For Ann Harris

Christopher Mihun

COMMUNICATIONS PLAN AND FINAL KA

PM650-1801B-01

Professor Al-Nizami

Introduction

Construction and house project development involves multifaceted processes of several activities such as; renovations, leasing of existing lands, and purchase of lands and sell of developed land. The property development processes are essential to the success of the projects. Over time we have come across a number of property development and other large scale projects which have failed or undergone critical failures in different levels before completion. There are several reasons that have contributed to the failure of these projects. For a successful project, there is the need for developing a risk management plan which will highlight all risky areas of failure of the project. For instance, in this risk management will consider the Sydney Opera house project. The Sydney Opera House became and has been today a disastrous project coupled with multiple failures from the poor risk management especially in the project planning and assessment. This project seeks to determine the major risk management processes which could have been used by the project developers in the reduction of the risk which impacted the development of the Sydney Opera House.

Project Description

The Sydney Opera House is one of the iconic structures recognized in Australia and around the world (NSW, 2017). The project was contracted to architect Jorn Utzon from Denmark, who won the bid from the New South Wales government in 1957. The project began in 1959. The project had been divided into three separate stages consisting of the podium as the first stage, outer shells as the second stage and interiors plus windows as the third stage. Architect Utzon after being selected he presented the “Red Book” in early March 1958 which was a detailed report on the Sydney Opera House. The report consisted of the indications in part of the plans, reports from consultants, sections and other elements of the project (Utzon, 2002). The New South Wales governments were not worried about the financial burden of the project. The project report established that the architect was to complete the project in 1962 and its grand opening would have been in early 1963. The original budget of the project had been estimated of AUD 7 million. But the project ended costing more than AUD 102 million and 14 years to complete.

a) Project Objectives

The project considered a number of objectives focusing on the development of the Opera House and helping to meet the expectations of the community. The developer focused on creating an iconic structure for quality and style. The aim of the project developers was to create a structure which has value for the cultural representation of the community. It was also important for the New South Wales government opting to develop a functional opera house to serve and offer cultural interactions for the community(Phil, Harrington, & Parker, 2012). The community was responsible for creating the needed resources such as support for the development and offering the community an established foundation focusing on growth and holding entertainment services. The project manager aimed to improve, develop and plan on the resources to meet the demands and timeline of the project developers and stakeholders. The project objectives for the development of the Sydney Opera House was to create a structure which will help diversify the image of the Australian society.

b) External Dependencies

The project manager had to coordinate with other members of the community and stakeholders ensure all the project deliverables were and will be met. The lead architect, Utzon worked closely with the government on the allocation of resources. There was an issue of communication within the project hierarchy and this changed and affected the outcome and relations which the management and architect. Requirement gathering and documentation was another dependency based on the stakeholders of the project. The architect and project manager failed in communication due to the process of gathering the necessary needs and user expectations. Allocation of resources through project planning was a responsibility of the New South Wales government (Phil, Harrington, & Parker, 2012). As a stakeholder for the project, the New South Wales government was also responsible for allocation, budget control and specification planning on the expectations and needs of the project. For a creative allocation of resources, there is the need for developing and meeting the expectations of external dependencies.

c) Stakeholder Analysis

The project developer and leader architect was he project stakeholder of the Sydney Opera House construction project was architect Utzon. Utzon had the responsibility to ensure the proposed project met the set budget plans and its culture aspect of its development was fulfilled. As a project manager, Utzon has the responsibility of managing and leading the project to fulfillment of its functional and operational expectations. Another stakeholder was the NSW government as the client. As the client of the project, the government needed to focus on the performance, allocation and planning to fully meet the project expectations of the project manager such as planning and creating the allocation of resources for the project (Bent, 2014). Finally, the public was another stakeholder of the Sydney Opera House construction project responsible for gathering user requirement such as on the cultural aspect and how to meet the expectations and process planning for the project.

Planned format for the Risk Management Plan

The construction industry is susceptible to more risk in comparison to other industries. The risks in the construction industry often creep from the initial appraisal of the project to the final stage of completion. There is the need to take risk management into consideration and if necessary develop different strategies to mitigate and control the risks. The risk management plan for the Sydney Opera House development will be conducted through:

· Conducting a risk process. This is through the project manager identifying the risks associated with the project.

