As a risk enthusiast, I always enjoy learning how people are motivated by it. Projects are subject to all kinds of surprises, both good and bad. In addition, organizations often have a process in place to deal with risks, one that is integrated with the project management plan—and this is very good (risk matters, after all!).
However (and this is a big issue in my opinion), I rarely see a good connection between qualitative risk analysis and quantitative risk analysis. This article explores this dynamic, trying to address it in a simple way.
Risk management and analysis: Is there a gap?
It begins with planning and making sure that risk is important to the project. As so, it should be integrated with everything else and be part of our project management plan. We identify risks and perform qualitative analysis, quantitative analysis and go-to response planning and implementation. Afterward, we monitor, update and re-do the cycle as needed (or suggested/enforced by the current PM corporate methodology).
In my opinion, however, there is a very big gap between the whole cycle and the “perform quantitative analysis” process. The way it usually goes is that people identify risks and perform qualitative risks analysis, and have a nice table with risks, probabilities and impacts (and the consequent severity), as well as a lot of information for categorization
Please log in or sign up below to read the rest of the article.