrying out
further study. Figure IV.l shows a conceptual flow diagram in the project at all. The internal intrinsic worth of the project should
which risk events are first categorized and then assessed for also be documented.
severity and probability in order to arrive at a criterion value on
which a priority ranking can be based. Stept
The extent of the assessment at this stage should be governed Select the risk events, or series of related events, to be exam-
by the project's risk management policies"but in any case, the ined. Prioritize these for attention according to the initial selection
categorization should be closely aligned to the project's work discussed earlier.
breakdown structure. Consequently, the possibility of a signifi- Certain risk events may be screened out from further consider-
cant impact as a result of some combination of apparently minor ation, as a matter of policy, even though the event could have a major
events must not be overlooked. For example, a succession of impact. For example, an "out-of-scope" risk event might be one that
relatively insignificant schedule delays, perhaps as a consequence seriously impacts other activities of the sponsoring organization, or
of a spate of untimely scope changes, could become highly signif- is common to more than one project. In this case appropriate re-
icant. The effect could be to completely miss a "window of oppor- sponse planning might be incorporated into the organization's busi-
tunity" such as reaching a market before a competitor, forestalling ness planning, rather than at the project level, to avoid overlap and
technological obsolescence, or construction in the summer season duplication. Blanket corporate insurance coverage is a prime
rather than in winter. example.

IV -2 IV-3
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology
Note that amount at stake and criticality may vary with time,
i.e., according to the stage in the project life cycle, as discussed
earlier in Chapter II.E.
PROCESS In most cases, the amount at stake and criticality can be
arrived at by a simple examination of the available data and some
I A R 0 subjective judgment. In complex situations, however, it may be
0 N E 0 necessary to develop some form of mathematical model and
E A S C conduct a series of computer runs.
N L P U
T Y 0 M Step 4
I S N E
F N Having identified the consequences and their significance,
E 0 this step involves planning to mitigate the likelihood of the risk
Y T
event(s) in question, and/ or developing suitable responses and
R STEP contingency plans, as discussed,in Chapter VI. It may even be

CD~--
I EVENT necessary to gain more insight and gather additional information
S to complete this step. Either way, it should be the most creative
K step of all because it provides the occasion for converting risks

r~
into opportunities.
F PROBABILITY
A Step 5
C

0~ ~0~ ~0
T The final step in the process is to accumulate the results of the
STEP
o CONSEQUENCE assessment in a set of "Conclusions and Recommendations" such
R that appropriate management decisions can be made with full
knowledge of the apparent risks involved. Either the residual risks
must be accepted, or the project abandoned.
By following these steps the management of risk and uncer-
Figure IV.2. Impact Analysis Matrix Sequence tainty can be directly incorporated into the early project planning
Step 2 process as well as dealt with expeditiously during the course of
Assess the probability associated with the risk event(s). This project execution.
is perhaps one of the more subjective steps, although there are a
number of procedures which can help. An estimate of the degree Risk Quantification
of uncertainty may be arrived at by: The application of the various techniques noted in Steps 2 and
3 above can provide insight into risk event interdependencies, the
• Influence diagrams merits of further detailed consideration of specific risks, and the
• Risk contribution analysis manner in which combined effects of risk events might be mod-
• Probability distribution elled mathematically. In such an analysis, especially on large
• Probability trees projects, it is often necessary to develop a further breakdown in
• Risk modelling which each activity is numbered and documented for reference.
• Sensitivity profiles Using this breakdown, the risks within each activity are identified
Where the determination of probability is particularly elu- by mentally stepping through all aspects of the activity to produce
sive, but important, there are more elaborate techniques available a comprehensive list of uncertainties.
as described in Appendix C. Beware, however, of overconfidence As with the project work breakdown structure, this break-
in the accuracy of the results of these various approaches. At best, down serves to focus discussion, to aid in identification of all risks,
they are estimates based on good experience and thoughtful and to provide a basis for formalizing dependency links within
opinion. the project. In this way a model may be developed in which the
variables are represented by discrete probability distributions
Step 3 having specified linkages. This allows maximum flexibility in
Assess the consequences and severity of the risk event(s) by representing distribution shapes as well as offering mathematical
determining: simplicity. It also paves the way for solving complex combinations
• the amount at stake, and of dependent and independent variables by repetitive computer-
ized calculations.
• the criticality.

IV·4 IV·5
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology
Where risk combination is analyzed by such modelling, three Simple Probability
levels of model are typically required. These are: To provide a better understanding of simple probability, con-
sider the following question and answer: "What is the probability
1. For detailed analysis of the joint impact of a small number of that we shall get approval for our project next month?" "It looks
risks within an activity, good, say, about 75%!" So what is the estimated probability of this
2. For examining the joint effects of all risks within an activity, and event occurring? 75%? However, it also means that there is a 25%
3. For examining the broad overall impact of risks from several or probability that approval will not be obtained. Note that the
all activities. probability of the event occurring Pr(Event) plus the probability
of the event not happening Pr(No Event) equals one-always.
This can be conceptualized as the successive summarization What if there are two related events? For example, consider
of a large probability tree and the resulting output shows overall the following question and answer: "What is the probability that
distributions as they impact cost, schedule and quality. These dis- we shall have the scope defined by next month and that we shall
tributions can be displayed graphically so as to show the relative get approval?" "Well, it still looks pretty good, say, about 80% that
importance of each contributing risk, as well as their cumulative it will be ready and 70% that we shall get approval." If the two
effect. Such risk analysis is discussed in more detail in Appendix B. events are possible but not certain, then how likely is it that they
In-depth project risk impact analyses are generally the pur- will both happen?
view of specialists in risk analysis who are familiar with the
various technical aspects of the project management application Pr(Event #1) x Pr(Event #2) = Pr(Both Events)
in question. This may require a significant commitment of time
and resources and may only be appropriate where there is sub- But Pr(Event #1) is 80%, and Pr(Event #2) is 70%, so how likely is
stantial uncertainty, the stakes are high, and there is a need for it that both will happen?
Significant management attention.
0.70 x 0.80 = 0.56 = 56%.
c. Advantages of Assessment Methodology
From the foregoing it can be seen that there are additional That's barely over a SO-50 chance. Suppose that only one of these
benefits which derive from this assessment methodology by pro- things is necessary before starting project planning. What is the
viding: probability that we shall start project planning?

1. The vehicle for incorporating uncertainties directly into the Pr(No Scope) x Pr(No Approval) = Pr(No Planning)
project management process of planning, development and 0.30. x. 0.20 = 0.06 = 6%
implementation of the project
2. A clear understanding of the overall project's goals, objectives, The probability that neither will happen is very low, so it is 94%
scope definition and feasibility likely that we will start planning.
3. What the risks really are, which are the most significant, and Another way to look at this problem is in three parts:
hence which should receive attention to lead to the most risk
reduction Pr(Scope) x Pr(Approval) = 0.70 x 0.80 = 0.56
4. The models and techniques by which the variability and Pr(Scope) x Pr(No Approval) = 0.70 x 0.20 = 0.14
uncertainty of estimates can be conveyed quantitatively Pr(No Scope) x Pr(Approval) = 0.30 x 0.80 =....ll.24
5. An information base of quantitative and order-of-magnitude 0.94
data to support trade-off decisions, such as choices between or 94% likely
cost and performance, or the comparison of different options
6. A more rational basis for contingency planning and evaluation More Complex Probability
7. A more consistent and workable project plan Probability ranges are more complex to deal with, especially
8. An early warning for risk in project work. For example, if a given human activity is repeated
many times, ostensibly under identical conditions, then the actual
It is better to avoid risks now than to encounter them later.
durations experienced will nevertheless not be· identical. This
D. The Basics of Probability variation will be due to a number of influences impacting the
activity such as human productivity. Theoretically, if the fre-
Probability may apply to simple on/off or go/no-go type
quency of occurrence (i.e., the number of times that a particular
situations such as getting approval or not getting approval, or it
duration occurs) is plotted against the time taken for the ~ctivity,
may be more complex and apply to ranges of probability as
the resulting plot will produce a "Gaussian" distribution curve,
encountered in estimating time and cost. 2

IV·6 IV·7
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology
popularly known as a bell curve. The bell curve is typically sym- The "most likely" value referred to earlier is that value which
metrical about its highest frequency value, in which case it is has the most likelihood of occurring. It is only the same as the
described as a normal distribution. "expected value" if the distribution is symmetrical around the
The probability of any particular time being taken is, strictly "most likely."
speaking, its number of occurrences divided by the total number Note that the sum of the "means" (expected values) is the
of times the activity was repeated in the whole sample. This mean of the sums (total). That is, if the total cost of a project = the
fraction may be expressed as a percentage. For example, the sum of WBS items #1-100, then the" expected" total cost is the same
probability (chances) of landing a "heads" or "tails" in a coin toss as the sum of the" expected" costs for each WBS item #1-100 since
is 0.5 or 50%. Similarly, the chances of pulling any given playing these are all arrived at by calculation from the given observations.
card from a full deck is 1 in 52, or approximately 2%. The sum of the separate "most likely" values, on the other hand,
In project work, two practical difficulties arise with the appli- is not necessarily the "most likely" for the whole project.
cation of this theory. In the first place, a set of observations rarely When all is said and done, the project manager should be
exists upon which a discrete probability calculation can be made, wary of false impressions of accuracy generated by extensive
and rarely is there the opportunity to carry out repeated runs of calculations. The assessment of the probability of an event occur-
an activity during project planning in order to make the calcula- ring is only as good as the available historic data upon which the
tion. Consequently, where future events are being postulated, it is assessment is based, or the quality of the experience and opinions
necessary to rely on speculation. of those making the assessment.
This leads to the second difficulty. When people are asked to
speculate on probability, there is typically a tendency to be opti- E. The Quality Risk
mistic. This may be due to natural human optimism, but is more The goals of risk management are to increase understanding
likely due to it being easier to overlook obstacles than it is to of the project, hence improve project plans, system delivery selec-
account for them. Consequently, such bell curves of probability tion, and especially to identify where the greatest risks are likely
are rarely symmetrical. Two examples are shown in Figure V.l, to occur during the phases of project accomplishment. This helps
Chapter V. These probability distribution curves show the many to establish where management can best focus its attention during
values that an element might take. The concept is used in Range the project and much of that attention will be concentrated on
Estimating (see Chapter V.C). containing potential overruns of schedule and cost. Presuming that
When speculating on the probability of future events, it is the project is not complete until the entire scope is accomplished,
usual to establish three values in order to fix the shape of the curve. there will nevertheless still remain a major area of project risk.
These values are the two outer limits of the element plus the value This risk can best be expressed by the question: "What if the
which has the highest probability of occurrence, i.e. the "most project fails to perform as expected during its operational life?"
likely." This simpler approach is used in PERT calculations (see This may well be the result of less than satisfactory quality upon
Chapter V.B). project completion, and is especially true if quality is not given
Two examples of how these might be expressed: due attention during the project life cycle. Since the in-service life
of the resulting product is typically much longer than the period
• The cost of project planning will fall between $x and $y with required to plan and produce that product, any quality shortcom-
the cost distributed "normally" around $z; ings and their effects may surface over a prolonged period of time.
• Activity #Bl16 has a low value of "0" days, a high value of "p" Consequently, of all the project objectives, conformance to
days, a most likely value of "m" days with a triangular (square, quality requirements is the one most remembered long after cost
stepped, bell, etc.) distribution. and schedule performance have faded into the past. It follows that
quality management can have the most impact on the long-term
The "mean" of a probability distribution curve (i.e., the value actual or perceived success of the project.
at which there is 50% of the total area under the curve on each This may be demonstrated by considering the long-term cash
side) is known as its "expected value," and this expected value is flow, including project costs, of a commercial venture as displayed
found by taking: in Figure N.3. As the figure shows, the intended return-on-invest-
ment could be thwarted by "poor" quality. Quality risk impacts
(the value an element can take) x may remain hidden or ignored, but are not forgiven if the project
(probability that it will take that value) fails to deliver its long-term objectives.

then summing the results, i.e., the expected value is the "weighted F. The Schedule Risk
average" (pOSSible values weighted by their likelihood of It is possible to manage the "critical path" of a schedule
occurrence). activity network but not manage the project duration. This is

IV-8 IV-9
Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology

DESIRED or INTENDED RETURN ON INVESTMENT

---------------------------------~-- 8
"'~
o~'t'
PROJECT
+
PRODUCT or
FACILITY BREAK·EVEN (ZERO BALANCE)
CASH FLOW ------------------------
$$
(accumulaled
and discounled)

FINISH

PROJECT PRODUCTION START

CONCEIVE EXECUTE
OPERATE DISMANTLE
DEVELOP FINISH
PRODUCT or FACILITY lIFE·CYCLE
o
Figure IV.3. The Quality Risk: Difference Between Success and Failure
because the schedule risk3 is the "highest risk path" that contrib- Figure IV.4. Simple Example of Network Completion Risk
utes the most risk to project completion, and this path is not (MacKrimmon and Ryavec in Archibald & Villoria)
D.T. Hulett, PMP Certification Workshop· Risk Management. PMI Orange County Chapter. 1991. pS2.
necessarily the critical path as determined by simple network
analysis. In fact, the "likelihood of finishing on time" requires Consider the activity network shown in Figure N.4, having
examination of the risks associated with all the activities necessary low, most likely and high durations as shown in Table N.l, Net-
to reach completion.
work Activity Summary. Calculated means assuming a symmet-
There is risk in the duration of every activity because any
rical distribution are shown in the fifth column of the table.
duration in the future is uncertain. Therefore, duration must be
measured as a range, and this is typically expressed in terms of Table IV.1. Network Activity Summary
the low, most likely (or alternatively, expected) and high durations
associated with specified degrees of certainty. The extent to which MEAN
the high-risk durations impact project completion will depend on ACTIVITY LOW MOST LIKELY HIGH EXPECTED
the logical relationships between activities and the skillful man- A-B 8 9 10 9
agement of available float. B-C 4 5 6 5
Note that the longest activities are not necessarily the "risk- C-E 0 0 0 0
B-E 1 6 7 4.7
iest" (a long-duration activity could be quite reliable). Indeed, any A-D 4 9 14 9
activity may be "highly risky," and any such activity could delay D-E 1 2 7 3.3
the project, whether or not it is on the critical path. Therefore, it is
necessary to identify and manage all the activities that could Three ways of evaluating duration along alternative network
contribute to the most delay to the project, which are not neces- paths are shown in Table N.2, Network Path Evaluation. The
sarily those on the critical path as observed earlier. This suggests question is, which path is the most risky? The exercise gives
that where significant project activity risks are involved a stan- multiple answers and, hence, mixed signals.
dard "critical path method" (CPM) may be of only limited value.
However, the CPM approach could suffice if the "expected" (cal- Table IV.2. Network Path Evaluation
culated) durations are used rather than the "most likely" (see
Section 0 above for discussion of "expected" and "most likely"). SUM OF SUM OF SUM OF
After conSidering significant activity duration risks on a PATH MOST LIKELY MEANS HIGHS
particular project, it is quite possible that a sound management A-B-C-E 14 14 16
strategy would be to forego the "expected" completion date by A-B-E 15 13.7 17
several days in order to reduce the overall project risk. To make A-D-E 11 12.3 21
MOST RISKY A-B-E A-B-C-E A-D-E
this determination it would be necessary to combine activity
risks along alternative paths of the schedule network. On simple
networks this is relatively easy but for complex networks the The example is used simply to demonstrate that in the face
process is not self-evident nor intuitive. of considerable uncertainty more sophisticated calculations

