Risk management

RISK MANAGEMENT STEP BY STEP IN CONSTRUCTION SECTOR PROJECTS.

IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA.


RISK MANAGEMENT OF PROJECTS ACTS ON THE UNCERTAINTIES WITH THE OBJECTIVE OF

INCREASING THE PROBABILITY AND THE IMPACT OF POSITIVE EVENTS, THE OPPORTUNITIES. AND

REDUCING THE PROBABILITY AND THE IMPACT OF NEGATIVE EVENTS, THE THREATS.

IN OTHER WORDS MANAGING RISKS INCLUDES THE PROCESSES NECESSARY TO CONTROL

PREDICTABLE EVENTS IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT’S SUCCESS. CERTAIN STEPS ARE IMPORTANT FOR

A SUCCESSFUL RISK MANAGEMENT.

THIS METHODOLOGY IS APPLIED BY INSURANCE COMPANIES WHICH CALCULATE THE EXPECTED

VALUE OF RISKS ASSOCIATED WITH CONTRACTS, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE PREMIUM TO BE

PAID BY AN INSURED PARTY. THE ADVANTAGE IN THIS IS THAT, WHEN WE MANAGE OUR OWN RISKS,

WE HAVE THE POWER NOT ONLY TO IDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY THEM, BUT ALSO TO DIRECT THEM IN

FAVOR OF OUR INTERESTS.

THE APPLICATION OF SUCH KNOWLEDGE MAKES DECISION MAKING MORE SAFE, GUIDES ACTIONS

DURING THE PROJECT, INCREASES THE COMPANY’S COMPETITIVENESS, AND TURNS UNCERTAIN

EVENTS INTO PROFIT OPPORTUNITIES.


THE RISK MANAGEMENT PROCESSES IN PROJECTS GUIDE THE PLANNING, IDENTIFICATION,

ANALYSIS, RESPONSE PLANNING, MONITORING AND CONTROL OF RISKS.

THIS METHODLOGY MUST BE APPLIED STEP BY STEP AND HAVE THE COOLABORATION OF AN EXPERT

OPINION IN ORDER TO USE ALL ITS INFLUENCE POWER OVER THE PROJECT.

THE EXPERT OPINION IS APPLIED ON ALL TECHNICAL DETAILS AND MAY BE PROVIDED BY ANY GROUP

OR PERSON WITH SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE OR TRAINING, AND IS AVAILABLE THROUGH SEVERAL

DIFFERENT SOURCES

KNOWLEDGE ON THE REGIONAL SCENARIO, METHODOLOGIES FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND

EXPERIENCE IN CIVIL CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS ARE FUNDAMENTAL TO AWAKE THE FACTOR

BEHIND A SUCCESSFUL RISK MANAGEMENT.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT VIA A COLLECTION AND DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM FOR THE LESSONS

LEARNED IS DIRECTLY RELATED WITH THE MATURITY OF A COMPANY IN DEALING WITH

UNCERTAINTIES AND EXPLORING THE BENEFITS BY MANIPULATING EVENTS TO YOUR FAVOR.


IDENTIFY RISKS

THE IDENTIFICATION OF RISKS IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARD THE MANAGEMENT OF UNCERTAINTIES, A

LIST OF THREATS AND A LIST OF OPPORTUNITIES MUST BE PREPARED, INDICATING THE ROOT

CAUSE, THE FOCUS OF THE PROBABILITY, AND THE EFFECT OF THE RISK AND THE FOCUS OF THE

IMPACT.

Threats

Cause Effect

High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks

Parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance

Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications

Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure

Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope

Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor

Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor

Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence

Lack of human resource in sufficient number Work behind schedule and increase of the indirect cost

Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty

Ignoring risks Lack of influence on the threats

Robbery and/or theft Associated losses

Default Financial Cost

Pending approvals and regularizations Changes


IDENTIFY RISKS

THE IDENTIFICATION OF RISKS IS THE FIRST STEP TOWARD THE MANAGEMENT OF UNCERTAINTIES, A

LIST OF THREATS AND A LIST OF OPPORTUNITIES MUST BE PREPARED, INDICATING THE ROOT

CAUSE, THE FOCUS OF THE PROBABILITY, AND THE EFFECT OF THE RISK AND THE FOCUS OF THE

IMPACT.

