Copyright 2007 Northrop Grumman Corporation 0 Taking Out the Garbage – How to Get Good Risks into Your Risk Tool INCOSE Advanced Risk Management Seminar.

Copyright 2007 Northrop Grumman Corporation 1

Taking Out the Garbage – How to Get Good Risks into Your Risk Tool

INCOSE Advanced Risk Management SeminarHampton Roads, VA

November 9, 2007

Vikki Parker, PMPNorthrop Grumman IT-TASC15036 Conference Center DriveChantilly, VA [email protected]


Outline

Introduction

Benefits of Writing Good Risks

The Challenges of Poorly-Written Risks

The Solution: The Logic Thread

The Four Elements of a Well-Written Risk

How to Write a Good Risk

Tips

Examples


Introduction

Topic

Audience

Purpose

Getting good risks into your organization’s database (or, how to write a good risk)

Busy systems engineers in large Government organizations and general risk practitioners

Introduce a method for identifying and articulating risks that are manageable (e.g., provide a good basis for analysis, can be managed to closure, etc.)


The Benefits of Writing Good Risks

Obtain accountable risk owners that are committed to managing the risks to closure

Maximize valuable resources time with focused discussions

Improve credibility because the right risks are scored and analyzed

Compel leadership to take action


The Challenges of Poorly-Written Risks

Analyses can be performed on bad information just as easily as good information (garbage-in, garbage-out)

Plenty of literature on process standards and quantitative analysis, but little literature explaining elements of a well-written risk

Numerical scores and statistical analyses are “logical,” whereas risk discussions can swirl and end up nowhere

Signs that indicate you may have

poorly-written risks

No Accountability

Inaccurate Data

Stale Risks


The Solution: The Logic Thread

A simple checks and balances method for articulating risks that links risk elements into a better description of the risk

Certify the vacation home is not vulnerable to hurricanes.Closure Criterion

Your vacation home in the Caribbean is not going to be complete by the time that hurricane season is in full swing. According to recent weather patterns, it will be a vicious hurricane year. It will cost a lot more money to accelerate the construction; once complete, the new construction is intended to provide excellent protection from hurricanes. This particular area in the Caribbean has been fortunate to not encounter many hurricanes, and the ones that did hit only caused minor damages to homes.

Context

If the vacation home under construction in the Caribbean is not complete enough to withstand a hurricane, then the vacation home may be destroyed.

Statement

Strong Hurricane May Destroy Vacation Home Before Construction is Complete

Title

Sample Topic for Risk Discussion: Vacation During Hurricane Season

Certify the vacation home is not vulnerable to hurricanes.Closure Criterion

Your vacation home in the Caribbean is not going to be complete by the time that hurricane season is in full swing. According to recent weather patterns, it will be a vicious hurricane year. It will cost a lot more money to accelerate the construction; once complete, the new construction is intended to provide excellent protection from hurricanes. This particular area in the Caribbean has been fortunate to not encounter many hurricanes, and the ones that did hit only caused minor damages to homes.

Context

If the vacation home under construction in the Caribbean is not complete enough to withstand a hurricane, then the vacation home may be destroyed.

Statement

Strong Hurricane May Destroy Vacation Home Before Construction is Complete

Title

Sample Topic for Risk Discussion: Vacation During Hurricane Season

The context provides the information for the statement (1); the statement provides the information for the closure criterion (2) and the title (3)


The Four Elements of a Well-Written Risk

Context Provide boundaries for the risk

discussion Focus on facts

Statement Typically written “If [state concern], then

[state consequence].” Concern cannot be same as closure

criterion or you inadvertently lead your reader to only one conclusion and no alternatives can be considered

Closure Criterion Ensure your mitigation plan will work

toward alleviating your concern Measurable action that becomes the last

step in your mitigation plan

Title The “headline” Convey the “So What?” Weak titles whine

RISKRISKRISK

If we do not receive funding for project “x,” then we cannot completed development.”Closure Criterion = funding

If we cannot complete development of system XYZ due to lack of funding, then the organization will be unable to support Mission QPR.”Closure Criterion ≠ funding


How to Write a Good Risk

1

2

4

5

3

6

GET THE RIGHT STAKEHOLDERS

Start with the subject matter experts and people with a vested interest

DOCUMENT THE CONTEXT

Write down the topic at hand provide some background; double-check the facts

WRITE THE CLOSURE CRITERION

The closure criteria should alleviate the concern in the risk statement

CRAFT THE RISK TITLE

The risk title is the same as the consequence in the risk statement

DEVELOP A RISK STATEMENT

The concern is different from the solution and the consequence conveys “so what?”

VALIDATE THE THREAD

Check that the logic flows between the four main elements

1

2

4

5

3

6

GET THE RIGHT STAKEHOLDERS

Start with the subject matter experts and people with a vested interest

DOCUMENT THE CONTEXT

Write down the topic at hand provide some background; double-check the facts

WRITE THE CLOSURE CRITERION

The closure criteria should alleviate the concern in the risk statement

CRAFT THE RISK TITLE

The risk title is the same as the consequence in the risk statement

DEVELOP A RISK STATEMENT

The concern is different from the solution and the consequence conveys “so what?”