IV -10 IV -11
 Chapter IV Risk Assessment Goals and Risk Management
Methodology
are needed in which degrees of uncertainty can be specified,
probability distributions assigned, and relative activity risks
assessed. Computerized mathematical models can be constructed
to deal with these variables, but software is also now available
off-the-shelf to assist the project manager by creating a number of
probability projections expressed as "S" curves (see Handbook
Volume I, Chapter VII.F). The collective result to any given degree
of certa~ty is then represented by the envelope of overriding
values, I.e., those generated by the riskiest near-critical activities.
Chapter V Computer Applications
A. Data Storage, Retrieval and Computation
The use of computers, and microcomputers in particular, has
gained ground rapidly in recent years due to the very rapid
increase in the power of micro hardware. This has stimulated the
development of elegant software capable of storing data in flat
readily-accessible data bases, or rapidly executing complex calcu-
lations which can produce robust graphical output. All of this
greatly facilitates communication, an essential ingredient of suc-
cessful project management.
The capacity of the computer simply to store information for
subsequent retrieval is invaluable. Most projects involve large
amounts of data which once associated with it become unique to
that project. If data can be collected and subsequently readily
searched and distributed to meet the progressive information
requirements on the evolving project, this in itself can go a long
way towards avoiding the risks of mistakes, misunderstandings
and misdirections. Data of this sort typically includes agreements,
instructions, specifications, drawings, latest changes, progress
coordination, current priorities, and so on.
Powerful and sophisticated software is now available on the
desk-top to support complex scheduling, range estimating and
costing, spread sheet type calculations, statistical quality analysis
and, more recently, the possibility of artificial intelligence appli-
cations (see Chapter X.C).
The computer helps members of the project tearn to reduce
the drudgery and time involved in handling large amounts of data
and wearisome calculations. It also helps rapid retrieval of vital
information for decision making. In addition, personal computers
are establishing an increasing role in the transfer of electronic data
and, together with the related "fax" machine, in the speed and
reliability of project communications.
B. PERT and the Probabilistic Model
One of the earlier applications of the computer was to the
PERT schedule network analysis technique. PERT stands for Pro-
gram and Evaluation Review Technique, a technique which was
originally developed for complex projects with an innovative
1. After D.T. Hulett, PMP Certification Workshop - Risk Management, PMI Orange County content and a high degree of uncertainty. Today, the term PERT
Chapter, 1991, p19. Chart tends to be misapplied in some software descriptions to
2. Ibid., p3. refer to a project schedule when presented in the form of a logic
3. Ibid., p46-53. network. This is to distinguish it from a Gantt Chart, which

IV -12 V-1
Chapter V Computer Applications Risk Management

presents the same data but in the form of a bar chart, i.e., horizontal An assessment is first made of the maximum tolerable varia-
bars representing activities plotted against time. tion in an estimate's bottom-line total cost which might result from
The real significance of the PERT technique is that it recog- a variation in any single element of that estimate. This threshold
nizes that estimates of activity time duratio!1s are just that-esti- value is called the critical variance. The critical elements in the
mates. As was shown in Chapter I.C, opportunity and risk are estimate are then identified as those whose actual values could
closely allied and in a probabilistic world a "most likely" estimate vary from the target by such a magnitude that the bottom-line cost
has by definition an equal value set of opportunities and risks that of the project would change by an amount greater than the critical
define the "best case" and "worst case." Some risks will inevitably variance. At a given level of probability, the variations in the actual
corne true as will some opportunities so, as noted earlier, project values will be either favorable or unfavorable and will range from
management must constantly pursue the latter to offset the former. 1 highest to lowest.
This concept is reflected in the PERT technique by establish- The deciding factor is not necessarily the magnitude of the
ing for each activity in the network three time estimates which element itself but its potential for variation. Consequently, the
represent: number of such elements in a typical estimate is not very large.
Nevertheless, because of the large number of possible combina-
o The most optimistic time possible for the activity, 0, tions, the number of potential outcomes in the actual bottom-line
o Its most likely time, m, and cost is indeed very large. Using a computer, these individual
o The most pessimistic time, p. uncertainties are put together in such a way that the uncertainty
in the bottom-line total can be measured.
If these three estimates are represented by time durations of The range of the resulting estimate is a simple but effective
0, m, and p, respectively, PERT allocates four times the weight to measure of its uncertainty. Surprisingly, the entire process requires
the most likely so that the expected time is then given by: only a modest amount of effort. Figure V.l shows the probability
distributions of two projects both of which have the same 50
Expected Time = percent probability of being completed for the expected value of
0+ 4m + p $165,000. However, because of their respective distributions, proj-
6
A more complete ect A is more likely to be completed close to the expected value
discussion describing the application of the PERT methodology than project B because the latter is less certain. Project B will
to cost and schedule analysis, with simple worked examples, is require a higher contingency amount to achieve the same level of
provided in Appendix D. Yet, this technique gives rise to a fair confidence in the estimate as project A.
amount of calculation, even for a relatively small network, so it is w
ideally suited to the computer. However, just calculating the () EXPECTED VALUE
z
uncertainties of activity durations (and costs) may not be suffi- w I
cient. The consequences need to be worked through the project a:
a:
network lOgic. There are a number of software packages on the :I
()
market that use network simulation using probabilistic evaluation ()
of success-dependent logic to arrive at possible results, or to o
evaluate various alternative "what if' scenarios involving uncer- 11.
tainties. Such tools help to give insight into the sensitivities of the o
variables for purposes of project planning. >-
!= 8
Co Range Estimating -m
...J

The application of probabilistic modelinf to cost estimates is <

m
employed in the Range Estimating approach; which is used as an o
adjunct to traditional estimating and not a substitute for it. The a:
Q.
methodology relies heavily upon the application of Pareto's Law,
Monte Carlo simulation and heuristics to identify: $100,000 $165,000 $250,000

o The mathematical probability that a cost overrun will occur COST ESTIMATE
o The amount of financial exposure (how bad it can get)
o Risks and opportunities ranked in order of bottom line Figure Vol. Probability Distributions: Two Projects With
importance the Same Expected Values of Total Costs
After J.R. Adams and M.D. Martin, A Practical Approach to !he Assessment of Project Uncertainty,
o The contingency required for a given level of confidence PMI SeminarlSymposium, Toronto, 1982, pIV·F.6

V-2 V-3
Chapter V Computer Applications Risk Management

D. Risk Analysis and five damage scenarios, at three criterion levels, would involve
Risk analysis, especially as described in Appendix B, is partic- 375 calculations for the one type of risk alone. Figure V.I. shows
ularly suited to computerization because it permits large amounts alternative formats for presenting such probability analysis re-
of data to be both stored and manipulated. Data is usually entered sults graphically. Figure V.2 illustrateS cumulative risks plotted by
interactively in response to question/prompts at each stage, and source category to show how the criterion values vary with degree
such that it can be rapidly changed to suit different requirements, of certainty.
or "what if' enquiries. The computer also provides the automatic
E. Knowledge-Based Risk Management
ability to present the results graphically, instead of through seem-
ingly endless streams of hard-to-comprehend printouts. In our post-industrial information-intensive age, corporate
Data to be handled might include: planning and decision making appear to be dominated by high-
powered information technology based on worldwide database
• Different project configurations retrieval networks and powerful computers. Through such net-
• Different damage/response scenarios and consequences for works and databases, almost all required data can readily be
each configuration obtained, except, that is, knowledge that domain specialists have
• Associated risk probabilities obtained through experience. Recently, artificial intelligence (AD, or
• Data for translation to equivalent dollar costs or time its sub-specialty, expert systems (also called knowledge-based sys-
• Calculations of probability distributions, either in terms of tems) has attracted special interest in order to deal with such
some natural value (e.g., lost time or materials), project dollar domain specialists' knowledge.
costs, or project schedule delay. The expert system provides an integrated approach which
facilitates risk identification by generating a list of the most sig-
nificant uncertainty factors and their descriptions. This list in-
Since the amount of data produced by these calculations· is
cludes the principal risks of all major parties involved in a project,
typically enormous, a variety of plotted output formats greatly
including the uncertainty factors that affect productivity, cost,
simplifies presentation. For example, in Figure B.I (Appendix B)
schedule, quality, and performance. The user selects factors related
a set of histograms shows the probability level identified for each
risk event magnitude. Figure B.2 shows the probability of damage
level if the risk event occurs, and Figure B.3 shows the probability M
of the criterion value being realized if the particular damage level I
is realized. For the case illustrated, calculating the effects of a POSTU~ATED EVENTS RISKS
L
single risk in each of, say, five configurations, at five risk levels, L
I
IMPLEMENTATION I MAINTENANCE o
1.0 N
S
TECHNICAL RISKS
o
F
NATURAL EVENTS RISKS o
o
L
P L
.1 A
R
C • C • C •
S
CRITERION VAlUE CRITERION VALUE CRITERION VALUE
CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION DENSITY FORM REVERSE CUMULATIVE
Any point on the curve indicates the Any point on the arve indicates the
.. 95 .96 .97 .98 .99 1.0
Any point on the curve indicates the
probabiDty p that the ailerion value probabUity P that a plIllGllJl[
CwiD IlIZI be exceeded probability P thai the aiterion value PROBABILITY
aiterion value C wiD be inalrred Cd be exceeded

Figure V.3. Presenting Results of Analysis: Cumulative Risks vs. Criterion Value
Figure Vol. Graphical Presentation of Analysis Results - Construction Project
After A.B. Cammaert c. 1986 After A.B. Cammaert c. 1986

V-4 V-5
 Chapter V Computer Applications Risk Management

to a given project from the list. Each of the general factors is further Application of expert systems in risk management can provide a
divided into subelements which provide the user with added practical model which not only considers traditional models, but
detail. After identifying the uncertainty factors, the e"fert system also expert knowledge, rules of thumb, and professional experi-
goes on to ask questiOns about risk policy, and so on. ences. An expert system provides information which is necessary
Figure V.4. shows an example of the breakdown structure of for management to make decisions under the condition of uncer-
an expert system inference net for construction risk management. tainty. . 4 . .
In his book, Knowledge-Based Rzsk Management, Klyoshl
Niwa develops the concept of a common expert system, then
identifies the weak pOints in terms of ill-structured management
TOTAL RISK domains. He then proposes a new concept of human-computer
cooperative system to overcome these weak pOints. The key element
is incorporating human intuitive ability into a computer system
to improve its flexibility and applicability. Specifically, the system
includes:

• A knowledge base
Environmenta 1
Uncertainty • A computer inference function
in Labor Human intuitive ability
.• A human-computer cooperative system to associate computer-
Ava!labil!ty
generated inference and non-lOgical human intuition
Sitill

The purpose of the system is to facilitate the calculation of risks

Uncertainty QIoali ty
Delay Disputes
'Control and improved management responses in the execution of projects
by commanding more comprehensive data.
Public Breudo,,"
Safety
Disorder
Avallabi l i ty
Demonstrations
Uncertainty
liar Histues
in Haterial

Government ACts Storage HAnage:Dent

&l\d Competence
Regulations Protection

Tax Rate Variation

Changes in Quality

Currency Labor Delayed Siu

Permits
Fluctuation Disputes

Quantny
Variation 1. P. Buckley, in a written response to the first draft of this handbook.
2. M.W. Curran, Range Estimating: Measuring Uncertainty and Reasoning with Risk, Cost
Defective
ConstNction
Engineering, Vol. 31, No.3, March 1989, p18-26, and in a letter dated November 26,
1990.
3. R. Kangari and L.T. Boyer, Risk Management by Expert Systems, PM], March 1989,
Figure V.4. Breakdown Structure of Identified Risks p40-48.
After R. Kangari and L.T. Boyer, Risk Management by Expert Systems, 4. K. Niwa, Knowledge-Based Risk Management in Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
PMJ, March 1989, p41 1989, pix.

V-6 V-7
 Risk Management

Chapter VI Risk Response and Documentation

A. Response Options
The structure of project risk response was shown diagram-
matically in Figure 111.2, Chapter III. Conceptually, responses to
project risks identified and evaluated as a result of the steps
described in previous chapters may take any of the following
forms. A risk may be:

• Unrecognized, unmanaged or ignored (by default)

• Recognized but no action taken (absorbed as a matter of policy)
• Avoided (by taking appropriate steps)
• Reduced (by an alternative approach)
• Shared (with others, e.g., by jOint venture)
• Transferred (to others through contract or insurance)
• Retained and absorbed (by prudent allowances)
• Handled by a combination of the above

Certainly the choice will depend on the project, the risks and
the circumstances, but the selection should be based on a clearly
defined set of standards.
B. System Standards
The next step, then, is to set policies, procedures, goals and
responsibility standards for risk management on the project in
question. Where appropriate, risk policy should be based on the
principle that responsibility should be placed on the shoulders of
those who represent the source of the risk in question. This will
establish the scope and framework for the risk management func-
tion, whether it is simply a recognition of a task to be undertaken
by the project manager, or the responsibility of a specialist or team
under his direction.
Bear in mind that risk events will affect the project's cost,
schedule, or quality of the work to an extent which depends on
the event and how it is handled. The overall project risk will also
vary considerably through the project life cycle, as described in
Chapter II.E. Potential impacts will increase as tasks with risk
events of high probability are undertaken and then decrease as the
bulk of the work is completed.
The project risk may also change substantially as a result of
changes in the scope of the project or changes in the method of
working. Consequently, continuous review of the situation, with
appropriate adjustments, is strongly recommended.