Opportunities

Cause Effect

Outsourcing Reduction of charges

Volume of purchases Increase of the power of negotiation

Proximity with city districts that supply the MDO Reduction of cost with transport vouchers


IDENTIFY RISKS

THIS PROCESS IS INTERACTIVE AND CONTINUES TO OCCUR DURING THE ENTIRE LIFE CYCLE OF THE

PROJECT, NEW RISKS MAY BE IDENTIFIED AND RANKED AS THEY ARE NOTICED BY THE TEAM.

FURTHER AHEAD WE SHALL SEE HOW THESE RISKS NOT IDENTIFIED AT THE BEGINNING MAY BE

CONSIDERED FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE EXPECTED VALUE OF THE RISKS WITHOUT

BURDENING THE INITIAL EXPECTATION UNDER WHICH THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED.


QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RISKS

THE QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RISKS CONSISTS OF ASSESSING THE PROBABILITY AND THE

IMPACT OF THE RISKS FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE LEVEL OF EACH RISK BY THE MULTIPLYING

FACTOR OF PROB. X IMPACT.

LOWER LEVEL RISKS MAY BE CONSIDERED FALSE AND DOCUMENTED, ACCORDING TO THE RISK

TOLERANCE POLICY OF THE COMPANY. MORE RELEVANT RISKS, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE RANKED

IN ORDER TO GUIDE ITS MANAGEMENT.

Risk Analysis

Context Level of Risk (GR)

0.90

Very

High GR>0.1 TRUE

0.70 High GR<0.1 FALSE

0.50 Medium

0.30 Low

0.10 Very Low



THE DEFINITION OF THE LEVELS OF PROBABILITY AND IMPACT REDUCE THE BIAS IN PRIORIZING THE

RISKS AND THEIR ANALYSIS ALLOWS TO ASSESS THE IMPORTANCE OF EACH RISK ON THE PROJECT.

Threats

Number Cause Effect Probab. Impact Level of Risk Validation

1High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks 0.90 0.50 0.45 TRUE

2Parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance 0.90 0.30 0.27 TRUE

3Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications 0.70 0.30 0.21 TRUE

4Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure 0.50 0.50 0.25 TRUE

5Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope 0.50 0.30 0.15 TRUE

6Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor 0.50 0.70 0.35 TRUE

7Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor 0.70 0.50 0.35 TRUE

8Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence 0.70 0.50 0.35 TRUE

9Lack of human resource in sufficient number

Work behind schedule and increase of the

indirect cost 0.70 0.50 0.35 TRUE

10Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty 0.70 0.30 0.21 TRUE

11Ignoring risks Lack of influence on the threats 0.10 0.90 0.09 FALSE

12Robbery and/or theft Associated losses 0.30 0.30 0.09 FALSE

13Default Financial Cost 0.10 0.30 0.03 FALSE

14Pending approvals and regularizations Changes 0.30 0.30 0.09 FALSE

15 - FALSE



THE DEFINITION OF THE LEVELS OF PROBABILITY AND IMPACT REDUCE THE BIAS IN PRIORIZING THE

RISKS AND THEIR ANALYSIS ALLOWS TO ASSESS THE IMPORTANCE OF EACH RISK ON THE PROJECT.

Opportunities

Number Cause Effect Probab. Impact Level of Risk Validation

1Outsourcing Reduction of charges 0.50 0.50 0.25 TRUE

2Volume of purchases Increase of the power of negotiation 0.70 0.50 0.35 TRUE

3Proximity with city districts that provide the MDO Reduction of costs with transport vouchers 0.90 0.30 0.27 TRUE

4 - FALSE

5 - FALSE

6 - FALSE

7 - FALSE

8 - FALSE

9 - FALSE

10 - FALSE

11 - FALSE

12 - FALSE

13 - FALSE

14 - FALSE

15 - FALSE



DURING THIS PROCESS WE MAY ALSO SEPARATE THE RISKS IN GROUPS DEFINED BY CATEGORIES

OF SIMILAR CAUSE OR EFFECT, OR EVEN TUNE THE PRIORITIZING BY COMPARING THE RISKS IN

PAIRS, IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE PRIORITY BETWEEN THE PAIRS.