· Conducting a risk identification: this will generate a risk log which will consider the project deliverables and identify any risk associated with the project (Smith, Merna, & Jobling, 2009).

· Conducting risk analysis: through a qualitative and quantitative risk analysis to determine the possible outcome of the risks on the project.

· Risk response monitoring by the team members.

· Finally, controlling, planning, monitoring and evaluation of the risks for reporting.

Risks Associated with the Project

The development of the Sydney Opera House was scheduled to be completed in 4 years with a budget of around AUD 7 million. But the project ended costing more than AUD 102 million and 14 years to complete. The risks associated with the development of the project include:

i. Incomplete designs which resulted in poor structural planning and delivery of the project.

ii. Poor stakeholder involvement in the due process and project planning

iii. Lack of project leadership from the project manager

iv. Lack of project progress reports and this hampered the performance appraisals

v. Poor Cost Estimates and budgeting

vi. Incomplete designs requirement gathering

vii. Failure to keep within the cost estimate.

viii. Inability to meet the completion timeline

ix. Changes in project scope and requirements.

x. Project scope and design changes.

xi. Lack of project change controls and Scope of the project

xii. The pressure to deliver projects on an accelerated schedule.

xiii. Inaccurate contract time estimates.

xiv. Lack of communication between project participants.

xv. Inadequately defined roles and responsibilities.

xvi. Insufficient skilled staff.

xvii. Political risks.

xviii. Poor task and roles assigning among the project stakeholders

xix. Inexperienced project managers

xx. Lack of stakeholders engagement in the development of the project development

Techniques Used to Identify the Risks

There are different techniques which can be used in the risk identification and this will be critical to risk assessment and management in any project. Based on the project carried and developed by the Sydney Opera House, risk identification was conducted through the use of risk screening using risk registers and identification of the risk associated with the project (Shenhar, Aaron, & Dvir, 2007). The risk registers as indicated in the table below, it indicates the process of meeting and identification of the critical risks which impacts the different phases of the project. The project considers the development of a construction project which takes into consideration process of planning, site reconnaissance and survey. It is only possible by ensuring there is a process for engaging in the managerial of risks and their root causes. Therefore, through root cause analysis, the risks as identified were analyzed and this helped in the planning, development and recognition of the necessary and ideal breakdown phases or work structures(National Research Council, 2005). The risks identified also were conducted through work uncertainties and checking the work phases such as planning on the phases and plotting the risks through risk registers. Risk registers indicates the ranking the risks in terms of impacts, probability and hazard level.

Stakeholders involved in the Risk Process

The risk identification involves all the stakeholders of the project. In this case study, stakeholders of the Sydney opera house include: the engineers in the design and system analysts in gathering the facts from the owners, the New South Wales Government. The stakeholders are the active members in the designing of the project (National Research Council, 2005). The architecture planning and designing was the sole responsibility of architect Utzon. They are able to identify the risks and develop the root cause analysis in the gathering of facts and designing of the opera house. The incomplete designs was due to the change in the scope of the project. The owner, the New South Wales Government considered the process of choosing the right to change the scope of the project. This impacted the responsibility of the architect and how to fully develop the project without completion of its designs. The financing of the house such the New South Wales Government also faced challenges in financial budgeting and allocations of resources to the construction of the opera house.

Qualitative and Quantitative Risk Ranking

Risk	Probability	Impact	Hazard Level
1. Poor Cost Estimates and budgeting	3	3	Critical
2. Incomplete designs	1	4	High
3. Failure to keep within the cost estimate.	3	4	Critical
4. Inability to meet the completion timeline	4	3	Critical
5. Changes in project scope and requirements.	1	3	High
6. Project scope and design changes.	2	2	Low
7. Pressure to deliver project on an accelerated schedule.	2	2	Low
8. Inaccurate contract time estimate.	3	4	Critical
9. Lack of communication between project participants.	3	4	Critical
10. Inadequately defined roles and responsibilities.	1	4	High
11. Insufficient skilled staff.	1	2	Low
12. Political risks.	4	2	Medium
13. Lack of stakeholders involvement in the project development and progress	3	4	Critical
14. Inexperienced project managers	2	4	High
15. Poor and lack of task and role assigning amongst the stakeholders of the project.	3	4	High
16. Lack of project change and scope control of the project	4	5	Critical
17. Lack of project progress reports and this hampered the performance appraisals.	2	4	High
18. Poor stakeholder involvement in the due process and project planning	2	5	Critical
19. Poor project manager leadership	2	4	High
20. Poor project design planning in meeting the structural planning and delivery of the project.	3	5	Critical