VI-1
Chapter VI Risk Response and Documentation Risk Management

Generally speaking, project risk policies and procedures D. Response Planning

should encourage the following preferred actions as appropriate: As a result of the methodology outlined above, a picture of
project risk will emerge. This will include where, when, and to
• Develop an environment and/ or work-arounds designed to what extent exposure may be anticipated.
avoid or minimize selected risk events With this picture in hand it is then possible to formulate
• Reduce impacts by defensive planning suitable risk management strategies, whether by way of absorp-
• Transfer the effect to others having control over the risk source tion, adjustment, deflection or systematic contingency planning.
• Make appropriate allowance for retained residual risks Adjustment may simply involve the proper recognition of certain
• Provide some flexibility in the contingency allowance proce- risks by appropriate modifications to the project's scope, budget,
dures to permit some response to the unexpected schedule, and quality specification, or all four combined.
Adequate contingency allowance and good control, even on
The term work-around may need some explanation. A work- a tight budget, will reduce the chance of overrun. A logically
around is an alternative solution to a potential problem-"We can developed schedule with attention to resource requirements and
get around that by doing this." For example, Requirements: Pro- conflicts will reduce the probability of schedule overrun. But in
vide airtight food container. Solution: Sheet metal box with tight- the course of the enthusiastic initiation of project implementation,
fitting lid. Risk: Nonavailability. Work-around: Substitute durable how often has one heard the battle cry "Our objective is to build
molded plastic container with self-sealing top. the best there is!" Not surprisingly, such an unrealistic definition
C. Insurance of quality results in a very high risk indeed of the project being
unsuccessful due to cost and time overruns as well as possible
Those types of risk which are insurable can be selected from failure to achieve even more realistic performance objectives!
the list of possible risks to the project, and duly insured. For Deflection involves the transfer of risk by such means as:
example:1
• Contracting out to another party
1. Direct Property Damage • Insurance or bonding, or
• resulting from auto collision • By recognizing it in the contract
• or other auto events
• to equipment, in transit or handling, etc. In the latter case, caution is advised since experience shows
• to project materials, including theft that this strategy will only be cost-effective if the contractor has
• to contractors' property proper and effective control over the source of the risk or risks
concerned.
2. Indirect Consequential Loss Contingent planning includes:
• cost of removing direct loss debris
• equipment replacement • The management of a contingency budget
• rental income loss • The development of schedule alternatives and work-arounds
• business interruption • Complete emergency responses to deal with major specific
• liquidated damages areas of risk
• increased financing • An assessment of project shut-down liabilities
3. Legal Liability
In complex situations, the effects of all such strategies can, if
• public bodily harm required, be analyzed by making appropriate changes to the risk
• property damage arising from the negligence of others model suggested in Chapter IVB.3. In this way decisions can be
• personal injury arising from the negligence of others optimized and the project can proceed with increased confidence.
• damage to the project entity due to
• design errors E. Data Collection, Application and Documentation
• execution errors
• project failure to perform as specified 1. Historical Databases
Project risk management, particularly the risk evaluation and
4. Personnel-Related analysis activities, is data intensive. A reliable data source or
• employee bodily injury sources is essential. Very often the required data is simply not
• cost to replace employee available, and other techniques have to be adopted to simulate the
• resulting business loss particular risk or risk groupings under consideration. However,

VI-2 VI-3
Chapter VI Risk Response and Documentation Risk Management

even when data is available, a practical difficulty is the correct

interpretation of the explanatory descriptions when applying it to
anticipated risks on current work.
Just as with project cost estimating, there is no better source
of information than an organization's own historical database. This
should consist of recorded risk events and experience on past
projects, preferably of a similar nature where these exist, built up
as a result of formalized post-project assessments described
below.
Chapter VII Management of Contingency
Allowances
2. Current Project Database
If a project is already in the implementation pha~e, every A. After the Known Risks, What Then?
effort should be made to collect appropriate ongoing data to So far this handbook has dealt with the identification of
establish a current project database of frequently recurring risk, as project risks and how they can be evaluated. That's fine for the
the project proceeds. This will be particularly valuable for updat- risks that can be identified, the known-unknowns. But what
ing the assessment of overall project risk. about the unknown-unknowns, should they be ignored?
However, for many of the risks, especially at the initial impact Maybe, it's a question of interpretation. Given the definition of
analysis stage,. the data are necessarily subjective in nature and unknown-unknowns in Chapter III.C, it is simply not possible
must be obtained through lessons learned by others, or by careful to plan for unknown..;unknowns.
questioning of experts or persons with the relevant knowledge. The 1973 Arab oil embargo is a good example of an
For example, an expert could be asked to estimate the optimistic, unknown-unknown. Cost estimates which were prepared
most probable and pessimistic values for a particu~r variable, prior to the ~mbargo contained no provisions for such in-
together with explanation of the factors which might contribute creased fuel costs-no estimator could have possibly been
to the degree of variability represented in these estimates. The expected to foresee that problem. In other words, in looking
amount at stake for each and the sensitivity of this amount to into the future, there is absolutely no way that unknown-un-
changes in related variables must also be determined. knowns can be taken into account. We must simply take our
lumps as they materialize. l
3. Post-Project Review and Archive However, problems do surface on projects which are "un-
The compilation of useful historical data is quite a challeng- expected" and are tagged with the inference of being unknown-
ing task. It is a task which may be set aside unless its value is unknowns simply because they were not thought of during
recognized and the data collected and organized as part of the planning (even though they should have been!). In reality, they
project's ongOing management responsibility. The descriptions of are known-unknowns whose existence and degree of impact on
risk assessments, events experienced and their consequences the project are uncertain. Experiencing "unexpected" events
should all be recorded. may be a reflection of weaknesses in the original planning
Consistently structured post-project reviews or evaluations in assumptions.
which planning assumptions are matched with actual experience, Planning assumption weaknesses may include:
variances conscientiously explained, and the overall success of the
project thoroughly assessed, are essential to consistently good • Predictions that prove to be false or overstated,
project management. All essential data associated with risk man- • Lack of timely information for project performance,
agement, systematically collected, carefully structured, and accu- • Loss of control during project realization,
rately recorded while each project is ongoing, should also be • Human resources that are not available when required,
included in the post-project review. • Lack of competence in key individuals or workforce,
The key elements of each post-project review should then be • Disruption due to personal conflicts or internal politics, or
abstracted and appropriately archived to update the simply,
organization's historical database. The post-project review and • The occurrence of misunderstandings, bum-out and sickness.
data archiving should be considered as part of the project's termi- Any such weaknesses should be carefully examined and
nation phase and completed before its conclusion. Such documen- accounted for by suitable mitigating steps, contingency
tation can be quite a demanding technical responsibility. plans, work-arounds, or otherwise accommodated from al-
lowances for identified risks. If, however, the impact is
1. PMBOK, 3/28/87, pE-4. greater than can be so accommodated, then the project man-
ager may well have to negotiate a change in the scope or

VI,-4 VII-1
Chapter VII Management of Contingency Risk Management
Allowances
quality of the work, take more time, spend more money, or C. Application of Project Contingency Allowances
some of all four, in order to complete the project. If a situation Contingency allowances are different, separate, and in addi-
develops which is beyond recall, then the project should be tion to the schedule and financial resources determined by good
aborted as promptly as possible to minimize further wasted estimating techniques. Good estimating requires statin~ the :sti-
time and effort. mating strategy, the planning assumptions and the typICal nsks
B. Contingency Reserves? included.
For example, when using a probabilistic estimating technique,
From the foregoing discussion it would appear to be pru- particularly when a range of any type is associated with the cost: ~he
dent to hold some contingency reserves, where this is permis- given range is actually a "basic contingency" allowance, both posItive
sible, to cover unexpected needs on the part of the project and negative, for that cost. Basic contingency is designed to cover
sponsor, principally in scope and quality requirements, which the inherent variability in the cost of the given element. For that
will surface in both the time and cost dimensions. However, the reason, in probabilistic estimates, no additional "basic contingency"
existence of any such allowances and their proper management should be added at the bottom of the estimate. That would ~
present the project sponsor, and indeed the project manager, accounting for it twice?
with some difficult philosophical and psychological manage- Separate from the "basic contingency" issue, there may ?e a
ment choices. For example: should they be added to the esti- need to consider other types of allowance to cover recogruzed
mates of time and cost of the project? Or should some flexibility scope uncertainties, resource uncertainties, and so on. ~ actual
be permitted in the accomplishment of the scope and quality of contingency amount is then derived from these adJUstments
the project instead? which are needed to bring the project's probability of overrun or
Neither the client nor the project manager relishes having underrun to an acceptable level. Such allowances should be ap-
to make changes to the project's constraints once they have been plied just once-at the 'bottom line" of the estimate. They should
agreed upon. Wise project managers negotiate time and cost not be duplicated or "layered" as a result of various estimate
allowances in their plans from the beginning to provide them segments being combined to form larger segments. Otherwise, ~he
with some management flexibility. Sometimes this flexibility accumulated total may be excessive and make the overall project
can be effectively accomplished by identifying some peripheral plan too long, too costly, or both.
3
or minor scope objectives that are not mandatory. Such flexibil-
ity greatly enhances the project manager's ability to exercise D. Contingency Allowances for Project Implementation
influence in managing the project. Strategies for handling contingencies in the implementation
If time and cost reserves are set aside, should they be under phase of a project, that is, after the go/no-go decision, will likely
the control of the project's sponsor, the project manager, or the depend on the type of project, its criticality, and whether it ~s b~ing
functional managers? Should they be global like big pots to be conducted with resources internal or external to the organIZation.
dipped into when needed, or should they be allocated on some In any case, for effective schedule and cost control during project
basis appropriate to authority and responsibility on the project? implementation, a realistic project schedule and budget must be
And finally, having regard to the propensity for any spare time approved as the baseline terms of reference. This approval nor-
and money to be spent, often well before the project is even mally depends on the schedule and cost estimates submitted as
completed, should such allowances be public or secret? part of the output of the project's development and planning
A prudent sponsor will hold some schedule and financial phase.
reserves for the sponsor's own needs, and the project manager For purposes of the following illustrations, we will look at the
mayor may not be aware of their existence. An "unsophisti- stages of a construction industry project. Approaches to other
cated" client, on the other hand, may not know enough to have types of projects should be adjusted accordingly. It will be as-
them, so the project manager should not count on access to any sumed that the project will be realized substantially by external
"secret" reserves. resources under contract. If this is not the case, then the approach
In practice, the answers to these issues probably lie in the should be modified to suit the particular in-house policies and
strength and experience of the project's sponsor, management, procedures of the sponsoring organization in question. For our
and general culture surrounding the project. What these ques- purposes in arriving at appropriate schedule and cost contingency
tions do point to, however, is the importance of applying risk allowances for the implementation phase, this phase may be
management, first to reduce project risks to an acceptable min- viewed as having three stages as follows: 4
imum, and then to justify effective cost and schedule contin-
gency allowances to cover the remainder. It will be up to project 1. Before contract award. In this stage, after approval to proceed
management to properly manage and control these allowances with the project but before award of any work to contractors,
for the ultimate success of the project. it will be necessary to establish the scope and quality of work

VII-2 VII-3
Chapter VII Management of Contingency Risk Management
Allowances
required in as much detail as possible. This is typically con- risk event. The concept is based on probability "swings-and-
veyed by means of scope of work descriptions, designs and roundabouts" and so it is most important to establish policies and
specifications. This work itself may be the subject of contracts, procedures for managing the complete contingency allowance.
if not performed internally. Either way, the quality of this work A recommended approach is that once appropriate allow-
is critical to subsequent success and requires sound project ances have been determined, allocations should be made to the
management, with regular reviews until the product of this major functional areas of responsibility associated with each of the
stage is satisfactory.
three implementation stages described in Section D. Table VII. 1
2. Contract award. This is the procurement, tendering and award shows a matrix chart for a construction project in which alloca-
stage. When placing an order or contract, especially if firm tions have been made to each of these three stages and to each of
price bids are being sought, a variance will inevitably exist four functional areas of responsibility.
between the estimates developed pre-tender and the schedules
and prices submitted. This is due to market pressures at the Table VII.l. Contingency Allocation: Construction Project
time of bidding, such as service and material price fluctuations,
impending labor agreements or disputes, productivity assess-
ments, and whether contractors are busy or slack and their
STAGE
consequent attitude to risk. RESPONSIBILITY
3. After contract award. It is in this stage, the main production PRE-AWARD AWARD POST-AWARD
stage, that the various unforeseen items really emerge. Typi-
Policy Changes
cally, this is evidenced by the necessity for issuing change Policy Changes
Scope Changes
Scope Changes
instructions. Any change will have a disruptive effect on the OWNER 1"10 Enhancements 1/2"10
Enhancements
work. The more changes, and the later they are, the more (All nominal)
Budget and Cash
disruptive to schedule and cost will be their effect. Flow Difficulties

Tendering Variances 5 "10 Other Contractors 1/2 "10

1"10 Market Conditions
In many ways, the number of changes that are necessary after MANAGER Schedule Delays Equipment Delivery
Inflation
contract award will be a reflection of how well the planning was
done prior to award, or the detailing of the work earlier in the Re-evaluation of Design Coordination
DESIGNER 1/2"10
Design Changes 1"10 "Making it Work"
current phase. Of course, the sponsoring organization may have
set a deliberate policy of awarding contracts before all the infor- Changed Conditions
mation is complete in order to reduce the overall time for the CONTRACTOR Claims for Delays 1/2 "10
Inflation
project. This project management strategy is often referred to as Legal Interpretation
"fast-tracking," and puts the project into a much higher risk cate-
gory. Under these circumstances, appropriate contingency allow-
ances must be increased accordingly.
E. Implementation Contingency Strategies
In the example, suppose a total contingency cost allowance
Typical approaches to setting contingencies vary from apply- of 10 percent for the implementation phase has been arrived at.
ing standard allowances, to percentages based on past experience, Then, say, 1 percent might be allocated to each of the sponsor,
to a careful assessment based on the sum total of the most likely project manager and designers in the pre-award stage for a total
probability and consequences of the various risk items properly of 3 percent, and 5 percent allowance assigned to the award stage.
identified. s It is the latter which is being advocated in this hand- This leaves 2 percent for the post-award stage, plus whatever is
book, as part of a pro-active and responsible approach to project carried forward from the two earlier stages. This latter carry
risk management.A simple format is described in Section F. forward is justified as follows:
In fact, the first two approaches may be characterized as the
"big pot" approach. When anything goes wrong, everyone dips Assuming that the original estimate is reasonably sound, and
into the big pot. Unfortunately, the pot always seems to be emptied that firm price tenders have been called for, then if the market
long before the project is completed. Indeed, the reality is exacer- conditions are depressed, very competitive bids may be re-
bated by the perception, because people are tempted to raid the ceived. This could mean that little, if any, of the award stage
pot before it is too late! allowance is consumed; indeed, it might even be enhanced.
It is true that when a contingency allowance is based on proba- However, it is then appropriate to increase the post-award
bility and severity of occurrence and is allocated to each item pro- stage contingency allowances because the probability of con-
portionately, no single amount is sufficient to cover its corresponding tract administration difficulties and consequent claims arising
is correspondingly increased.