IN THE EXAMPLE BELOW, THE LAST RISK MARKED IS CONSIDERED AS THE MOST IMPORTANT AND

SHALL BE PRIORITIZED, AS WELL AS THE CATEGORY 0001 RELATED WITH LABOR IS THE ONE WITH

THE LARGEST NUMBER OF RISKS IDENTIFIED AND SHALL HAVE AN ACTION PLAN INTEGRATED TO IT.


QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE RISKS

A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS CONSISTS OF ANALYZING THE RISKS NUMERICALLY. FROM THE

IDENTIFICATION, RANKING (CLASSIFICATION) AND PRIORITIZING OF THE RISKS MADE DURING THE

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS, WE DEFINE THE IMPACTS MATHEMATICALLY ON THE ACTIVITIES AND

RESOURCES IMPACTED BY THE RISK, CALCULATING THE EXPECTED VALUE INDIVIDUALLY FOR A RISK

OR ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF THE ADDED RISKS ON THE PROJECT.

EXPECTED VALUE = PROBABILITY X IMPACT.

Threats

Number Cause Effect Probab. Impact Expected Value

1High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks 90.00% R$ 1,140.392.56 R$ 1,026,353.30

2parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance 90.00% R$ 346,583.92 R$ 311,925.53

3Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications 70.00% R$ 337,359.64 R$ 236,151.75

4Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure 50.00% R$ 456,157.02 R$ 228,078.51

5Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope 50.00% R$ 114,039.26 R$ 57,019.63

6Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor 50.00% R$ 1,732,919.60 R$ 866,459.80

7Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor 70.00% R$ 1,346,015.46 R$ 942,210.82

8Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence 70.00% R$ 432,503.64 R$ 302,752.55

9Lack of human resource in sufficient number

Work behind schedule and increase of the

indirect cost 70.00% R$ 479,087.53 R$ 335,361.27

10Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty 70.00% R$ 558,566.29 R$ 390.996.40

Total R$ (6,943,624.91) R$ (4,697,309.56)



A QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS CONSISTS OF ANALYZING THE RISKS NUMERICALLY. FROM THE

IDENTIFICATION, RANKING (CLASSIFICATION) AND PRIORITIZING OF THE RISKS MADE DURING THE

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS, WE DEFINE THE IMPACTS MATHEMATICALLY ON THE ACTIVITIES AND

RESOURCES IMPACTED BY THE RISK, CALCULATING THE EXPECTED VALUE INDIVIDUALLY FOR A RISK

OR ASSESSING THE EFFECT OF THE ADDED RISKS ON THE PROJECT.

EXPECTED VALUE = PROBABILITY X IMPACT.

Opportunities

Number Cause Effect Probab. Impact Expected Value

1Outsourcing Reduction of charges 50.00% R$ 1,265,098.67 R$ 632,549.33

2Volume of purchases Increase of the power of negotiation 70.00% R$ 553,735.08 R$ 387,614.56

3Proximity with city districts that supply the MDO Reduction of costs with transport vouchers 90.00% R$ 421,699.56 R$ 379,529.60

Total R$ 2,240.533.30 R$ 1,399,693.49



THE EFFECT OF THE RISKS ADDED TO THE PROJECT DETERMINE THE EXPECTED VALUE OF THE

PROJECT WITH RISKS.

EXPECTED VALUE OF THE PROJECT WITH RISKS = BASE VALUE OF THE WORK + THREATS +

OPPORTUNITIES.

AT THIS TIME, IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE TO DETERMINE THE EXPECTED VALUE IN THE BEST CASE

(CONSIDERING THAT ONLY THE OPPORTUNITIES OCCUR), AS WELL AS THE EXPECTED VALUE IN THE

WORST CASE (CONSIDERING THAT THE THREATS SHALL OCCUR AND THE OPPORTUNITIES SHALL

NOT).