Project Sponsor’s Risk Tolerance Level

With the objectives of the architect and the client clashing, the time and cost of the project was ignored, which in turn proved to be very problematic. In the long run of the project, the New South Wales government decided to change the architect, which did not do the project any good either in cost or time management. As the project manager and sponsor for the Opera House development, it did not meet the expectations, process and planning to improve and help in the support and operational performance (McNeil, Frey, & Embrechts, 2015). The sponsor needed clarification on the project, which accelerated the project from the initial 3 phases to 4 phases of the construction design. The sponsor also had a low level risk assessment and management or consideration. The initial financial budgeting for the project was as AUD 7million and a timeline of 4 year to the completion of the project. Eventually, the project cost more than AUD102 million covering 14 years of development. This indicates poor planning and resource management from the project sponsor.

Risk Response

The risks identified are essential in the development of an essential risk response. Risk responses are the different ways and processes for which an organization can effectively use to manage risk. In the construction project, the project managers and stakeholders could have used different responses in the management of the risks. The risk identified and their responses includes:

Risks Identified	Responses
xxi. Incomplete designs which resulted in poor structural planning and delivery of the project.	Avoidance
xxii. Poor stakeholder involvement in the due process and project planning	Contingency
xxiii. Lack of project leadership from the project manager	Accept
xxiv. Lack of project progress reports and this hampered the performance appraisals	Reduce
xxv. Poor Cost Estimates and budgeting	Avoidance
xxvi. Incomplete designs requirement gathering	Transfer
xxvii. Failure to keep within the cost estimate.	Exploit
xxviii. Inability to meet the completion timeline	Contingency
xxix. Changes in project scope and requirements.	Accept
xxx. Project scope and design changes.	Reject
xxxi. Lack of project change controls and Scope of the project	Reduce
xxxii. The pressure to deliver projects on an accelerated schedule.	Reject
xxxiii. Inaccurate contract time estimates.	Exploit
xxxiv. Lack of communication between project participants.	Reduce
xxxv. Inadequately defined roles and responsibilities.	Share
xxxvi. Insufficient skilled staff.	Avoid
xxxvii. Political risks.	Enhance
xxxviii. Poor task and roles assigning among the project stakeholders	Reduce
xxxix. Inexperienced project managers	Share

Application of these Risk Responses

According to the risk responses as shown above, the responses for the opportunities and threats in the risk management. The responses are an opportunity for structural competency and how to effectively manage the risk. The process for risk identification and mitigation can be effectively managed to improve project performance. Therefore, the application for the risk responses can be effectively developed through:

a) Avoidance

Avoidance is a risk response which is essential for the changing the project to meet the expectations of the stakeholders while managing the risk. For instance, the change in the designs could have improved the outcome of the project. The change affects and reduces the ability for an effective risk mitigation and process. Avoidance also helps to change the necessary expectations, planning, and how to fully develop and improve resource allocation to ensure the impact of the risk does not affect the project.

b) Transfer

Transferring the risk is a risk response which is all concerned with the mitigation and management of the risk by transferring it to another aspect and event. For instance, transferring the risk to the project stakeholders could have helped to designing complete and effective designs. It is a process for ensuring the transfer for risk meets the value, resources, and exposition for the project. The risks could have been transferred to help in the mitigation and management of designs.

c) Reduce

Reduction of the risk means creating an opportunity such as reducing the occurrences bytapping the root causes of the risk. This can be completed and especially managed due to poor planning before implementation, planning and creating the resources for the risk. The reduction is essential for focusing on the risk entities. This will increase, change and effectively reduce by targeting the root cause of the risks.

d) Accept

Accepting the risk can be an essential process for ensuring the project meets the expectations of its stakeholders. Some risks can be accepted by the stakeholders. It is also a process to ensure and how to fully develop and support the performance of stakeholders. It is also a process for enhancing the changes, processes and accepting the risk to a manageable state. This will effectively help in improvement and gaining the value, resource and process management. Some risk such as unskilled staff and poor leadership can be accepted by managed effectively.