VII-4 VII-5
 Risk Management
Chapter VII Management of Contingency
Allowances
Of the three stages described, contract award is probably the
most uncertain. For example, in constru.ction work, even under
good bidding conditions and on a "good set of documents," the
core bids (Le., those bids not containing gross estimating or com-
putation errors or extremes) are likely to vary at least by 5 percent
to 10 percent, simply as a result of differences in production
methods, productivity assumptions and required margins. How-
ever, if the bids are scattered well beyond this range, perhaps the Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's
documents should be re-examined for ambiguity or lack of clarity
and precision.
Environment
F. A Simple Tabular Calculation A. What is the Project Environment?
A simple computation to arrive at an appropriate estimating Why worry about the project environ~ent. .. when the o?je~­
contingency allowance to cover the consequences of second- and tive of project management is to get the project completed WIthin
lower-order risks may be arrived at by using the tabular format scope, cost and schedule? The truth is that what i~ ul~imat:Iy ~t
shown in Table VII.2 risk is project success, so important though these objectIve cntena
are, they are not necessarily the ultimate determinants of success.
Table VII.2. Simple Tabular Calculation of Estimating Contingency Heresy? Perhaps. But success, a very elusive notion. at be~t, is
dependent upon navigating the project through all Its vanous
Description of Probability of Estimated Cost Risk Event Status
uncertainties (risks) and ending up with satisfied customers.
Risk Event Occurrence of Consequence (Criterion Value)
Who are the customers? In varying degrees, just about anyone
(Amount at Stake) $
involved with the project, in other words, the project stakeholders.
Risk Event #1 Probability P CostC PxC It is these stakeholders collectively who establish the various
Risk Event #2 do. do. do. cultures surrounding the project and thereby establish the
etc. do. do. do. project's environment. Two views of the project en~o~ent .are
Project Estimating Contingency based on: l:PxC shown conceptually in Figures VIII. 1 and 2. The followmg discusSIOn

This exercise itself may well identify higher-than-reasonable

risks requiring risk management focus. All first-order risks, i.e.,
those with both a high probability and high amount-at-stake
should, of course, be reported to senior management or the project
sponsor for appropriate action. Depending on that decision, and
the degree of controllability of the particular risk, it may be
necessary for project management to establish a disclaimer re-
garding the consequences.
In summary, effective contingency management requires a
positive and systematic approach. By doing so, changes in the
status of the allowances and, hence, the trends in the final pOSition
at the end of the project will be very good indicators of its health.
Moreover, adverse trends can be brought to the attention of those
who are able to significantly influence the future course of events
in the interests of the project's ultimate success.

1. M.W. Curran, Decision Sciences Corporation, in letter dated November 26,1990.

2. Ibid.
3. A.M. Ruskin and W.E. Estes, What Every Engineer Should Know about Project Management,
Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1982, p45.
4. R.M. Wideman, Cost Control of Capital Projects, A.E.W. Services, Vancouver, B.c., 1983,
p75. Figure VllI.l. Project Environment Process
After N.R. Burnett and R. Youker, EDI Training Course, CN-848, July 1980.
5. Ibid., p76.

VII-6 VIII-1
 Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's Risk Management
Environment

This is particularly true of hard, commercial and industrial,

projects, but it is also often true of soft, administrative-type
projects, and the subsequent stress in the working environ-
ment. The problem is that people are understandably resistant to
change because the known is always more comfortable than the
unknown. For example, when a situation has remained stable for
a significant period, individuals develop all sorts of habits and
short-cuts that work to their personal advantage. Change threat-
ens to destroy this personal comfort base, forcing people to start
afresh. These vested interests, together with an initial lack of
understanding and a perception that there will be winners and
losers, all too often constitute serious hurdles to be overcome. Yet
too frequently these very hurdles are simply overlooked during
the course of the project.
This resistance to change may be evident amongst many of
the stakeholders. Others may simply have counter vested inter-
ests, or personal or group agendas, which are only indirectly
related to the project. Together with the project's sponsors, owners
and users, these people constitute the project's direct and indirect
stakeholders. Collectively or separately, their attitudes and expec-
tations may well undermine the success of the project.
This leads to the pOSSibility of influencing these attitudes
and expectations in such a way that the change which the
project is designed to introduce will be much better received. If
these uncertainties can be uncovered in good time, they can be
Figure VllI.2. Project Environment: External Influences and Interfaces dealt with pro-actively so that the corresponding risks to the
R.M. Wideman, Project Management Course, 1990
project are significantly reduced.
looks at the environment from the perspective of risk. For conve-
nience, this environment may be thought of in terms of the internal C. Risk and Safety1
project culture, the sponsors' (permanent) corporate culture, and A good example of the potential for attitudes to undermine
the external social surroundings. a project is public concern over safety and/ or environmental
The internal and corporate stakeholders are the easiest to damage. An organization may have a finely tuned project risk
recognize, and the manager of the successful project understands management program in place, and still suddenly find itself in
~he need to be ~ttuned to current organizational, social and polit- the middle of an hysterical local community distraught over
ICal maneuvenngs to. avoid some classic project risks. To advan- public fears and media distortion of a risk issue. The fact is, risk
tage, he or she may spend some time and effort in influenCing management is not complete without effective risk communi-
these environments for the benefit of project team performance. cations. Suggested mechanisms for public communication are
For example, every project team member needs to be convinced outlined in Sections E and F below, but perhaps it is worthwhile
of the project's worth and become dedicated towards its objec- discussing at this point why traditional responses with factual
tives. Top management needs to be convinced of the benefits of data tend to fail.
appropriate training, and its power in developing competence Research into the psychology of risk perceptions by U.S.
and commitment. In this way, misunderstandings, mistakes, and psychologists Paul Slavic and Vince Covello indicates:
rework may be avoided, and the consequences of such risks
correspondingly reduced. 1. People do not, in fact, demand zero risk. They take risks every
day, both consciously and subconsciously, and they are willing
B. Problems are Caused by People
and able to take benefit/risk decisions, as in driving and speed-
. The external stakeholders are more difficult to identify and ing. Some take deliberate risks simply for pleasure, prestige or
mc~ude all those who will in any way be involved with the resulting self-satisfaction (e.g., sky diving).
entity or product upon its completion. Typically, that's a lot of people, 2. Peoples' judgments of degrees of risk are not, however, coinci-
and today there is a rapidly growing awareness and concern amongst dent with most methodologies for measuring risk statistically.
them for the impacts on their physical environment. The public may greatly underestimate familiar risks

VIII- 2 VIII-3
Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's Risk Management
Environment
(e.g., driving) while greatly overestimating unfamiliar risks public emotional response to risk, and responding by seeking a
(e.g., buying a home near a nuclear facility). change in the attitude towards those who are being held respon-
3. A variety of emotional, not logical, factors control risk percep- sible for creating and managing the risk. This is in contrast to
tions: seeking a change in the perception of the risk itself.

• Primary is the sense of personal control, Le., the ability to D. Principal Determinants
choose taking a risk (like getting into a car) and the ability to To identify the potential difficulties associated with project
manage the risk (I am the one behind the wheel). risks and to assess their probability of occurrence, designated
• Secondary are qualities of familiarity and, conversely, members of the project team must interact frequently with those
dread. The greater the unfamiliarity and potential for con- institutions and individuals which constitute the most important
nection to gruesome (e.g., nuclear impacts), the more it is elements of the project's stakeholders. The required effort can then
likely to be judged as highly risky and therefore unaccept- be priorized with a view to heading off the most serious obstacles
able. well in advance.
This environment will not be the same for every project, of
4. Once established, risk perceptions are extremely hard to course. In fact, it is likely to be determined principally by three
change. New information may be absorbed by the intellect but considerations: 2
it is not readily absorbed at an emotional level.
5. Risk perceptions reside fundamentally at an emotional level. • The product or service resulting from the project,
• The technology and the manner of its application, and
What these insights suggest is that, in a crisis of fear, the • Its physical location.
traditional management instinct of providing rational, statis.ti-·
Suggested steps in the process of identification are: 3
cally-based information could be misguided.
In a recent egg/ salmonella case, spokesmen for the egg pro- 1. Learn how to understand the role of the various stakeholders,
ducers tried to explain the extremely low risks of an individual and how this information may be used as an opportunity to
actually being made sick by an infected egg. What they failed to improve both the perception and reception of the project.
recognize was the sanctity of food and the trust in those who 2. Identify the real nature of each stakeholder group's business
deliver it. It is not a question of how much risk, but rather the and their consequent interest in the project.
sudden imposition without warning of risk into a system assumed 3. Understand their motivation and behavior.
to be low- risk. As a result, the problem effectively got out of 4. Assess how they may react to various approaches.
control. 5. Pinpoint the characteristics of the stakeholders' environment
In the example, risk communications should have tried to and develop appropriate responses to facilitate a good relation-
address the issues of surprise events and loss of control. Instead of ship.
trying to prove that there was "no problem, except for the elderly, 6. Learn project management's role in responding to the
the infirm and babies," a better response might have been "A stakeholders' drive behind the project.
detailed examination has been ordered to determine the extent to 7. Determine the key areas which will have the most impact on
which the problem exists. We will get to the bottom of it and keep the successful reception of the project by all the stakeholders.
you fully informed. For the moment we recommend that all eggs 8. Develop a Project Acceptance Plan aimed at managing external
be thoroughly cooked, and that the elderly, infirm and small stakeholders' interests.
children limit their consumption. Anyone with these symptoms
should immediately call, etc., etc." However, remember always that even a minor stakeholder
The difference in the two approaches is that the first assumes group may discover that i'fatal flaw" in the project's concept that
that there is a basis of trust, or fails to recognize the need to could bring it to a standstill! Failure to deal with these issues in a .
establish a basis for trust by asking people to be reasonable. The timely manner will inevitably lead to a less than optimum project
second endeavors to establish a basis of trust by showing that the outcome.
problem is being actively monitored and controlled.
If the research demonstrates· that the fundamentals of risk E. PtIIanaging by Stakeholder Groupings and Categories
perception are emotional and not rational, then the primary focus Project stakeholders may be recognized in any of the follow-
of project risk management communications should be to ing categories: 4
establish (or re-establish) trust in the organization, rather than to
• Those who are directly related to the project by having a stake
educate the public about science or technology and its benefits.
in its process or product such as suppliers of inputs, managers
This means beginning by recognizing the natural legitimacy of
of the process, or consumers of outputs;

VIII-4 VIII-5
Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's Risk Management
Environment
• Those who have influence over the physical, infrastructural, • Genuinely sincere appreciation expressed to inquirers
technolOgical, commercial/ financial/ socioeconomic, or polit- • Flexible personal responses provided, where special issues
ical/legal conditions; dictate
• Those who have a hierarchical relationship to the project such as · Recovery from inevitable lapses of existing services during
government authorities aHocal, regional and national levels; and project activities, in ways that impress
• Those individuals, groups or associations, sometimes only • Project team members empowered to make decisions to solve
indirectly related to the project, but who see a linkage between urgent and obvious local problems
their own interests and the project's goals and who pursue it • Stakeholder-friendly information facilities available both
for their own ends. These may include special interest groups during project implementation, as well as subsequently
or competitors, but also those providing services who wish to
profit at the expense of the project. Traditional management has long since recognized the value
of the classic input-process-output model, with its management
Having identified the various stakeholder groupings, each information feedback loop for controlling output. Dynamic man-
may be assigned to a category according to their amenability to agers have also recognized that opening communication channels
influence. Three categories are suggested, namely: in both directions, such that modified management strategies
result, can be a particularly powerful workforce motivator. The
• Those who are controllable, key is quality information. Whether this information is presented
• Those who are influenceable, and in verbal, written or graphical form, improvements in perfor-
• Those who need to be appreciated. mance can be quite remarkable and, indeed, many "knowledge
workers" demand it to provide them with job satisfaction. The
Within each category, stakeholders may then be further rated concept is shown in Figure VIII.3.
by degree of importance according to their ability to influence the The principle is just as true in the field of projects, though
outcome of the project. Members of the project team can then regretfully less evident, especially where the external environ-
prioritize their efforts to maintain effective stakeholder linkages, ment is concerned. Thus, the project manager's job is no longer
designed to give the best chances of ultimate project success. confined to controlling events within his or her own organization.
Possibly the largest constituency are those who are relatively It is no longer sufficient to think of project management simply as
neutral at the outset and can therefore be influenced in their the monitoring of time and cost by planning, scheduling and
opinion. They may also represent the best source of potential resource leveling, as some scheduling software promotion seems
support and hence the best opportunity to establish a perception to suggest. Nor is it sufficient just to include the many other
of project success, if their opinion is mobilized effectively. If the administrative tasks required of the project manager as leader of
project is sufficiently large or visible, a separate program of effort the project team.
may be assigned to a specific group as a special public relations (PR)
effort.
Either way, the trick is to persuade the various players that
what they want is the same as the project's objectives, or else to Positive Feed Forward
modify the project's objectives accordingly. The goal is to establish
such a congruence through risk management. ;(//////////.////////////1-

F. The Means and Value of Exercising Positive Influence

~ ~
P~ed ~ ~
What are the hallmarks of a successful PR program? Here is
a top-ten check list: 5

• Quality information about the benefits of the project

• Participation in those decisions which have some degree of
flexibility, or constitute viable alternatives, and which may
result in enhanced project value Public Feedback
• Care and concern genuinely expressed for the project's stake-
holders
• Information requirements anticipated and provided ahead of
time Figure VIll.3. Managing the Environment: Public Relations Concept
R.M. Wideman. Managing the Project Environment.
• Timely response to other information requests Dimensions of Project Management. Springer-Verlag. New York, 1990, p63.

VIII-6 VIII-7
 Risk Management
Chapter VIII Managing the Risks of the Project's
Environment
Today, to a remarkable extent, the success of a project depends
on the ability of the project manager and his or her team to
establish a genuine and positive influence over the attitudes of the
stakeholders.
A favorable perception means a successful reception!

Chapter IX Dealing with Risks in Contracts

A. Contract Strategy Considerations

Selection of an appropriate procurement strategy will depend
upon the type of project, its particular emphasis in terms of scope,
quality, time and cost, and the degree of uncertainty associated
with each. Careful consideration of these aspects should lead to
the right choice of organizational structure, allocation of respon-
sibility, and means of procurement. If the project is to be realized
by internal resources, then clny commitments will be less formal
since they are not "at arms length" in a strictly legal sense even
though they may become part of an employment contract. HoW-
ever, any risks arising out of uncertainty under agreements inter-
nal to the organization rest with the organization, so the issue is
not "contractual" but rather one of internal policies and proce-
dures.
Whenever any work is to be contracted for outside the orga-
nization then a suitable contract needs to be formulated in some
detail. The manner of its development, tendering or negotiation
and award procedures, are the subject of the PMI Handbook on
Contract/Procurement. However, a range of types of contract is
possible in which the degree of associated risk is shared differently
between the parties. The choice of which type of contract is most
suited to the project in question is very much the subject of project
risk management. The selection of the right form of contract
requires:

• The identification of specific risks,

• Determination of how they should be shared between the
parties, and
• The insertion of clear legal language in the contract documents
to put it into effect.

1. Adapted from J. Lindheim, Distress Signals, Management Today, BIM, London, April 1989, The most challenging of these tasks is the finding of a cost-ef-
p105. fective and equitable degree of risk allocation. Standard contract
2. Galbraith, 1977. (or purchase order) documents prepared by various levels of
3. R.M. Wideman, Good Public Relations: An Essential Part of Successful Project Manage- government, organizations which undertake a lot of procurement,
ment, PMI Seminar/Symposium Proceedings, Denver, Colorado, 1985. or standard model documents prepared for various industry sec-
4. Adapted from Asian Development Bank, Analyzing the Project Environment, 13th ADB tors, such as construction, are typically used. Specific allocations
Regional Seminar MS, Manila, Philippines, 1987. of risk are intrinsic to such standard forms, but the principles
5. D.M. Connor, abstracted from promotional literature, Connor Development Services, behind the allocations are rarely stated.1 Such intrinsic allocation
Victoria, B.C., 1989. of risk mayor may not be appropriate to the project.