Expected value Pre-reaction

Result Analysis

Base Value of the Work R$ 34,658,391.90

Risks - Threats R$ (4,697,309.56)

Risks - Opportunities R$ 1,399,693.49

Expected Value of the Project (with Risks) R$ 37,956,007.97

Expected Value - Best Case R$ 32,417,858.60

Expected Value - Worst Case R$ 41,602,016.82


PLAN THE RESPONSE TO RISKS

IT IS FROM THIS POINT ON THAT THE PMO BEGINS INTERFERING ON THE EVENTS AND IMPACTS OF

THE RISKS. THE PRECISE IDENTIFICATION WAS FUNDAMENTAL TO BEGIN THIS PHASE WITH

PARAMETERS TO DECIDE ON THE FUTURE OF THE PROJECT.

WHAT STRATEGY SHALL WE USE FOR EACH RISK? IS THERE A REACTION TO THE RISK? WHAT IS THE

BENEFIT/COST OF THAT REACTION? WHEN MUST IT BE TAKEN AND BY WHOM?

THERE ARE 04 BASIC STRATEGIES TO RESPOND TO THE RISKS, NAMELY;

- ELIMINATE OR PROVOKE = TAKE THE PROBABILITY TO 0% OR 100% FOR THREATS OR

OPPORTUNITIES RESPECTIVELY.

- TRANSFER OR SHARE = OUTSOURCE THE IMPACT OR THE ACTION FOR THREATS OR

OPPORTUNITIES RESPECTIVELY.

- MITIGATE OR LEVERAGE = REDUCE OR INCREASE THE PROBABILITY AND/OR THE IMPACT FOR

THREATS OR OPPORTUNITIES RESPECTIVELY.

- ACCEPT = WHEN THE COST BENEFIT OF THE REACTION IS NOT JUSTIFIABLE AND THE RISK IS THEN

ACCEPTED AND MONITORED.



A GIVEN REACTION MAY BE ALSO RANKED AS CONTAINMENT OR CONTINGENCY, I.E., CONTAINMENT

FOR REACTIONS MADE REGARDLESS OF THE EVENT OF RISK OCCURRING OR NOT AND THE

CONTINGENCY FOR REACTIONS THAT ARE PERFORMED AS THE EVENTS OF RISK TAKE PLACE.

Reaction - Containment or Contingency for the Risk - Threats

Cause Effect Expected Value Moment Strategy. Probab. Impact

1 High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks 1,026,353.30 Contingency Mitigate 90.00% 1,140.392.56

2 Parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance 311,925.53 Contingency Mitigate 90.00% 346,583.92

3 Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications 236,151.75 Contingency Mitigate 70.00% 337,359.64

4 Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure 228,078.51 Contingency Transfer 50.00% 456,157.02

5 Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope 57,019.63 Containment Accept 50.00% 114,039.26

6 Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor 866,459.80 Contingency Mitigate 50.00% 1,732,919.60

7 Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor 942,210.82 Contingency Mitigate 70.00% 1,346,015.46

8 Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence 302,752.55 Contingency Mitigate 70.00% 432,503.64

9 Lack of human resource in sufficient number

Work behind schedule and increase of the indirect

cost 335,361.27 Contingency Mitigate 70.00% 479,087.53

10 Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty 390.996.40 Containment Mitigate 70.00% 558,566.29

11 Ignoring risks Lack of influence on the threats - Contingency Transfer 10.00% -

(4,697,309.56) (6,943,624.91)



AS REACTIONS DEVEM BE LISTADAS AND OS CUSTO ASSOCIADOS A ELAS DEVEM BE CALCULADOS.