VALIDATE THE THREAD

Check that the logic flows between the four main elements


Tips for Writing Good Risks

ElementWhat the Reader Should Know Tips

General The importance of the risk is easily understood and objective

Plan time for the trial-and-error effort to getting the wording right

Speak to a general audience and limit the jargon

Relate risks to an existing requirement or objective

Do not blame

Title The ultimate “so what?” Write it like a headline

Know your audience

Do not sensationalize, but get attention

Statement Concern and consequence; typically an “If …, then…” phrase

Concern cannot equal the solution

For the consequence, ask “so what?” five times

Context Background (who, what, when, why, where, how?)

Only facts

Do not introduce new risks here

Validate facts, avoid assumptions

Cite related requirements and objectives

Closure Criterion

How the concern will be eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level

Be specific and measurable

Tells you how you will mitigate … your mitigation goal; last step in the mitigation plan


Example Scenario

Scenario

Acme Company has a requirement to develop a transporter that is safe for humans and can be used in both civilian and military sectors. Transporter beams will move people and things from place to place in an instant. Persons would be placed on the transporter pad and are dismantled particle by particle by a beam with their atoms being patterned in a computer buffer and converted into a beam that is directed toward the destination, and then reassembled back into their original form.

The need for the transporter beam comes from the shortage of fossil fuels and the exponential increase in transportation costs.

Acme Company had recent success with a prototype that successfully transported a chicken from Asia to the U.S. For a human to be transported, a machine would have to be built that could pinpoint and analyze the trillions of atoms that make up the human body and have 100% fidelity, which is a measure of how well the quantum state of the second ion after transportation resembles the original quantum state.

Acme Company has received a substantial government grant with a fixed deadline to produce the transporter. Because of the fixed deadline, the schedule has been compressed and does not allow time to test on humans before being put into operation.

The fictional scenario provides a basis for comparing poorly-written risks to well-written risks.

Any resemblance to a real project is purely coincidental.

The following risk topics might be chosen for further assessment:- Funding- Requirements- Fixed Deadline- Safety- Compressed Schedule


Example: Poorly-Written Risk

Get fundingClosure Criterion

The transporter beam will be the first of its kind and will save billions of dollars for commuters. The energy source is assumed to be safe for humans based on animal tests. Though the Acme company has been successful with most of its innovative products, the transporter beam is at a low level of technology readiness and has not been tested with humans. Also, there may not be enough time to test the transporter beam for effects on humans before its first use. Funding had originally been assigned to the transporter beam team, but Jane Doe agreed to reallocate it to fund her Cone of Silence project (for portable classified communications anywhere).

Context

If we do not get funding, then we cannot test the ability to correctly digitize the information for transmission via electromagnetic radiation and ensure the quantum state of the second ion after teleportation resembles the original quantum state.

Statement

Lack of FundingTitle

Name game

blames

Introduced opinion vs.

fact

Assumptions introduce new risks

Circular argument: must get funding to alleviate concern of

fundingTechno jargon

alienates decision makers

No funding … so what? This title could not

stand alone in a list of risks.

Funding doesn’t really solve your

problem. What does the funding need to

accomplish?

This risk assessment considered the consequences of the compressed schedule and came to the conclusion that it needed more money in order

to extend the schedule to allow for testing.


Example: Well-Written Risk

Validate 100% fidelity of atom transfer using human volunteers.Closure Criterion

Adjustments must be made for human transportation (vice chicken) and the fidelity must be checked and double-checked. Development for the fully operational transporter beam is on track. However, prior to the energizing humans in the first transporter beam, there is no plan to test the adjustments for human transportation after successfully transporting the chicken. It is tough to duplicate in human transportation because of the unique human attributes (e.g., use of thumbs and ability to speak). Historically, transporter beam prototypes have demonstrated either poor performance or poor functionality, or both, on the first animal tests.

Context

If the human safety is not acceptable prior to the first transporter use on humans, then the operation may result in physical deformity or death.

Statement

Physical Deformity or Death due to Unacceptable Margins of Error in Transporter Safety

Title

All facts, no bias

The concern stated talks to

the overall concern,

regardless of solution

Straightforward; No techno

jargon

Title should stand out in a list of risks

It was determined that the only way to ensure human

safety was to test it on a human.

Using the same risk topic, compressed schedule, the above example focuses on what will happen without proper testing instead of just going after funding.


Conclusion

Clearly articulating risk information is a critical first step in the risk management process

Provides a strong foundation for analysis Ensures better data for better decisions

Copyright 2007 Northrop Grumman Corporation 0 Taking Out the Garbage – How to Get Good Risks into Your Risk Tool INCOSE Advanced Risk Management Seminar.

Documents

good risk slide

northrop grumman corporation

risk discussions

good risks element

articulating risks

right risks

pmp northrop grumman

written risks analyses