VIII-8 IX-1
Chapter IX Dealing with Risks in Contracts Risk Management

B. Suggested Risk Sharing Principles C. Types of Contract

Various authors have sought to identify principles which The term contract has been defined in various ways by various
should ;,ovem the allocation of risk amongst the parties to a authorities. Also, the law of contract depends on the jurisdiction,
project. Recommendations are suggested by the answers to these so that the essential attributes of a valid contract may vary. How-
questions: ever, for project purposes, two requirements appear to be immu-
table-in return for a legal act, there shall be legal "consideration."
• Which party is the source of the particular risk and hence best
It is the consideration, or form of payment mechanism, which has
able to control the events that may lead to it happening in the
led to a variety of different contracts.
first place? These different types of contract range from fixed-price-
• Which party can best manage the risk, if it occurs? lump-sum for the identified work, to fully cost-reimbursable.
• Is it or is it not preferable for the client to retain an involvement While the payment mechanism may be a reflection of the current
in the management of the risk in question? practice in a particular industry, it is also often a reflection of how
• If it cannot be controlled, which party can or should carry the much is known beforehand of the work to be accomplished. Work
risk? that is fully described, can proceed without interruption and can
• Will the cost incurred, or premium charged, by the recipient of therefore be scheduled and estimated, is appropriate to a fixed
the risk be reasonable and cost-effective? price. Work that is essentially undefined and/ or cannot be sched-
• Will the recipient be capable of sustaining the consequences of uled is obviously highly uncertain, and therefore risky, and in fact
the risk, if it occurs? is unlikely to proceed except on some form of cost reimbursable
• Or will it lead to the possibility of other risks of a different basis. Figure IX.l shows a typical relationship between different
nature being transferred back again, e.g., slow down or types of contract and the allocation of risk.
collapse of the project effort through demoralization or In other words, the payment mechanism is a reflection of the
bankruptcy, etc.? degree of uncertainty, i.e., risk. So it transpires that one of the most
If at the time of entering into a contract the distribution of risk Significant differences between the various forms of contract is the
is not clearly understood, or is patently unfair, such as one party way in which risks are handled and paid for, ranging from those
being the cause of risks which are then sustained by the other which are price-based to those which are cost-based.
party, then disputes are almost inevitable. The adoption of system- In price-based contracts (i.e., lump sum, and, to a slightly
atic project risk identification and analysis may consequently lesser extent, unit price contracts where the quantities of individ-
result in departing from the standard contract conditions in par- ual units are expected to vary), payment is deemed to cover all
ticular circumstances, to the overall benefit of the project. costs, overheads and profit, wherein the contractor includes all
necessary contingencies for risks specified and/ or inferred.
Cost-based contracts are at the other end of the scale. Here,
all costs actually incurred in the performance of the contract are
SCOPE OF WORK very little partial complete reimbursed and, in addition, a fee is paid to cover profit and any
INFORMATION
associated costs and overheads which are not defined as reimburs-
UNCERTAINTY high moderate low
able. It follows from this arrangement that virtually all risks are
paid for by the client, unless specified otherwise and covered by
the agreed upon fee.
DEGREE OF high medium low
RISK Almost as a corollary to the allocation of risk between these
two extremes is the degree to which the owner or client has the
SUGGESTED opportunity to get involved in the management and organization
RISK of the work and to make changes. In the former, management and
ALLOCATION
organization of the work must be in the hands of the contractor
with quite rigid procedures for making changes. In the latter, there
CONTRACT
TYPES
CPPF CPIF CPFF FPPI FFP can be a high degree of flexibility.
At first glance, it might be supposed that the cost-reimburs-
CPPF - Cost Plus Percentage Fee FPPI - Fixed Price Plus Incentive able approach is the ideal form of contract. Unfortunately, it is
CPIF - Cost Plus Incentive Fee FFP - Firm Fixed Price the subject of very detailed and accurate cost and progress
CPFF - Cost Plus Fixed Fee
record keeping, which even then may be the subject of indepen-
dent audit and dispute. Perhaps more important is the lack of
incentive to control cost and schedule by those engaged under
Figure IX.t. Contract 1YPe vs. Risk Allocation the contract.

IX-2 IX-3
Chapter IX Dealing with Risks in Contracts Risk Management

This has given rise to a whole range of cost-plus-incentive types Table IX.1. Risk Implications of Different Types of Contract (from Client's perspective)
of contract. The range of possibilities tend to be a function of the
imagination of the respective contract negotiators and seem to be
almost endless. In any case, this is the subject of Contract/Procure- Type of Contract
ment Management. Suffice it to repeat here that the particular Issue Lum Sum Unit Price Tar et Cost Cost Reimbursable
form of contract adopted will be a reflection of the degree of
uncertainty, and how the risks are to be allocated and paid for. Financial Different but Different and in Considerable Both based on
objectives reasonably potential conflict harmony. actual cost
of client and independent Reduction of but in potential
D. Different Contract Risk Implications contractor actual cost is conflict
Figure IX.2 shows probability curve distributions for three a common
projects all with the same expected value. However, the probabil- objective provided
ity of project A being completed for this value is the highest cost remains
within the
compared to projects Band C because it has the best definition of incentive region
scope of work. The figure also suggests the type of contract
appropriate to the range of uncertainty.
Table IX.l shows the impact of different issues on the different Contractor's Excluded if Usually excluded Contractor Contractor may
types of contract.3 It also shows how risk may be distributed or involvement competitive price encouraged to be appointed
in design based on full contribute ideas for design input
handled in each case. for reducing
design and prior to execution
specifications cost
E. More Than One Contract
In many project situations, more than a single implementa-
tion contract is involved. In program management, for example, Client Excluded Virtually Possible through Should be active
there will be a series of projects, running either consecutively or involvement in excluded joint planning involvement
management
concurrently which will no doubt involve separate contracts. Or of execution
within a project, particularly one which is complex, large, and/ or

Claims Very difficult, Difficult, only Potentially easy, Unnecessary

resolution no basis for limited basis for based on except for fee
$$ evaluation $$ evaluation actual costs. adjustment.
Project A Contract needs Usually
Well defined scope and work careful drafting relatively easy
HIGH content. High probability of
achieving realistic cost
estimate at 100% Forecast final Known, except Uncertain, Uncertain. Target Unknown
Project B cost at time for unknown depending on cost usually
Fairly well defined scope of bid claims and quantity variations increased by
PROBABILITY MEDIUM and work content. Fair changes and unknown changes, but
OF probability of achieving claims and effective joint
OCCURRENCE 100% cost estimate changes management and
efficient working
Project C can reduce final
LOW Poorly defined scope
and content. Low
cost below an
probability of 100% original realistic
cost estimate budget

80% 90% 95% 100% 110% 120% 140% Payment for Depending on Depending on Payment of Payment of
COST ESTIMATE VALUE cost of risk contract terms, contract terms, actual cost of actual costs
events undisclosed undisclosed dealing with
Suggested types of IL +/- 15%:- FFP J I contingency,
if any, in
contingency,
if any, in
risks as they
occur, and
contract for various
spreads
+/- 25%:- CPFF -1 contractor's bid. contractor's bid. target adjusted
L...-_ _ _ _ _ +/- 50%;- CPIF
Otherwise by Otherwise by accordingly
> 50%:- CPPF claim and claim and
negotiation negotiation
Figure IX.2. Scope Definition - Risk - Contract Selection

IX-4 IX-5
Chapter IX Dealing with Risks in Contracts Risk Management

organized on a specialty or trade basis, there may be numerous • Clear definitions of risk and their assignment
separate service agreements and contracts to be coordinated. • Positive incentives linked to risk assignment
The work involved in the different phases and stages of the • Flexibility for different assignment of different risks between
project may also be the subject of different contracts or agree- parties
ments. For example, in the project development phase, social, • Strong emphasis on good management practices designed to
environmental, market and technical studies may be procured avoid unnecessary risks
from different specialists. Even a separate risk analysis study may
be commissioned for a large or critical project. In subsequent Handling project risk in the way described may require a
stages detailed specification, design and supervision or quality departure from sometimes traditional forms of contract. However,
control and expediting may be the subject of separate specialized if the effect is to avoid or reduce the number of contract disputes,
packages, and so on. as well as the amounts of money under dispute, then the respec-
The greater the number of separate packages under separate tive levels of management will have more time to spend on the
and discrete responsibilities, the greater the amount of coordina- real issue-project success.
tion required and the greater the resulting risk. Consequently,
early in the development of the project the project sponsor must
develop a suitable contract strategy and establish an organiza-
tional structure consistent with the intended project objectives.
The organizational structure selected must reflect the proper di-
vision of responsibility for these various components in terms. of
scope, quality, time and cost, including any delegation of project
management responsibility. The strategy must recognize the need
for management coordination and integration of the various con-
tracts over time by making corresponding provisions in each of
the contracts.
There are many different ways of structuring a project's pro-
curement to suit differing objectives and circumstances. Different
structures assign risk in different ways. Perhaps the most signifi-
cant issue for project risk management is the overall distribution
of responsibility for project risk as reflected by:
• The ways in which management responSibility is structured,
• How it is delegated, and
• How it is incorporated into the various contracts.
Responsibility for the costs of risk events for different types
of typical standard contract is also compared in Table IX.l.
F. A Question of Attitudes
Many descriptions of successful projects (e.g. Showcase Pro-
jects reported in the PM NETwork) reflect on the healthy coopera-
tive team spirit enjoyed on the project. So it is not necessarily the
project organizational structure and forms of contract which de-
termine whether or not project objectives are successfully 1. R.W. Hayes et aI, Risk Management in Engineering Construction, Special SERC Report
achieved, but rather the attitudes of the parties involved. How- by the Project Management Group, UMIST, Thomas Telford Ltd., London, Decem-
ever, an effective structure and good contract wording can go a ber 1986.
long way to establish good relations and avoid the frustrations 2. Ibid., p26. Other authors include D.B. Ashley, C.E. Porter, N.M.L. Bames, J.G. Perry and
which otherwise undermine initial enthusiasm and good inten- P.A. Thompson, p30. See also Contract Risk Allocation and Cost Effectiveness, CII
tions. Publication 5-3, Austin, Texas, November 1988.
Obviously, this includes an equitable distribution of risk, and 3. After R.W. Hayes et al, Risk Management in Engineering Construction, Special SERC
the means for handling it in the event that it arises. Suggested Report by the Project Management Group, UMIST, Thomas Telford Ltd., London,
characteristics of good contract conditions in respect of risk in- December 1986, p29.
clude:4 4. Ibid., p28.

IX-6 IX-7
 Risk Management

Chapter X Summary/Conclusions
A. Risk Management - The Present
Projects are launched to take advantage of opportunities, but
opportunities are associated with uncertainties which have risks
attached. For the project to be viable, the expected value resulting
from a favorable probability of gain must be higher than the
consequences and probability of loss. Therefore, the riske; associ-
ated with a project must receive careful examination in the context
of the organization's willingness or aversion to taking risks. This
is the domain of Project Risk Management, which forms a vital
part of Project Management.
With careful planning and good management some inherent
risks in the project management process can be substantially
reduced or virtually eliminated. Steps towards this goal include:

• Thorough and realistic appraisal of the project concept, and

hence scope definition, in the concept phase
• Observing good project management practices in the project
planning and development phase, including realistic estimat-
ing of time and cost for defined scope and quality
• Examining the uncertainty and risk inherent in the project, and
identifying ways of mitigation, and/or making due contin-
gency allowances where the scope of work is uncertain
• Preparing contingent action pl,ans and work-arounds
• Developing sound procurement strategies designed to opti-
mize performance, supported by an appropriate organiza-
tional structure and responsibility distribution
• Assigning specific responsibility for risk in a way that moti-
vates by recognizing that risk and reward go together
• Examining contract documents for risk identification, general
clarity and potential sources of misunderstanding
• Seeking innovative but practical solutions to offset potential
areas of risk

While many of the details described in the foregoing chapters

of this handbook are applicable to large complex projects, the
principles involved are just as applicable to any size of project in
any field of endeavor. Since there is no point in taking any risk
that has negative expected value, the principles of risk manage-
ment should be an established part of early project management
activities on all prpjects-whether complex or simple, large or
small.

X-1
Chapter X Summary/Conclusions
Appendix A

B. It's the Attitude That Counts

Successful projects such as Showcase Projects reported in the
PM NETwork emphasize the benefits of a healthy cooperative
project team spirit and constructive attitude. Appropriate pro-
curement strategies, project organizational structure, responsibil-
ity distribution and corresponding forms of contract should all be
designed to support this positive attitude towards successfully
achieving project objectives. Effective and equitable handling of
project risks can go a long way towards establishing such good Appendix A
relations and avoiding the frustrations which otherwise under-
mine initial enthusiasm and good intentions.
C. Risk Management - The Future? Typical Project Risks
Because risk has a natural complexity in its variety, scenario
combination possibilities and variation in probability impacts
unique to each project, there are some ideal opportunities for 1. How Does the Project Manager Know When There is a Project Risk? 1
computer applications. Obvious applications include rapid access Some of the most common general project risk situations
to established databases, data storage, repetitive computations encountered:
ranging from simple to complex, and sensitivity or "what-if'
analyses. • The project sponsor (and the project manager) do not recognize
However, effective project risk management is also subject to that every project is an exercise in risk.
practical experience and sound judgments. Artificial intelligence • This project is very different from the last one.
(An, expert systems (ES), and, more recently, human-computer • There is a feeling of uneasiness.
cooperative systems (HCCS) are being developed to incorporate • When the project is in its earliest phase, project risk and oppor-
these added dimensions. The intent is to enhance the project tunity are highest (but the amount-at-stake is lowest).
manager's risk management ability to arrive at better solutions • The project scope, objectives and deliverables are not clearly
than would have been arrived at without such support systems, defined or understood.
e.g., by reducing the recurrence of similar risks. • A large number of alternatives are perceived as possible.
The ultimate potential of AI and ES (and HCCS) is in their • Some or all technical data is lacking.
ability to augment the program manager's reasoning power. But • The technical process (and design) are not mature.
to do this a better understanding of cognition, knowledge repre- • Standards for performance are unrealistic (the best there is for
sentation, information usa.pe, effective decision making and risk everything) or are absent.
assessment is still needed. • Costs, schedules and performance are not expressed in ranges.
• The future timing of activities and events are vague.
• Design lacks production engineering input.
• Prototype of a key element is missing.
• There is a higher than usual R&D component.
• Some or all environmental permits are outstanding.
• Other similar projects have been delayed or cancelled.
A wide variation in bids are received.
• Some key subsystems and/or materials are sole source.
• No appropriate contingency plans have been developed.
• The project team relies entirely on the contingency allowance.
• Someone starts "hedging their bets'"
2. Specific Project Risks
The following detailed listings provide convenient groupings
of project risks generally classified according to source. The degree
1. M.D. Martin et aI, Critical Issues in the Application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to
of predictability and ability to manage appropriate response var-
Acquisition Management, Forum on Artificial Intelligence in Management, Dayton,
ies but, in any case, is independent of the risk event status (prob-
Ohio, 1988.
ability and amount at stake).