Cause Effect Expected Value Reaction Moment Strategy. $ Reaction Probab. Impact

1 High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks 1,026,353,30 Quality/Contract Control Contingency Mitigate 75,000.00 90.00% 30.00% 1,140.392,56

2 Parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance 311,925,53 Compatibility of Project Contingency Mitigate 30,000.00 90.00% 30.00% 346,583,92

3 Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications 236,151,75 3rd Party Document Control Contingency Mitigate 90,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 337,359,64

4 Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure 228,078,51 Performance Clause Contingency Transfer 10,000.00 50.00% 10.00% 456,157,02

5 Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope 57,019,63 Accept Containment Accept - 50.00% 50.00% 114,039,26

6 Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor 866,459,80 Anticipated purchase Contingency Mitigate - 50.00% 30.00% 1,732,919,60

7 Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor 942,210.82 Labor Fidelity Contingency Mitigate 150,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 1,346,015,46

8 Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence 302,752,55 Safety Technician Contingency Mitigate 135,000.00 70.00% 10.00% 432,503,64



cost 335,361,27 Fund raising agencies Contingency Mitigate 30,000.00 70.00% 10.00% 479,087,53

10 Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty 390.996,40 Quality/Contract Control Containment Mitigate 75,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 558,566,29

11 Ignoring risks Lack of influence on the threats - Net Premium Contingency Transfer 200,000.00 10.00% 0.00% -

(4,697,309,56) 595,000.00 (6,943,624,91)



SINCE THE REACTIONS INTERFERE IN THE FUTURE OF THE RISKS, ON MUST DETERMINE NEXT THE

NEW NOVO EXPECTED VALUE OF THE RISKS AND COMPARE IT TO THE EXPECTED VALUE PRE-

REACTION.


Cause Effect Expected Value Reaction Moment Strategy. $ Reaction Probab.

New

Probab. Impact New E.V.

1 High level of outsourcing Low quality and reworks 1,026,353.30 Quality/Contract Control Contingency Mitigate 75,000.00 90.00% 30.00% 1,140,392.56 342,117,77

2 Parallelism between projects and performance Error on the performance 311,925.53 Compatibility of Project Contingency Mitigate 30,000.00 90.00% 30.00% 346,583.92 103,975,.8

3 Labor claims Costs with claims and indemnifications 236,151.75 3rd Party Document Control Contingency Mitigate 90,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 337,359.64 101,207.89

4 Low performance of structural inputs need for reinforcement of the structure 228,078.51 Performance Clause Contingency Transfer 10,000.00 50.00% 10.00% 456,157.02 45,615.70

5 Initial services performed by another company Buffer or Gap of scope 57,019.63 Accept Containment Accept - 50.00% 50.00% 114,039.26 57,019.63

6 Inflation above expectations Increase of price of materials and labor 866,459.80 Anticipated purchase Contingency Mitigate - 50.00% 30.00% 1,732,919.60 519,875.88

7 Competition for labor Increase of costs with labor 942,210.82 Labor Fidelity Contingency Mitigate 150,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 1,346,015.46 403,804.64

8 Work-related accidents Indemnifications and leaves of absence 302,752.55 Safety Technician Contingency Mitigate 135,000.00 70.00% 10.00% 432,503.64 43,250.36



cost 335,361.27 Fund raising agencies Contingency Mitigate 30,000.00 70.00% 10.00% 479,087.53 47,908.75

10 Problems after delivery of the product Provision of warranty 390.996.40 Quality/Contract Control Containment Mitigate 75,000.00 70.00% 30.00% 558,566.29 167,569.89

11 Ignoring risks Lack of influence on the threats - Net Premium Contingency Transfer 200,000.00 10.00% 0.00% - -

(4,697,309,56) 595,000.00 (6,943,624.91)(1,832,345.69)


Post-reaction expected value

Result Analysis

Base Value of the Work R$ 34,658,391,90

Cost of reaction of threats R$ 595,000.00

Cost of reaction of opportunities R$ -

New Base Value of the Work R$ 35,253,391.90

Risks - Threats R$ (1,832,345.69)


Management Reserves R$ -

Expected Value of the Project with Risks (POST-REACTION) R$ 35,686,044.10

Expected Value - Best Case (Improbable) R$ 33,012,858.60

Expected Value - Worst Case (Improbable) R$ 42,197,016.82

Expected Value - Best Case (Probable) R$ 33,853,698.41

Expected Value - Worst Case (Probable) R$ 37,085,737.59

Risk Differential Improbable Worst Case R$ 7,538,624.91

Risk Differential Probable Worst Case R$ 2,427,345.69

Most Probable Risk Differential R$ 1,027,652.20

Risk Differential Probable Best Case R$ (804,693.49)

Risk Differential Improbable Best Case R$ (1,645,533.30)

Pre-reaction expected value

Result Analysis


Risks - Threats R$ (4,697,309.56)


Expected Value of the Project with Risks (PRE-REACTION) R$ 37,956,007.97

Expected Value - Best Case R$ 32,417,858.60

Expected Value - Worst Case R$ 41,602,016.82


Expected value Post-reaction

Result Analysis





Risks - Threats R$ (1,832,345.69)














THE MOST PROBABLE RISK DIFFERENTIAL POST-REACTION INCREASED IN 2.97% THE BASE VALUE OF

THE WORK.