e) Contingency

The contingency planning is an essential risk management technique which helps companies in the modern society to develop backup plans. Backups can be an essential resource to help in the processing and functional performance. It can be effectively used for an effective process to improve performance and develop project success. Contingency can be developed in place of lack of budgeting and cost-timelines. The use of contingency planning can be a process for influencing change in performance through risk expectations.

f) Share

Sharing risks can be an essential opportunity to minimize the impact of the risk to a project. It is also an essential policy to effectively influence and increase performance based on values such as mitigation, planning, and process development. It is also important for an effective allocation of risk to other stakeholders. Stakeholders can share risk, develop the necessary roles such as engaging and defining the processes.

g) Exploit

Sometimes, it is important to exploit an opportunity. This is essential for curbing on the opportunities for affecting the project. The exploitation can be used effectively in improvement of risks and using the impacts for making another plan. This is management of risk opportunities by the project managers. It is also an opportunity for an effective planning to provide, develop and influence resources such as poor leadership to introduce change and increase resource processing. Effectively using exploitation, a project manager can allocate for more resources and skilled staff.

h) Enhance

Enhancing the occurrence of a risk can effective result in risk response and this can be used effectively to improve and develop financial allocations. The manner and ability for an effective resource is to effectively, develop, and improve financial planning. The process can be used progressively to help in the mitigation approaches. It is also important to develop and improve processes such as organization, performance and value creation.

i) Reject

Sometimes, if the risk is too high, it is important for an effective development, planning and creative allocation of resources. Mitigating risk can be a risk process which affects the performance of a project. Rejecting poor relations, unskilled and poorly designed requirements can be effectively improved and this can improve resource allocation and planning.

Risk Breakdown Structure

Sydney Opera House Project Risk Work Breakdown

Risk Responsibility Plan

The risk responsibility plan is a risk response planning on choosing the right project stakeholders who are responsible for the risks. It indicates a prose development of all the responsible, those who approved the project processes resulting in the occurrences of the risks. There are also those who supported the project processes, resulting in the errors and risks associated with the project planning, initiation, execution, implementation, and management. Therefore, the responsibility plan is a tool which has been and will be used in the creation of risk project management and responsibility for accountability of all project risks and any associated challenges.

Identified Risks	Roles and Responsibilities (R-Responsible, A-Approver, S-Support and I -Informed )
	Project manager	Architect/ Designers	Business Analysts	NSW Government	Project Team	Stakeholders
i. Incomplete designs which resulted in poor structural planning and delivery of the project.	A	R	R	S	I	S
ii. Poor stakeholder involvement in the due process and project planning	R	A	A	R	A	R
iii. Lack of project leadership from the project manager	R	R	S	A	R	A
iv. Lack of project progress reports and this hampered the performance appraisals	A	I	I	I	R	A
v. Poor Cost Estimates and budgeting	R	I	R	A	A	A
vi. Incomplete designs requirement gathering	A	R	R	I	R	R
vii. Failure to keep within the cost estimate.	R	R	A	I	I	A
viii. Inability to meet the completion timeline	R	R	A	I	A	I
ix. Changes in project scope and requirements.	R	R	I	R	I	A
x. Project scope and design changes.	A	A	I	S	I	R
xi. Lack of project change controls and Scope of the project	R	R	I	I	S	A
xii. The pressure to deliver projects on an accelerated schedule.	I	I	S	R	S	A
xiii. Inaccurate contract time estimates.	R	R	S	I	S	A
xiv. Lack of communication between project participants.	I	I	I	A	S	R
xv. Inadequately defined roles and responsibilities.	R	R	A	I	S	A
xvi. Insufficient skilled staff.	R	I	S	A	R	R
xvii. Political risks.	I	S	I	R	S	R
xviii. Poor task and roles assigning among the project stakeholders	R	R	R	I	S	A
xix. Inexperienced project managers	R	S	S	I	S	R
xx. Incomplete designs which resulted in poor structural planning and delivery of the project.	R	R	S	A	S	A
xxi. Poor stakeholder involvement in the due process and project planning	S	S	S	R	S	A

Management of the Risk Plan and the Risk Responses

The importance of the risk responsibility plan is to offer, support, and increase the devolution in project progress and support development. It indicates the agreed responsibility for achieving the necessary roles and responsibilities. It is a system which maps the critical processes, actions, and ways in which the project manager can effectively manage and respond to risks. It also clarifies the roles and responsibilities of all the stakeholder of the project. This defines the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders in comparison to planning and assessing the needed expectations (Heldman, 2018). Finally, it supports a structure for making the right decisions such as focusing on the right strategy, idea and contemplating on the clear resources such as sorting and attracting overall responsibility resources to map and increase operational safety and performance. Therefore, the management of the risk plan and risk responses is to ensure there is a clear communication strategy and how to fully clarify the roles of the involved stakeholders.