X-2 A-1
Typical Project Risks Appendix A

External Unpredictable (and uncontrollable) Internal, Non·Technlcal (but generally controllable)

a. Regulatory, i.e., unanticipated government intervention in: a. Management, i.e., difficulties due to:
· supply of raw materials • insincerity/lack of integrity
· environmental issues • incapacity
· design standards • inadequacies
· production standards • loss of control
· site location • incompatibility of goals
· product or service sales or export • senior staff changes
· pricing inappropriate or lack of organizational structure
· special requirements • lack of appropriate policies and procedures
b. Natural Hazards, i.e., as a result of natural elements: • inadequate planning
• location • unrealistic scheduling
• storm • lack of coordination
· flood • inadequate project management
· earthquake b. Schedule, i.e., delays and time overrun due to:
c. Postulated Events, Le., as a result of deliberate intent: • delays due to management difficulties above
· vandalism • regulatory approvals
• sabotage • labor shortages
d. Indirect Effects, i.e., occurring as a result of the project: • labor productivity
• environmental • labor stoppages
• social • material shortages
e. Completion, Le., failure to complete the project on account of • late deliveries
one of the following: • unforeseen site conditions
• failure of the supporting infrastructure as a result of others • sponsor / user scope changes
• failure of deSign, execution or supply contracts due to bank- • accident or sabotage
ruptcy or receivership, etc. • start-up, turn-over or launch difficulties
• failure to provide financial support to the end of the project • lack of access
• inappropriate project concept or configuration c. Cost, i.e., overruns due to:
• political unrest • any of the schedule delays listed above
• lack of final acceptance • inappropriate procurement strategy
• pay negotiations
External Predictable (but uncontrollable) • management and/ or workforce inexperience
Changes in the following are predictable, but the extent and • lack of understanding how parts fit together
direction is uncertain. • contractor claims
under-estimating
a.MarketRisks • any of the external factors listed previously
• availability of raw materials d. Cash Flow
• cost of raw materials • squeezing
• demand, including customer/user rejection • interruption
· economics • insolvency
· competition e. Loss of Potential, Le., removal of:
end value in the market benefit
• willingness of buyers to honor purchase agreements • profit
b. Operational (i.e., after project completion)
• maintenance needs Technical (and generally controllable)
• fitness for purpose a. Changes in Technology
• safety • rendering parts of the project obsolete
c. Environmental Impacts • parts discontinued
d. Social Impacts • introduced by competitors, rendering the project obsolete,
e. Currency Changes uncompetitive, or unacceptable
f. Inflation • complexity introduced as a result of new technology
g. Taxation

A-2 A-3
 Appendix B
Typical Project Risks

b. Performance
• quality
• rate of production
• reliability
c. Risks Specific to Project's Technology
• in creating the entity or product
• in operating or marketing it
d. Design
Appendix B
• inadequate data
• designer / detailer inexperience
• design inadequacies
detail, precision and suitability of the specification
Impact Analysis Methodology
• likelihood of changes during the course of the project This appendix describes a risk analysis methodologyl which
• design vs. execution methods can be applied to the general situation of managing a project under
e. Sheer size or complexity of project varying degrees of uncertainty. A risk of the complexity discussed
here has generally been applied only to very large programs or
Legal (generally controllable) projects, such as utility or infrastructure construction. The meth-
Difficulties arising from any of the following: odology is described for purposes of illustration.
a. Licences This type of risk evaluation should typically be carried out
b. Patent Rights very early in the project life cycle. In fact, it should be carried out
c. Contractual i.e., difficulties due to: when real information is most lacking, precisely because it is at
• misinterpretation this time that a risk analysis can be of most use to the project team
• misunderstanding in gaining an understanding of the project itself.
• inappropriate contracting strategy / contract type However, in order to achieve these benefits, the risk manage-
• failure ment process should be part of the central project management
d. Outsider Suit planning, not merely an optional adjunct. The benefits will be great-
e. Insider Suit est when the project team perceives risk management as a means to
f. Force Majeure project ends, and not an end in itself. The depth of the process can
be tailored to suit the size, nature and drcurnstances of the project.
The methodology which follows is not confined to front-end
planning. It can be used equally well for more detailed analyses
during subsequent project phases. In fact, the risk framework or
models developed in the process can form a valuable baseline for
subsequent detailed studies in later stages of the project. Although
like most other project management functions the process of risk
analysis is iterative, for simplicity it is described as a set of six tasks
in the following typical sequence:

1. Problem Structuring - confirming the specific objectives of the

study, and developing a framework for the analysis.
2. Risk Identification - identifying a comprehensive set of risk
items associated with project activities incorporating judg-
ments from many sources, initial screening of risk events as to
potential risk status, and developing preliminary risk models.
3. Risk Quantification - estimating the probability of risk events
and the impacts on variables of concern such as performance,
delivery, cost, reliability and impact on the project environment.
4. Risk Modeling - modeling the combined effects of risks within
and between activities, discussing results leading to base plan
1. After D.T. Hulett, PMP Certification Workshop - Risk Management, PMI Orange County adjustments for the project as appropriate, and re-running.
Chapter, 1991, p22.

B-1
A-4
 Appendix 8
Impact Analysis Methodology

Associated with each scenario will be measures such as econom-

5. Overall Economic Modeling - producing overall measures of
ics, delivery and performance impacts. Summarizing the tree will
variability in project economics or effectiveness as a result of
produce overall distributions of project cost, economic return, etc.
incorporating the impacts of all risks considered.
The point of structuring the analysis of risks in this way is
6. Project Risk Report - presenting the findings and recommen-
to enable discussion to focus on specific uncertainties and risks
dations. in some level of detail, and provide the basis for establishing
the dependency links between the various project activities. It
These steps are more particularly described below.
also sets the stage for the subsequent development of schedule
network diagrams for the specific analysis of schedule related
1. Problem Structuring risks.
Perhaps the most important steps in the process, as with any
study, is to obtain agreement on the objective and a study plan for
its achievement. For example, the objective might simply be stated 2. Risk Identification and Screening
Following the breakdown of the project by activity, the next
as To identify responses appropriate to project risks which may impact
step is to identify risks associated with each, in order to produce
project scope, quality, time and/or cost.
The resulting study plan would then involve steps, firstly, to a comprehensive set of uncertainties and risks. The objective is to
capture the base case project scope statement in terms of project ensure that all such risks have been considered and discussed,
configuration, with potential project alternatives. Secondly, initia- employing judgments from as many relevant sources as possible.
tives would be designed to force discussion of project uncertain- In the earliest stages of the project, concern is primarily with
ties and risks amongst members of the project team to improve fundamental uncertainties, those which could force a change in
the understanding of the project. Thirdly, would be the tasks project scope, or otherwise could be particularly damaging to the
involved in the structuring of information and analyses required success of the project.
At this stage, the classic ''brain-storming'' approach, concurrent
to support the decision making for the project implementation
with similar project planning sessions, could be entirely appropriate.
plan. However, a more in-depth examination of the compounding ef-
The information itself will consist of two types: objective and
fects of seemingly inSignificant risks, such as a series of minor
subjective. The objective information may be based on projecting
delays, can also be very damaging. This is especially true when
today's understanding and circumstances, be derived from a
the project is aimed for a particular "window of opportunity."
similar project, be the result of statistical inference, and may lead
Next, all the risks should be coarsely screened to establish
to a large number of trails. The subjective information may have
to be based on a similar project but different assumptions, differ- those which are:
ent pr01ects, limited observations, expert opinion, or mere
• Relevant to the project
guesses
Three types of information structuring could be contem- • Within project responsibility for project management purposes
plated. The first is the ordering of tasks within the study itself to Not otherwise covered by normal project insurance
ensure an effective progression, but also to understand the inter- • Predictable (but uncertain)
dependencies between tasks to ensure the necessary cross-flow of • More than of minor significance
information. This breakdown typically follows the traditional This should bring the total within manageable proportions.
areas of professional or technical expertise associated with the Where several risks have broad implications, they may be conve-
project domain. niently grouped by source as indicated in Appendix A, and further
The second structuring is the development of a well-defined, subdivided into discrete events (Le., single worst cases) and time-
non-overlapping work breakdown of activities for the implemen- scaled events. Care should be exercised to ensure that a risk item
tation of the project. Generally these will follow the first structure, judged minor in one case is not major in another.
but will necessarily contain a greater level of detail, and will Once the risks have been assembled and assessed in this way,
include design philosophies, procurement strategies and timing, consideration should be given to joint effects and how these can
as well as actual production activities. be:,t b.e modeled. The level of detail will depend on the study
The third structuring relates to risk modeling such as a prob- obJectIves. For example, for the analysis of safety, where complex
ability / decision tree. This device provides the flexibility for han- combinations of low probability risk events and response failures
dling different levels of complexity of risk events, including result in accidents, a detailed probability tree which allows
situations requiring complex conditional probability treatment. conditional probability specification may be necessary. However,
For each issue considered, the underlying framework for the anal- for broader study aspects, risks can usually be treated as dependent
ysis is a probability tree where each branch represents some combi- ?r in~ependent at some percentage level. This is important to
nation of potential scenarios and their respective probabilities. ldentify, before considering quantification.

8-3
8-2
Impact Analysis Methodology Appendix B

3. Risk Quantification
The risks identified in the previous task must now be quan-
tified in terms of degree of uncertainty in a spectrum of cer-
tainty frisk/uncertainty (Le., probability of occurrence) and
magnitude of impact (i.e., on project objectives of scope, quality,
time and cost). For this purpose, it is necessary to describe the risk

t
together with its primary impact scenario, followed by any con-
sequential impacts. Figure B.1 shows a conceptual relationship
between risk probabilities, damage scenarios and consequences.
1. A PROBABILITY LEVEL IS
When estimating impacts, however, it is often necessary to have IDENTIFIED FOR EACH RISK
a set of response decision rules in order to arrive at consistent PROBABILITY EVENT MAGNITUDE
quantification. This will depend very much on the orientation of the OFA
particular project, i.e., whether it is primarily scope, quality, time or PARTICULAR
cost driven. For example, if a delay is experienced in initiating project RISK
MAGNITUDE
realization due to financing delays, will the response be to accept the
delay in the interests of quality and cost? Or will steps be taken to
accelerate the work by increasing manpower (with the possibility of
reduced productivity) in the interests of time? INCREASING MAGNITUDE
OF RISK EVENT
Such decision rules should be a fundamental part of the basic
risk management plan for the project.
More esoteric considerations cover the choice of methods to
describe and combine risks for purposes of computation according
to standard probability theory. The assumption that all·random
variables can be described by pr~elected distributions, such as
normal distribution, or that all distributions are independent may
greatly facilitate calculation, but the results are most likely unreliable.
t
PROBABILITY
OF DAMAGE
2. IF A RISK EVENT OCCURS. IT CAN
CAUSE A NUMBER OF POSSIBLE
DAMAGE SCENARIOS. EACH OF
WHICH HAS A PARTICULAR
PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE.
THUS. IF AN EVENT A OCCURS.
THE PROBABILITY THAT IT WILL
LEVEL IF CAUSE MAJOR DAMAGE
Lack of consideration of the positive dependence that often exists THE RISK APPEARS IN THE SHADED AREA
between variables, such as cost and time, may result in serious IS REALIZED SHOWN
underestimation. NONE
Perhaps the most contentious aspect of risk analysis is the LIGHT MAJOR
estimation of probability distribution, due to the scarcity of rele-
vant data. Where available, it may have to be modified to suit the
project in question. Where not available, reliance must be placed
•
INCREASING DAMAGE LEVEL

t
on totally subjective estimation based on expert opinions and
judgments from personal and/ or other past experiences (see Del-
phi Method, Appendix C). 3. A RANGE OF CRITERION
Where insurable risks are concerned, there is a large body of PROBABILITY VALUES IS ASSIGNED FOR
existing knowledge and extensive statistical data on frequency OF CRITERION EACH DAMAGE LEVEL
and size of incidents ranging from natural disasters to the man- VALUE IF A
PARTICULAR
controlled perils. These data should not be overlooked. Such
DAMAGE LEVEL
information is typically available through insurance companies IS REALIZED
and specialists in risk management. MIN MODE MAX

4. Risk Combination and Modeling

Once the uncertainties and risks have been quantified within
•
INCREASING CRITERION VALUES

each activity of concern, the joint impact of these risks must be

considered. Three levels of modeling may need to be examined,
namely:
a. The joint impact of a small number of risks for detailed analysis
within an activity, Figure B.I. Conceptual Relationship Between Risks, Damage Scenarios and Consequences
After A.B. Cammaert c. 1986
b. The joint effects of all risks within an activity, and

8-4 8-5
Impact Analysis Methodology Appendix B

c. The overall impact of risks from a set of, or all, activities. Project Direct Costs $ xxx
Project Indirects $ xx
Interest & other charges $ xx
At each step it is important to review and, if necessary, recycle etc., etc.
the results, preferably with the persons responsible within the Expected Value of Risks··
project team. The purpose is to make team members aware of the TOTAL PROJECT COST
uncertainties in the estimates so that inconsistencies and
weaknesses in the overall project plan can either be corrected early, •• Note that this may be a more comprehensive and convincing way of
expressing an appropriate "contingency" allowance for the project.
or more appropriate courses of action adopted.
As can be seen, these areas of risk quantification and risk A conceptual risk analysis computer program, structured for
modeling can become highly sophisticated. They then become the conducting the type of risk analysis described above, is shown in
purview of highly specialized expertise and experience in the
Figure B.2.
particular area of project application.
However, in simpler terms, a criterion value, ranking, or
status for each risk event (or set of combined events) may be
established by the following relationship:
INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT
Risk Event Status = Risk Probability x Amount at Stake

where probability3 and the amount-at-stake (i.e., severity) are DATA

PRINT OUT
given by: INTERACTIVE
REPORTS
MAIN
Probability = FrequenQl of relevant events RISK PROCESSING
Total number of possible events SPECIFICATION
OPTIONS
Amount at Stake = cost of investment loss +
least cost to restore status quo

5. Overall Evaluation
The third level of risk modeling considers the impacts of all
risks combined, usually translated into project economics as a
common basis. This approach is important since the economic SCENARIO BY RISKS
return for a project is determined from the scenarios of project SPECIFICATION
costs, schedules, production, political considerations, and so on,
over the whole life of the entity. Nevertheless, considerations of
economics alone will not deal with such dimensions as safety and ACROSS RISKS
environmental impacts. Depending on the project, these may very
well require independent presentation.

