CATEGORIES:
BiologyChemistryConstructionCultureEcologyEconomyElectronicsFinanceGeographyHistoryInformaticsLawMathematicsMechanicsMedicineOtherPedagogyPhilosophyPhysicsPolicyPsychologySociologySportTourism
Quantitative Analysis
Methodology
In order to assess risks is proposed to use following techniques:
1. the method of analogy (this method consists of comparing a similar project which has already be implemented with the current project. The company has experience in entering foreign markets, therefore, possible reveal the general relations according to the changes and use them in the current project);
2. the method of analysis of forecasts (means checking of expert opinions to make forecasts);
3. the method of scenario analysis (calculated possible "scenarios" of possible changes: a pessimistic scenario, the optimistic and the most probable);
4. the method of Monte Carlo simulation (identifies common risks and their impact on the final project economics);
5. the method of expert estimates (based on a survey of the group of experts).
Main methods that are proposed to implement:
• avoiding excessive risk activities;
• prevention or diversification;
• outsourcing;
• the formation of reserves;
• using information-gathering techniques (SWOT, interwiewing and Delphi).
Roles and responsibilities
| Name | Responsibilities |
| Alexander Katorgin (Project Administrator) | Leads in the planning and development of the project; manages the project to scope; develop risk management strategy |
| Anna Votintseva (System Administrator) | Identifies risks that connected with: • IT system and database • technical strategy, policy and procedure • testing programs |
| Leo Likhachev (Supplier-side Project Manager) | Identifies risks that connected with: • the supplier-side of the budget • in communication paths between the project team and the supplier • financial reports (time/expenses) |
| Mila Orlova (Risks Experts) Roman Babanov Ekaterina Balan Lilia Khabibullina | Make research of the risks, data gathering, analysis, and documentation as outlined in the risk plan |
Budgeting
| Risk | Probability | Money |
| Disruption of project time, budget | 0,9 | 720 000 |
| Disruption of contract terms with a third party | 0,7 | 560 000 |
| The leak of confidential information | 0,5 | 400 000 |
| Fierce competition from oil Companies | 0,3 | 240 000 |
| Negative governmental reaction | 0,1 | 80 000 |
| TOTAL | 2 000 000 |
Timing
Deadline implementation of strategies - 20/09/16. Duration of a project approximately 9 months
Scoring and interpretation
The Risk Identification Worksheet facilitates the categorization of individual project risks. Each risk element should be rated according to the following criteria. Ratings will be estimates based upon project knowledge at the time.
Probability
Project Impact
Exposure
Thresholds
The Project Manager will determine the appropriate threshold in which actions should be initiated. It will be considered EPMO best practice to provide an Agreed Action for each risk element that has a high Degree of Exposure.
Reporting formats
| Position | Name | Risk | Reports | Controls | Acts |
| Project Manager | Alexander Katorgin | Disruption of project time, budget | |||
| Project Administrator | Anna Votintseva | Disruption of contract terms with a third party | |||
| System Administrator | Lev Likhachev | The leak of confidential information | |||
| Supplier-side Project Manager | Mila Orlova | Disruption of contract terms with a third party | |||
| Subject Matter Expert | Roman Babanov | Fierce competition from oil Companies Negative governmental reaction | |||
| Team Member | Lilia Khabibullina | Disruption of project time, budget | |||
| Team Member | Ekaterina Balan | Disruption of project time, budget |
Tracking
Tracking of risk elements and activities should be documented in the Risk Management Worksheet. The revision history table within the document should be utilized to document changes and updates.
| Risk Score for a Specific Risk | |||||||
| Item | Probability | Risk Score = P x I | |||||
| Disruption of project time, budget | 0.90 | 0.05 | 0.09 | 0.18 | 0.36 | 0.72 | |
| The leak of confidential information | 0.70 | 0.04 | 0.07 | 0.14 | 0.28 | 0.56 | |
| Disruption of contract terms with a third party | 0.50 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.40 | |
| Fierce competition from oil companies | 0.30 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.12 | 0.24 | |
| Negative governmental reaction | 0.10 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.08 | |
| 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.40 | 0.80 | |||
| Impact on an Objective (e.g. cost, time or scope) (Ratio Scale) | |||||||
Quantitative Analysis
Date: 2015-12-24; view: 1181
| <== previous page | | | next page ==> |
| YOUNG COUPLE DEAD OF UNNATURAL CAUSES IN RENTAL CAR | | | Answer the questions. |