A practical risk management system has been developed over nearly three decades. An overarching focus has been to ensure risk management adds measurable value. The system has benefitted from great feedback from many Clients and this is important as you can be assured that the system works. That said - you decide. Compare what is presented...
Integration is a requirement of ISO 31000, but what does this mean in practice? This video explores what's required and outlines three techniques that enable integration. These in turn improve risk management and business outcomes.
Objectives drive a risk/time relationship that is not widely understood. This video seeks to broaden that knowledge as the relationship not only impacts the achievement of objectives and business outcomes but also has significant project implications.
Is your risk management adding value to your organisation? How do you know? How are you measuring value? This video addresses these questions, suggests what may have gone wrong and outlines three straightforward ways to measure value.
What does “the effect of uncertainty on objectives” (ISO 31000 definition) mean in a project environment? Standard risk management processes are focussed on identifying and managing risks that MAY happen. That applies to both a project and non-project environment. Where projects differ is that management practice also introduces (correctly!) two other areas of uncertainty – cost...
Once an assessment of the efficiency of your risk process has been made (see the insight “Is your risk management process efficient or wasteful?”) the second element is to consider whether your risk toolset is efficient or wasteful. There are two aspects to consider – Inputs and Outputs. Inputs are straightforward. Risk management should be undertaken...
Since the first standalone risk management standard (AS/NZS 4360 - 1996) there has been a significant growth in risk management as a specialisation. These “experts” have espoused a range of processes which, although mostly well intentioned, are often far from efficient. The result is a considerable waste in time and hence costs. Over the years...
In my last insight I reflected on how an organisation’s management of projects can increase risks. A second area where an organisation often introduces risk is the use of different processes and/or toolsets in different phases of a project. Both result in the “saw tooth” risk profile in the diagram. This can be further exacerbated when...
In an earlier musing (Project risks – Black Swans or Brown Cygnets?) I had a diagram showing a project’s risk profile over its lifecycle. The sloping line represented the number of risks. At the start of the project, when planning has only just started there are a lot of unknowns and hence a large number...
In my last posting I underpinned the need for executive support for risk management. Earlier this year I came across some great research undertaken by Drs Jon Whitty and Stephen Duffield (from USQ – University of Southern Queensland). They refer to their research as the SyLLK (Systemic Lessons Learned Knowledge) model. They also describe this...