THIS NUMBER IS THE UPPER LIMIT (THE “CEILING”) ACCEPTABLE FOR THE IMPACT OF THE RISKS IN

THIS PROJECT.


Expected value Post-reaction

Result Analysis





Risks - Threats R$ (1,832,345.69)














THE METRICS FOR THE DETERMINATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF RISKS SHALL BE BASED ON THE

EXPECTED VALUE IN THE PROBABLE BEST CASE.

THE IDR (RISK PERFORMANCE INDEX) SHALL VARY ACCORDING WITH THIS NUMBER. REACHING THE

GOALS MEANS AN IDR = 100%.


MONITORING AND CONTROL OF RISKS

CULTURALLY, CONSTRUCTION COMPANIES INCORPORATE RISKS FROM 3% TO 5% WHILE DEFINING

THE COSTS OF A PROJECT.

A MISTAKEN CONCEPT WAS CREATED THAT THIS PARAMETER WORKS SINCE THE TENDENDY FOR

RISKS THAT ARE IGNORED AND NOT MANAGED IS TO REMAIN WITHIN SUCH MARGIN.

THE FACT IS THAT THE RISK MANAGEMENT MAY TURN UNCERTAINTIES INTO A COMPETITIVE

ADVANTAGE AND MAKE THE DIFFERENT ON DECISION MAKING.

THIS METHODOLOGY MUST BE APPLIED AFTER THE DETERMINATION OF A RISK POLICY WHERE THE

ORGANIZATION’S RISK TOLERANCE WAS DEFINED.

THIS POLICY MAY BEGAN ON A PESSIMISTIC NOTE AND BECOME MORE OPTMISTIC AS THE PROJECTS

REGISTER BETTER PERFORMANCE, AND THE LESSONS LEARNED PROVIDE MATURITY FOR THE

ORGANIZATION.

MATURE COMPANIES ARE MORE COMPETITIVE!

THE SUCESS IN OBTAINING STREAMLINED RISK PERFORMANCE METRICS LIES IN MONITORING AND

CONTROLLING THEM IN THE ENTIRE LIFE CYCLE OF THE PROJECT.


MONITORING AND CONTROL OF RISKS

TIPS FOR THE MONITORING AND CONTROL OF RISKS:

-ALL REACTIONS MUST HAVE A RESPONSIBLE PERSON AND A DATE FOR THEIR PERFORMANCE.

- THE REACTIONS MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE SCHEDULE AS ACTIVITIES.

- THE ROOT CAUSE OF THE RISK MUST BE MONITORED AND WARNING MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE

COMMUNICATION PLAN.

- THE MANAGEMENT RESERVES MUST BE USED ONLY FOR RISKS NOT IDENTIFIED.

- THE PMO MUST ESTABLISH GOVERNANCE FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE PROCESSS AND FOLLOW-

UP OF THE RISKS.

- MAINTAIN DOCUMENTATION WITH THE REGISTERING OF THE RISKS, TENDENCIES AND CHANGES TO

THE SCENARIO.

- INCREASE THE ORGANIZATION MATURITY BY INCORPORATING THE LESSONS LEARNED IN RISK

MANAGEMENT OF KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT.


WRITTEN BY

EDUARDO MILITÃO ELIAS, MBA / PMP®

ID 1396759

SPONSORED BY

CONSTRUTORA IBEN LTDA., RCP PMI®

ID 1463462

Risk management

Business

iben engenharia ltda

risk management step

construction sector

identi analysis

human resource

leaves of absencelack

expectationsincrease

laborincrease of costs