I would see if you could create a third option from these two risk scenarios by finding out what makes these situations so risk and risk adverse. The client will want a solution that will delivery while still avoiding unnecessary risk taking. Saving Changes...
I always advocate considering higher impact risks so long as their likelihood of realization is not very low.
This is the underlying rationale for most insurance purchases. The likelihood of loss tends to be pretty low but the impact is severe and hence we are willing to pay "something" to transfer the risk to someone else.
Although I can't envision a "Sophie's Choice" situation where I could only discuss one risk with my team, I would pick the one that has a more actionable handling plan. If one risk is to be mitigated or avoided and the other will be accepted, then the first will require a plan, and the second will not. I would pick the one where we need to take action. Saving Changes...
Drew CraigSr. Agile & Product Coach| VanguardPhiladelphia, Pa, United States
If the likelihood is high, it should be brought to the team with, or to determine, a mitigation or contingent strategy. A lower probability risk can be noted and addressed in the case the likelihood increases. Saving Changes...
Sergio Luis ConteHelping to create solutions for everyone| Worldwide based OrganizationsBuenos Aires, Argentina
Lower Probability / high Impact are transferible risks. Nothing to discuss there. Just transfer them and that´s all.
Higher Probability / lower impact are risk you have to accept. So, perhaps the strategy to accept them Saving Changes...
How much higher is the impact, and how much lower is the probability? If the impact is significantly higher, the greater probability of the other project may not matter. Something that is going to happen five times and cost you $1,000 each time is not as important as something that will only happen once but cost you $50,000. Saving Changes...
Christopher HealySR IT Program Manager| General MotorsBerkley, Mi, United States
It is interesting to see the responses and some of the assumptions made. With the detail you have, you cannot determine which one you can pick.
Is it realistic that you could only talk about 1, probably not. If that was the case, you would want to look at timing. When the risk could happen should drive priority..
Thus is 1 risk could happen in the next few weeks and the other may not happen for a few month's, you would want to discuss the risk which could happen sooner. Saving Changes...
Community Champion