6. Project Risk Report

The resulting report should be prepared as a baseline sum-
marizing the findings, changes and/or recommendations, in a
form that can be used for subsequent risk response planning,
tracking and program updating. Each activity and associated risk
events should be clearly described and numbered for reference, Figure Bol. Simplified Risk Analysis Program Structure
After A.B. Cammaert c. 1986
along with the impact scenarios envisaged.
Some form of tabulation of the risks considered and their
comparative values showing status ranking will be helpful, as 1. Adapted from notes by Dr. A.B. Cammaert, while Manager, Arctic and Off-shore Services,
well as examples of the major decision trees, and any schedule risk Acres International Limited, Toronto.
networks developed. 2. D.T. Hulett, PMP Certification Workshop - Risk Management, PMI Orange County
In its simplest form, the expected total value of risks on the Chapter, 1991, p3.
project might be presented as a ''bottom line" to the project costs 3. J.R. Adams, M. D. Martin, A Pract~cal Approach to the Assessment of Project Uncertainty,
as follows: PM! Seminar/Symposium Proceedings, Toronto, 1982, p N-F.3.

8-6 8-7
 Appendix C

Appendix C

Other Risk Analysis Techniques

Some techniques which can be used to support risk analysis
follow. Practical application may be limited to certain types or size
of project. Perhaps more important is management's attitude
towards risk analysis itself, especially as it tends to be governed
more by their understanding of the mathematics involved in the
techniques and, consequently, in their confidence in the results
produced.
1. Brainstorming
This technique is used extensively in formative project plan-
ning, and can also be used to advantage to identify and postulate
risk scenarios for a particular project. It is a simple but effective
attempt to help people think creatively in a group setting without
feeling inhibited or being criticized by others.
A committee is assembled, whose members have as relevant
and broad a knowledge of the circumstances of the situation as
possible. The rules are that each member must try to build on the
ideas offered by preceding comments. No criticism or disapprov-
ing verbal or nonverbal behaviors are allowed. The leader or
facilitator does not require any special expertise, but must enforce
the rules and record the results. The intent is to encourage as many
ideas as possible, which may in turn trigger the ideas of others.
In assembling the ideas, any evaluation is strictly reserved for
later study. Thus, ideas are encouraged to flow as freely as possi-
ble, however imaginative, innovative or wild they may appear.
While many suggestions may subsequently be rejected, the
greater the number to start with, the more likely that a useful
number will be retained, and so provide more comprehensive
coverage.
The technique is improved by the variety in the participants'
backgrounds and is very helpful in project team building. It is very
effective in finding creative solutions to potential problems.
2. Sensitivity Analysis
Sensitivity analysis1 seeks to place a value on the effect of
change of a single variable within a project by analyzing that effect
on the project plan. It is the simplest form of risk analysis. Uncer-
taintyand risk are reflected by defining a likely range of variation

C-1
Other Risk Analysis Techniques Appendix C

for each component of the original base case estimate. In practice A scenario is established and each panelist is requested to
such an analysis is only done for those variables which have a high reply to a questionnaire. The responses, together with opinions
impact on cost, time or economic return, and to which the project and justifications, are evaluated and statistical feedback is fur-
will be most sensitive. nished to each panel member in the next iteration. The process is
The effect of change of each of these variables on the final cost continued until group responses converge to a specific solution.
or time criteria is then assessed in turn across the assumed ranges. Should the responses diverge, the facilitator needs to review the
If several variables are changed, the most sensitive or critical wording of the questionnaire, the feedback, or the experience of
variables can be compared graphically in a sensitivity diagram. the panelists to determine if there is a problem which needs to be
Some of the advantages pf sensitivity analysis include im- corrected.
pressing management that there is a range of possible outcomes, Social scientists are sometimes critical of the method on the
decision making is more realistic, though perhaps more complex, grounds that the method has no predictive validity, and that the
and the relative importance of each variable examined is readily use of "experts" leads to manipulation of group suggestion rather
apparent. Some weaknesses are that variables are treated individ- than consensus.
ually, limiting the extent to which combinations of variables can
be assessed, and a sensitivity diagram gives no indication of 5. Monte Carlo
anticipated probability of occurrence. The Monte Carlo Method,4 simulation by means of random
numbers, provides a powerful yet simple method of incorporat-
3. Probability Analysis ing probabilistic data. The basic steps are:
Probability analysis 2 overcomes the limitations of sensitiv-
ity analysis by specifying a probability distribution for each 1. Assess the range for the variables being considered and deter-
variable, and then considering situations where any or all of mine the probability distribution most suited to each.
these variables can be changed at the same time. However, since 2. For each variable within its specific range, select a value
every project is unique, defining the probability of occurrence randomly chosen, taking account of the probability distribu-
of any specific variable may be quite difficult, particularly as tion for the occurrence of the variable. This may be achieved
political or commercial environments can change quite rapidly. by generating the cumulative frequency curve for the variable
Typically, a distribution profile is allocated to the range which and choosing a value from a random number table.
has been defined for the variable, and, in the absence of statis- 3. Run a deterministic analysis using the combination of values
tical data, simple triangular, trapezOidal or rectangular distri- selected for each one of the variables.
butions may be adopted. 4. Repeat steps 2 and 3 a number of times to obtain the probability
As with sensitivity analysis, the range of variation is subjec- distribution of the result. The number of iterations required
tive, but ranges for many time and cost elements of a project depends on the number of variables and the degree of confi-
estimate should be skewed toward overrun, due to the natural dence required, but typically lies between 100 and 1000.
optimism (or omission) of the estimator. The problem of assessing
how risks can occur in combination is usually handled by a 6. Decision Tree Analysis
sampling approach (such as the Monte Carlo technique below) A feature of project work is that a number of options are
and running the analysis a number of times. The outcome is a typically available in the course of reaching the final results.
range of possible results with their respective probabilities shown Indeed, even before considering the project in any detail or devel-
diagrammatically, such that reviewers can assess their own atti- oping a network analysis for example, the decision maker is faced
tudes and response to the project and its risks. with an array of procurement possibilities and a sequence of
decision choices. The Decision TreeS provides a graphical means
4. Delphi Method of bringing the information together. Figure C.l shows the princi-
The basic concept of the Delphi Method3 is to derive a con- ple applied to the choice between two projects.
sensus using a panel of experts to arrive at a convergent solution An advantage in its application to risk management is that it
to a specific problem. This is particularly useful, for example, in forces consideration of the probability of each outcome. Thus, the
arriving at probability assessments relating to future events where likelihood of failure is quantified and some value is placed on each
the risk impacts are large and critical. The first and vital step is to decision. This form of risk analysis is usually applied to cost and
select a panel of individuals, as participants, who have experience time considerations, both in choosing between different early
in the area at issue. For best results the panel members should not investment decisions, and later in considering major changes with
know each others identity, and the process should be conducted with uncertain outcomes during project implementation. In the latter
each at separate locations. This is to prevent single member influence case, it may be linked to a sensitivity analysis as a means of
and simplistic concurrence. determining the value of a certain decision.

C-2 C-3
Other Risk Analysis Techniques

( 036.')
SUCCESS 030

PROJECT
A
(024)
FAILURE 020
START
(028)
SUCCESS 035 ."

PROJECT
B
(012)
FAILURE 015

Note the change in recommendation if the initial probability ( ) is changed

Figure C.l. Decision Tree for Two Projects Showing Probabilities Assigned
After J.R. Adams and M.D. Martin, A Practical Approach to the Assessment of Project Uncertainty,
PMI Seminar/Symposium, Toronto, 1982, pIV-F.7

The method is well suited to project risk analysis and has been
applied extensively, with additional efforts made to resolve the prob-
lem of interrelated risks.
7. Utility Theory
None of the techniques discussed so far take into account the
attitude towards risk of the decision maker. It may be reasonable
to suppose, for example, that a potential loss of 90 percent would
not be viewed with the same equanimity as, say, a loss of 10
percent. Somewhere in between the attitude will change. How-
ever, at what point may well depend on the attitude of the decision
maker. That is to say, the decision maker may be risk seeking, risk
neutral, or risk averse.
Utility Theory' endeavors to formalize management's atti-
tude towards risk, an approach which is appropriate to Decision
Tree Analysis for the calculation of expected values, and also for 1. J.G. Perry and R. W. Hayes, Risk and its Management in Construction Projects, Proceedings
the assessment of results from sensitivity and probability analy- of the Institute of Civil Engineers, Part 1, 1985, June 1985.
ses. However, in practical project work Utility Theory tends to be 2. Ibid.
viewed as rather theoretical. 3. M.D. Martin and M.B. McCormick, Improving Project Planning Productivity, PM!
Seminar/Symposium, Houston, Texas, 1983, p III E5.
8. Decision Theory 4. J.G. Perry and R. W. Hayes, Risk and its Management in Construction Projects, Proceedings
Decision Theory' is a technique for assisting in reaching of the Institute of Civil Engineers, Part 1, 1985, June 1985.
decisions under uncertainty and risk. All decisions are based to 5. Ibid.
some extent on uncertain forecasts. Given the criteria selected by 6. Ibid.
the decision maker, Decision Theory points to the best possible 7. After J.R. Adams and M.D. Martin, A Practical Approach to the Assessment of Project
course whether or not the forecasts are accurate.

C-4 C-5
 "

Appendix 0

Appendix D
Risk Applied to Schedule and Cost Analysis
Optimistic-Pessimistic Estimating
It is often possible to describe the likelihood of particular
events occurring in such vague terms as quite likely, often, rarely,
etc. However, for project purposes it is typically necessary to
quantify the probability of an event occurring in order to plan an
appropriate response. The use of statistical analysis tools,
whether they result in subjective or objective probabilities, enables
quantification with some degree of confidence.
For example, in order to develop a realistic project schedule
and/ or cost, it is necessary to know the durations and/ or cost of
the various activities involved. When some of those activities are
very uncertain, perhaps because they are unfamiliar, a different
strategy is required. One estimating strategy which is useful in
these circumstances requires making three estimates.
The following approach can be applied to either cost estimat-
ing or to time estimating, but for simplicity, the method will be
d,escribed in the context of scheduling.
The first estimate is an optimistic-corresponding to the
shortest possible time if everything falls neatly into place as
required. The second estimate is the most likely time-one in
which there is a typical balance between things going well and
things going poorly., The third estimate is a pessimistic one-the
time it will take if difficulties are encountered and a lot of things
go wrong. These three estimates can be more technically described
as follows:
Optimistic time estimate (0): A time estimate in which a task can
be completed if everything goes exceptionally well. An estimate
in which the probability of accomplishment is not more than
one-in-one hundred (1 %), the original PERT assumption.
Most likely time estimate (m): The estimate ,of the time required
for an activity which would be expected to occur most often if the
activity could be repeated several times under identical circum-
stances (without any "learning curve" effects).
Pessimistic time estimate (p): An estimate of the longest time a
task might require under the most adverse conditions, barring
"acts of God." An estimate in which the probability of not accomp-
lishing the task is less than 1 %.

0-1
Risk Applied to Schedule and Cost Analysis Appendix D

Note that the most-likely-time is a matter of judgement. It is not Again, the indicated completion of the project is 30 days but
the same as the "expected time." Expected time (te) is a term given that is now called the "expected completion" of the project. There
to a calculated weighted average calculated as follows: is a 50% chance of exceeding that time as well as a 50% chance of
Expected Time (le): An estimated value calculated from the for- completing before that time.
mula te =(0+4m+p)/6, where 0 =optimistic, P =pessimistic and Using a concept from probability theory, the Central Limit
m = most-likely. This relationship is a simplification of the "bell- Theorem, we can combine the uncertainty about the individual
shaped" curve of probability theory, giving recognition to the fact activities into an expression of the uncertainty about the project
that such time estimates generally are not symmetrical. completion time. This requires the calculation of the standard
deviations of each activity using the formula, standard deviation
In arriving at the three judgmental estimates, it is desirable to = (p - 0)/6, per the original PERT concept. Thus, the standard
consult with members of the project team who have relevant deviations for activities A, C, and Fare 2.00 days [(15 - 3)/6] and
experience of each activity in question. It will not only lead to for activities B, E, and G, 0.33 days [(11 - 9) 16]. For activity D it is,
establishing better values, but, as a side benefit, involves members of course, zero.
of the team and thereby builds commitment to the project plan. To get the standard deviation of the completion of the project,
Consider the project plan illustrated below in activity-on- the uncertainty of the activities on the critical path must be com-
node notation with one time estimate for each activity. Conven- bined. Theory requires that the standard deviations be "squared"
tional critical path calculations lead to an indicated completion to obtain the "variances" in order to add them so the variances of
time of 30 days. the activities B, E, and G are 0.111. Adding them gives a variance
of .333 of which the "square root," i.e., the standard deviation, is
0.577 days for project completion. This standard deviation can be
9 9 9
used with the standard normal distribution to make statements·
0~-·~~-·~ about the probability of completing the project by a specific time.
For example, the 95% confidence limits on the normal distribution
is based on plus or minus 1.96 standard deviations. Multiplying
1.96 times .577 days gives 1.13 days from which we can say that
there is a 95% probability of completing the project in between
28.87 days and 31.13 days. If the target completion date is 31 days,
10 10 we can state that the probability of being completed by that date

~-0----·@]
is 96%. Thus, the risk of being late or early can be assessed.
This illustration was designed to emphasize a fallacy of the
original PERT concept. It assumed that the uncertainty of project
Suppose estimates were obtained for these same activities completion was dependent only upon the critical path. In this
using the three time estimate approach and the assumptions in the illustration, it can be seen that the second most critical path has a
original PERT system. The network and estimates might be as duration of 27 days. However, it is composed of activities which
shown below and result in the les as shown. Note that these are far more uncertain. They each have standard deviations of 2
estimates are probably not realistic but are chosen to simplify the days resulting in a standard deviation for the completion of that
illustration and emphasize the a dificiency in conventional PERT. path being 3.46 days. Thus, the 95% confidence limits for the
completion of the project, based on this path, are 20.22 days to
3-9-15 =9 3-9-15 =9 3-9-15 = 9 33.78 days and the probability of project completion in 31 days is
now only 88%. This path has greater potential of causing a delay
0~-t·~1----·~ in project completion than the critical path and therefore poses
greater risk.
A solution to this anomoly exists however, in project manage-
ment software which incorporates a Monte Carlo Simulation ap-
proach to analyzing uncertainty. This approach is identical to the
9-10-11 = 10 above up to the point of calculating the project completion time.
Instead of using the expected times (te), a procedure is used which
takes samples from the range of durations for each activity using
random numbers. Thus, in any given calculation, one activity may
have a performance time near its optimistic, another near its
pessimistic, and another near its most likely, and so forth. The

0-2 0-3
Risk Applied to Schedule and Cost Analysis Appendix D

frequency of selection of times within this range is consistent with developing resulting scenarios. Expected Value (EV) can be used
the probability distribution of durations for each activity. The to adjust the value of the consequences of any given outcome for
resulting completion time from that calculation is then an obser- the probability of its occurence.
vation in the development of the distribution of completion times Assume that our project has an estimated cost of $90,000 and
for the project completion and is a function of the uncertainty of has to be completed in 31 days. In addition, there is a $50,000
every activity in the project. penalty if completion takes longer. How significant is this risk?
This resulting distribution is then a reasonably accurate re- In our schedule example described earlier, based on the most
flection of the uncertainty associated with the completion of the risky path there was an 88% chance of completing the project in
project and can be used effectively in risk analysis of project 31 days or less; therefore, there is a 12% chance that the project
completion times. would not be completed in 31 days. The expected cost is calculated
There have been several variations developed from the orig- as the sum of the products of the value of an outcome times the
inal PERT. One of those, by Moder1, argues that the optimistic and probability that that outcome will occur as follows.
pessimistic time estimates are more likely to be a reflection of
Outcome Value of the Outcome Probability Product
one-in-twenty occurences than one-in-one hundred. If that is true,
then the divisor for the standard deviation is 3.2. Otherwise the Complete in 31 days or less $90,000 x .88 = $79,200
calculations and concepts are the same. Complete in more than 31 days 140,000 x .12 = 16,800
Expected Value = $96,000
Impact Analysis: Probability of Event and Severity of Consequences From this calculation it will be seen that the EV of the cost is
The relationship between probability and severity of conse- substantially higher' than the estimated cost and the calculation
quences is shown schematically in Figure D.l. provides a clearer basis for management decision as, for example,
Event probabilities can often be estimated using statistical a decision as to whether or not to invest in an R&D project.
inferences based on history. Severity of consequences may be The calculation also provides a basis for other comparative
Similarly derived or by estimating the impact of specific events by calculations. For instance, whether or not a schedule slippage
beyond the 31 day point is a high risk or a low one depends on the
PROJECT RISKS consequences that may result. In real-:world terms, it may also
depend on who is responsible for the slippage.

