Good question George! I think project sponsor and manager both are responsible for such project failure. Waiting for other replies here... Saving Changes...
Ramachandran SwaminathanRegional Delivery Manager| Oracle Consulting IndiaBangalore, Karnataka, India
If the project failure is due to an identified risk materializing, then whoever gave the approval for going ahead with the project is responsible. This is at a high level.
If you really want to find who exactly, have a look at the risk matrix. What was the probability and impact % given to this particular risk. Pull out the meetings minutes of when this risk was discussed with higher mgmt. Look at whether the probability or impact of the risk was under rated based on the actual scenario. Was there any remediation documented in the matrix.
...
1 reply by Prashant Sonwane
Jun 15, 2017 9:00 AM
Prashant Sonwane
...
I am with you Ramachandran.
Saving Changes...
George LewisProgram/Project Manager| DXC Technology CompanyHeredia, Costa Rica
Product Operations Program ManagerBarcelona, Cataluña, Spain
I am not convinced that a sponsor alone can/should decide to take risks, specially if these can threaten the project itself. It might be a better practice to bring it up to the steering committee before taking further actions. Saving Changes...
Thilo WackHead of Existing Product and Test Lab| optimedTholey-Hasborn, Germany
Good question, reflects reality that there is a need for a culprit if something like this is happening. But is there really someone responsible? The sponsor, of course is accountable for the business value of the project and the project lead is accountable for managing the project accoring to SOPs, internal rules, project charter and general best practices. So the project lead did risk management, a risk was discovered and it was analyzed and a business decision was made based on the best available assumptions. And then comes Mr. Murphy...
So maybe it is the fault of the organization, which did not really have a good process in place and did not clearly enough communicate its level of risk aversion to the sponsor. Maybe the organization does not have a (good, empowered) PMO and assigned the project a project lead who was not up to the task, whether the actual problem was in the risk management process or the communication or the stakeholder management. And just maybe everybody did the right thing and it was all just a case of bad luck. Looking at single events with the power of hindsight can make us forget that things sometimes just happen and it is too costly and/or time-consuming to try to make everything 100% safe all the time... Saving Changes...
Eric SimmsSenior Program ManagerBaltimore, Maryland, United States
Whoever accepted the risk is responsible if it materializes. Usually high-level Managers have the authority to accept risks that could jeopardize a project, and they must accept the blame if the risk is realized and the project fails. Saving Changes...
I'm not sure if only the Sponsor, maybe as a Project Manager or risk managers we should analyze if we explained and communicated properly the risk and its posibles effects.
The Risk Owner, whether that is the sponsor or someone else, is the initial responsible person that comes to mind. This is assuming standard risk management definitions and practices.
1) The Risk Owner is THE person who has authority to make decisions about the risk
2) Accepting the risk means that the risk owner decided that no mitigating action was required for the risk
3) Proper/adequate risk analysis was performed
It doesn't seem like there are many situations where someone would knowingly accept a risk that had high potential to cause a project to fail.
Thinking about this a little more, it could also be a no-fault situation. There could be a low (or higher) probability of not getting enough budget approved to continue a project. Is it really the risk owners fault if the company slashes the budget, causing the project to fail?
...
1 reply by John Tieso
Jul 06, 2017 11:04 AM
John Tieso
...
Would you not agree, Aaron, when a risk analysis is done, and the PM agrees that a risk is lower on the priority, the PM now own the risk
Saving Changes...
stephen kinnairdPresident/CEO| Stem Technical Solutions Inc.Manotick, Ontario, Canada
I guess for me there are two ways’ to look at this:
1) Did the project fail because the risk was identified but underestimated as to the impact it would cause, and/or the likelihood of it occurring?
Or
2) Did the project fail because the risk was identified to clearly have the potential to end the project should it occur, and the plan was implemented to end the project because it did occur?
If the first is true then the team responsible for quantifying the risk should take responsibility, along with the sponsor for signing off on the plan.
If it was the latter then I wouldn't necessarily call the project a failure. The risks were identified prior to the project, when the risk occurred the decision was made to end the project as per the plan.
The only caveat on option two is that it occurred very early in the project!
...
1 reply by Stephen Grey
Jun 13, 2017 12:57 AM
Stephen Grey
...
It is not black and white. A risk may be accepted and plans made to complete despite the risk but if those plans are not executed competently the failure might lie with the project team.
Community Champion