Maintaining the Plan and Risk Responses

Maintaining the plan can be achieved through contact communication and interacting with all the project stakeholders. Communication will help keep the organization informed on the impending risk responses and any planning to control the risks identified. This will also help the stakeholders to understand the importance of the information they have and possess. Through communication, it becomes a potential way for informing the teams, people and all other partners on their roles and responsibilities (Kerzner, & Kerzner, 2017). This will eventually associate the plan into the project activities and ensure all the individuals have accessibility to information, facts and essential objectives. There is also the need of ensuring all the people are trained on their respective roles and responsibilities. This will help and ensure all the people associated with the risk planning processes, risk responses and control processes have the needed training. It will achieve awareness and reduction of costs in mitigating risks. There is also the need of conducting regular plan changes and this will help, develop and improve operational effectiveness in support, planning, and actualization of essential features to support operational performance. It is a process for engaging in the review and support of the risk responsibility planning (Kerzner, & Kerzner, 2017). The focus is also on the accessibility of the plans and who is responsible for the management of the plan. This can be achieved through backing up the plan and developing audit plans for the plan to ensure the risk responses and plans are always up to date and easily implemented.

Contingency Budget for the Risk Responses selected

Contingency planning is about the development and keeping of the project development into a reasonable management scale. This focuses on developing backup plans to the loss of life, resources, financial support and assets due to disaster or loss due to uncontrollable risks. The contingency budget will focus on the qualitative risks identified (Lentzos & Rose, 2009). For every risk response such as avoidance, acceptance, sharing and transferring the risk, it is important to develop and focus on the importance, value, and resource development of a financial plan. It is also important to use, develop and increase operational effectiveness in in terms of allocating, distribution and protecting the vital goals and aims of each project task. The contingency budget will focus on the value, resources and operational effectiveness to meet and improve resource allocations. This can be done through improved performance, planning on the risks identified by considering the impacts of the risk to the progress of the project.

References

Bent, F. (2014). What You Should Know About Megaprojects And Why: An Overview. Project Management Journal, 45.2, 6-19.

Edwards, L. (1995). Practical Risk Management In The Construction Industry. Thomas Telford.

NSW, G.O.V (2018). About Sydney Opera House. Retrieved Feb 17, 2018, from: http://www.eoi.es/blogs/cristinagarcia-ochoa/2012/01/14/the-sidney-opera-house-construction-a-case-of-project-management-failure/

Phil, N., Harrington, M., & Parker., D. (2012). Leadership Performance Is Significant To Project Success Or Failure: A Critical Analysis. International Journal Of Productivity And Performance Management, 61.2 ,204-216.

Shenhar, Aaron, & Dvir, D. (2007). Project Management Research-The Challenge And Opportunity. Project Management Journal, 38.2, 93.

Smith, N. J., Merna, T., & Jobling, P. (2009). Managing Risk: In Construction Projects. John Wiley & Sons.

Utzon, J. (2002). ‘Design Principles: Sydney Opera House. Utzon Design Principles. Sydney: Sydney Opera House.

Bent, F. (2014). What You Should Know About Megaprojects And Why: An Overview. Project Management Journal, 45.2, 6-19.

McNeil, A. J., Frey, R., & Embrechts, P. (2015). Quantitative risk management: Concepts, techniques and tools. Princeton university press.

National Research Council. (2005). The Owner's Role in Project Risk Management. National Academies Press.

Cabanillas, C., Resinas, M., & Ruiz-Cortés, A. (2011). Mixing RASCI matrices and BPMN together for responsibility management. VII Jornadas en Ciencia e Ingeniera de Servicios (JCIS 2011), 1, 167-180.

Heldman, K. (2018). PMP: project management professional exam study guide. John Wiley & Sons.

Kerzner, H., & Kerzner, H. R. (2017). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.

Lentzos, F., & Rose, N. (2009). Governing insecurity: contingency planning, protection, resilience. Economy and Society, 38(2), 230-254.