I
RECURRING NON-RECURRING
Consider the "normal" experience that design changes cause
schedule slippages. Suppose that our experience of the type of
project calculated earlier shows that there is a 50/50 chance of the
CONDITIONS EVENTS project's client requesting a design change, and further that ac-

+
cording to our records client-ordered changes have led to a delay

+
OBJECTIVE
ANALYSIS
SUBJECTIVE
ANALYSIS HIGH
on 70% of the occasions. Then, if a schedule slippage occurs on
this project, what is the likelihood that it will be caused by a
client-ordered design change? This calculation is shown below:

P
.5 x.7 = .35
I R
0
B
?•
Pclient = .35/.41 = .85
PROBABILITY OF A
OCCURRENCE ~ B
I
L
I LOW ?
T
Y
RISK • Pnot client = .06/.41 = .15
1.00
LOW no client .5 x .12 = .06
SEVERITY OF CONSEOUENCES
change .41

RISK CRITERION VALUES

(RISK EVENT STATUS)

Figure D.l.

D-4 0-5
Risk Applied to Schedule and Cost Analysis Appendix D

The results show that there is an 85% chance of the responsi- expected completion time of 30 days (derived from the original
bility being with the client, and therefore a 15% chance that the PERT calculations) or savings from completing in less than 30
slippage will!lQ1 be due to the client. The calculation of the revised days, outcomes which each have a probability of 50%. The EV of
EV of cost is shown as $90,900. the profit from a FFP of $115,000, with penalty, is $24,000. A risk
taker could be expected to take the second option as the EV of
profit is greater. In other words, there is a 98% probability of a
< 31 days 0 .88 x $90,000 = $79,200
$25,000 profit even when offset by an 2% chance of a $25,000 loss.
This could be considered a better deal than a $10,000 profit guar-

~
anteed.
Note, however, that expected value theory assumes that the
risk taker is playing this game a large number of times and that in
~ client .85 .12 x .85 x $90,000 = $ 9,180 any single play the risk taker can afford to take the loss, should it
>31 days .1~ occur.
Guidelines for Use of Expected Value Techniques
.12 x .15 x $140,000 =$ 3,520 1. The risk assessment process should not be started with a
Expected Value = $90,900 preconceived point of view.
2. Keep an open mind until an objective decision has been
reached.
Taking into account that there is only a 12% chance of over- 3. Ensure objectivity in defining the risk, reward and rem-
running the 31 day limit and only a 15% chance of the penalty edy and in the data collection process.
being imposed, and that these two events are assumed to be 4. Avoid biased subjective probability judgements and accu-
independent, then the probability of incurring the $50,000 late rately estimate the value of the reward and the cost of the potential
completion penalty is about 2% (12% x 15%). Conversely, the remedial action.
probability of there being no penalty, even if the project is late, is 5. If the probabilities are defined by a range of values, use
98%. the conservative end of the range in the analysis.
6. If the computed expected value of profit is clearly nega-
REVENUE less EXPECTED COST = EV PROFIT tive, DON'T TAKE THE RISK, if that is an option.
wlo penalty clause
$100,000
0 1.0 x $ 90,000 = $90,000
7. If the computed expected value of profit is clearly positive,
TAKE THE RISK, provided the loss can be afforded, should it
Expected profit = $10,000 occur.
8. If the sign (positive) of the computed expected value of
versus profits can change with slight adjustments in the probability
098 x $ 90,000 =$88,200 judgements or in the estimated reward or remedy, DON'T TAKE
$115,000 THE RISK.
wi penalty clause 9. If there are -any doubts at all about the situation (risk,
reward, remedy or probabilities of success and failure), DON'T
TAKE THE RISK.
0.02 x $140,000 = $ 2,800 10. Once the risk has been taken, be ready to implement a
Expected cost = $91 ,000 contingency plan if and when it is realized that the desired out-
Expected profit = $24,000 come cannot be achieved.

Consider the possibility of having a choice between taking on

the project at a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) of $115,000 with the penalty
clause, or at $100,000 without the penalty clause. Which option
should be taken?
An aid to answering this question can be obtained by using
the above probabilities to compare the two alternatives, FFP with-
out penalty clause and FFP with penalty clause. 1. Moder/JosephJ., Cecil R. Phillips/and Edward W. Davis. 1983. Project Management With
The probability calculation shows that the EV of the profit CPM, PERT and Precedence Diagramming. Third Edition. p. 283. Van Nostrand
from a FFP of $100,000 with no penalty is $10,000. This does not Reinhold Company: New York.
consider any increase in costs due to the project exceeding the

D-6 0-7
 Appendix E

Appendix E

A Glossary of Project and Program

Risk Management Terminology
Note: The project and program risk management context Is Implicit
throughout the following definitions.

Activities. A series of tasks performed over a period of time.

Amount at Stake. The extent of adverse consequences which could occur to the
project.
Business Risk. The inherent chances for both profit or loss associated with a partic-
ular endeavor.
Contingency Allowance. Specific provision to cover variations which may occur in the
expected values of elements of cost or schedule, but not scope or quality (see
Contingency Reserve).
Contingency Planning. The development of management plans to be invoked in the
event of specified risk events. Examples include the provision and prudent
management of a contingency allowance in the budget, the preparation of
alternative schedule activity sequences, work-a rounds and emergency re-
sponses to reduce the impacts of particular risk events, and the evaluation of
liabilities in the event of complete project shut down.
Contingency Reserve. A provision held by the project sponsor for possible changes in
project scope or quality. Scope and quality changes constitute changes in the
project manager's mandate and will affect the project's cost and schedule
(see Contingency Allowance).
Control. Planning, monitoring accomplishment, and exercising any necessary cor-
rective action to yield the required outcome.
Deflection. The act of transferring all or part of a risk to another party, usually by some
form of contract.
Go/No-Go Decision. A major decision point in the project life cycle, typically marking
the transition from planning to accomplishment.
Historical Database. Records accumulating past project experience stored as data for
use in estimating, forecasting and predicting future events.
Insurable Risk. A particular type of risk which can be covered by an insurance policy.

E-1
A Glossary of Project and Program Appendix E
Risk Management Terminology

Impact Analysis. The mathematical examination of the nature of individual risks on Risk Factor. Anyone of risk event, risk probability or amount at stake.
the project, as well as potential arrangements of interdependent risks. It
includes the quantification of their respective impact severity, probability, Risk Identification. The process of systematically identifying all possible risk events
and sensitivity to changes in related project variables, including the project which may impact on a project. They may be conveniently classified accord-
life cycle. To be complete, the analysis should also include an examination ing to their cause or source and ranked roughly according to ability to
of the external "status quo" prior to project implementation as well as the manage effective responses. Not all risk events will impact all projects, but
project's internal intrinsic worth as a reference baseline. A determination the cumulative effect of several risk events occurring in conjunction may
should also be made as to whether all risks identified are within the scope well be more severe than examination of individual risk events might
of the project's response planning process. suggest.
Known, Known-Unknown, Unknown-Unknown. A method of classifying risks according Risk Management. The art and science of identifying, analyzing and responding to
to the amount of information available. risk factors throughout the life of a project and in the best interests of its
Mitigation. The act of revising the project's scope, budget, schedule or quality, objectives.
preferably without material impact on the project's objectives, in order to Risk Probability. The degree to which the risk event is likely to occur.
reduce uncertainty on the project.
Risk Response System. The ongoing process put in place during the life of the project
Opportunity. The cumulative effect of the chances of uncertain occurrences which will to monitor, review and update project risk and make the necessary adjust-
affect project objectives positively. Opportunity is the opposite of risk. ments. Examination of the various risks will show that some risks are greater
in some stages of the project life cycle than in others.
Post-Project Review. An appraisal of all aspects of a project upon completion, with a
view to examining and documenting variations and events, to augment the Success (Project Success). The achievement of stakeholder satisfaction.
organization's historical database. Surprise. The surfacing of an unanticipated uncertainty, either opportunity or risk event.
Probability. The likelihood of occurrence. The ratio of the number of chances by which
Technique. Skilled means to an end.
an event may happen (or not happen) to the sum of the chances of both
happening and not happening. Total Certainty. All information is known.
Process. The set of activities required to achieve an output. Total Uncertainty. No information is available and nothing is known. By definition,
total uncertainty cannot be enVisaged.
Pure Risk. See insurable risk.
Uncertainty. The possibility that events may occur which will impact the project either
Public Relations. An activity designed to improve the environment in which a project favorably or unfavorably. Uncertainty gives rise to both opportunity and risk.
organization operates in order to improve project performance and recep-
tion. Work-around. An alternative solution to a potential problem.
Response Planning. The process of formulating suitable risk management strategies for
the project, including the allocation of responsibility to the project's various
functional areas. It may involve mitigation, deflection and contingency plan-
ning. Some flexibility should also be provided, however tentative, for the
completely unforeseen occurrence.
Risk (Project Risk). The cumulative effect of the chances of an uncertain occurrences
which will adversely affect project objectives. It is the degree of exposure to
negative events and their probable consequences. Project risk is character-
ized by three risk factors: risk event, risk probability and the amount at stake.
Risk is the opposite of opportunity.
Risk Data Applications. The development of a database of risk factors, actual responses
and consequences, both for the current project and as a matter of historic
record.
Risk Event. The precise description of what might happen to the detriment of the
project.
Risk Event Status. A measure of importance of a risk event. Also referred to as criterion
value or simply its ranking.

E-2 E-3
 YOUR COMMENTS
on
Project and Program Risk Management
HELP us HELP YOU!
So that we may better provide you with the practical information you need, please take a moment
to record your comments on this page and return it to:
The Executive Director
Project Management Institute
130 South State Road
Upper Darby, PA 19082
U.S.A.
I/we have the following suggestions regarding this handbook:,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Name.___________________________________________________

Address._________________________________________________

City________________________ State_________ZIP Code.______

Country Date
------
 Code of Ethics
for
The Project Management Profession
PREAMBLE: Project Management Professionals. in the pursuit of the profession. affect the quality of life for all
people in our society. Therefore. it is vital that Project Management Professionals conduct their work in an ethical
manner to earn and maintain the confidence of team members. colleagues. employees. employers. clients and the
public.
ARTICLE I: Project Management Professionals shall maintain high standards of personal and professional
conduct. and:
a. Accept responsibility for their actions.
b. Undertake projects and accept responsibility only if qualified by training or experience. or after full
disclosure to their employers or clients of pertinent qualifications.
R. Max Wideman, P.Eng. FEIC, FICE, Fellow c. Maintain their professional skills at the state of the art and recognize the importance of continued personal
PMI, is a professional engineer specializing in project development and education.
management consulting. Since graduating at London
University, his experience has included hydroelectric, d. Advance the integrity and prestige of the profession by practicing in a dignified manner.
river, marine, transportation, industrial, institu- e. Support this code and encourage colleagues and co-workers to act in accordance with this code.
tional, commercial and residential projects. He has f. Support the professional society by actively participating and encouraging colleagues and co-workers to
also been instrumental in social and environmental participate.
impact studies, major contract and expropriation g. Obey the laws of the country in which work is being performed.
claims, construction productivity, and project man-
agement audit. In working for a diversitY of sectors, ARTICLE II: Project Management Professionals shall. in their work:
he has gained a broad perspective and insight into the a. Provide the necessary project leadership to promote maximum productivity while striving to minimize costs.
project management process. b. Appl~ state of the art project management tools and techniques to ensure quality. cost and time objectives. as
Mr. Wideman has lectured extensively, present- set forth in the project plan. are mel.
ing papers or seminars on a variety of project manage-
ment topics in Canada, China, Egypt, Iceland, India, c. Treat fairly all project team members. colleagues and co-workers. regardless of race. religion. sex. age or
national origin.
Jamaica, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, the
United Kingdom, and the USA. d. Protect project team members from physical and mental harm.
In 1974, Mr. Wideman joined the Project Man- e. Provide suitable working conditions and opportunities for project team members.
agement Institute (PMI) and later launched the PMI
f. Seek. accept land offer honest criticism of work. and properly credit the contribution of others.
West Coast BC chapter. In 1982 he was elected to the
International Board as Vice President Member Ser- g. Assist project team members. colleagues and co-workers in their professional development.
vices and served as director for three years. During ARTICLE III: Project Management Professionals shall. in their relations with employers and clients:
this time, he was assigned responsibility for expanding
a. Act as faithful agents or trustees for their employers and clients in professional or business matters.
and codifying PMI's existing standards ofknowledge
by conducting a major voluntary study by PMI mem- b. Keep information on the business affairs or technical processes of an employer or client in confidence while
bers. The resulting report became known as the Project employed. and later. until such information is ptoperly released.
Management Body of Knowledge, or "PMBOK," c. Inform their employers. clients. professional societies or public agencies of which they ~re m~mbers or to
which was approved by the PMI Board in March 1987. which they may make any presentations. of any circumstance that could lead to a connlct of mterest.
Mr. Wideman received PMI's Distinguished d. Neither give nor accept. directly or indirectly. any gift. payment or service of more than nominal value to or
Contribution to Project Management Award in 1985, from those having business relationships with their employers or clients.
and the following 'Year was honored as PMI Person- e. Be honest and realistic in reporting project quality. cost and time.
of-the-Year. He was elected PM! president for 1987,
ARTICLE IV: Project Management Professionals shall. in fulfilling their responsibilities to the community:
became chairman in 1988, and was made a Fellow of
the Institute in 1989. Mr. Wideman has authored a a. Protect the safety. health and welfare of the public and speak out against abuses if!. these areas affecting the
number of articles and papers for the Institute's pub- public interest.
lications and is author of Cost Control at Capital b. Seek to extend public knowledge and appreciation of the project .management profession and its
Projects, AEW Services, Vancouver, 1983. achievements.