project management homework 2
Instructions
| Risk Plan Overview | ||
| Risk Event Description | ||
| What is the event? | ||
| A Source of a risk or hazard – the thing which has the potential to harm or assist e.g. a dangerous chemical, competitors, government. | ||
| An Event or Incident – Something that occurs such that the source of risk has the impact concerned e.g. a leak, competitor expands into or leaves your market, new or revised regulations, or some level of observation reaching a particular trigger level. | ||
| A Consequence, outcome or impact on a range of stakeholders or assets e.g. environmental damage, loss or increase of market/profits, regulations increase or decreased competitiveness | ||
| Risk Drivers | ||
| What are the conditions, actions, or events that are likely to trigger the risk event to occur or is a leading indicator to the risk event occurring? | ||
| There are two beneftits to identifying risk drivers: - Focus attention on the probable root cause(s) to aid in developing a Risk Response Strategy - Identify events or trends that should be monitored | ||
| Response/ Mitigation Strategy | ||
| What action(s) will be taken to limit the likelihood of these event occurring or limiting the impacts? | ||
| Accept: | This response accepts or ignores the risk. This may be the appropriate choice when the impact or likelihood of the risk is so low that it does not warrant further attention or if you have no control whatsoever over the impact or likelihood of the risk. (e.g. the risk that your project will be terminated or be placed on hold due to a company merger). | |
| Transfer: | This response involves moving all or part of the risk to another party. (e.g. purchase automobile insurance and transfer the risk to the insurance company, for a small monthly fee of course). Transferring risk comes with a cost. | |
| Mitigate: | This response involves reducing the likelihood that the risk will happen, reducing the impacts of the risk or both. This is what most people are referring to when they are discussing risk management. Most risks can be mitigated with some effort. Although it is unlikely that you can reduce the impact and likelihood of occurrence to zero, this would in essence be eliminating the risk, it is often possible to significantly reduce them. For example, if you have a technical team member who is critical to the success of the project and if that person left, the project schedule would be at risk, you may be able to mitigate the risk by training a backup person to reduce the impact or offer that individual a bonus or incentive to stay reducing the likelihood of occurrence. | |
| Avoid: | This response focuses on eliminating the risk from the project. This sounds like a great choice, so you might ask why we don’t choose this all the time. The reason, it often comes at great cost. To eliminate a risk generally requires that you remove the source of the risk from scope. For example, you may have a schedule risk associated with a new version of software that has not been released yet by the vendor. Although the customer may be expecting this software as part of their project, removal from scope would eliminate this risk. | |
| These general response strategies can be used in combination to address a single risk event. This may be done in the event that your chosen strategy is not working effectively or as a way to attack certain types of risks. For example, you may begin by mitigating a risk reducing both the likelihood and impact. The remaining risk could then either be avoided by a smaller scope reduction, transferred to a vendor or accepted. | ||
| Contingency Plan | ||
| What action(s) will be taken if this event occurs? | ||
| Complete the “Contingency Plan” column for all risk events that the Project Manager deems necessary to adequately address the risks of the project. | ||
| The contingency plan describes what needs to be done in the event that the risk actually occurs. When the risk event actually occurs, it is no longer a risk event; it is simply an event and may require a response or plan to be activated. The project manager will need to determine what the criteria are to trigger the need for a contingency plan. One method is to use the “Total Score” column of the risk plan template to determine a threshold that requires the development of a contingency plan. For example, a total score of 85 or higher may be the threshold which triggers the need for a contingency plan to be developed. However, there may be a need to develop a contingency plan for a risk event that scores much lower due to likelihood, but has a high impact. In the end, the project manager must be comfortable with the decision around when to develop a contingency plan. | ||
| Risk Timeframe | ||
| Critical date(s) or period of exposure | ||
| Some risks are related to specific events, milestone dates or time periods. These critical dates should be documented to focus attention on the associated risk at the appropriate time. |
Impacts Defined
| Risk impact level Matrix | ||||||||
| Likelihood | Low | Medium | High | |||||
| Unlikely | Likely | Almost Certain | ||||||
| Impacts | Low | Medium | High | |||||
| Schedule | No Impact to Critical Path or Field Work | Potential to Affect Critical Path or Field Work | Certain to Affect Critical Path or Field Work | |||||
| Cost | Less Than | $ 100,000 | $ 100,000 | to | $ 500,000 | Greater Than | $ 500,000 | |
| Quality | Minor impact to product deliverables | Moderate impact to product deliverables | Major impact to product deliverables | |||||
| Safety | No Impact to worker safety | Minor impact to worker safety | Major impact to worker safety | |||||
| Scope | < 1% | 2% to 5% | > 5% | |||||
Risk Plan
| H | |||||||||||||||||
| M | Yes | ||||||||||||||||
| L | No | ||||||||||||||||
| Project Name: Risk Plan | Date: ##/##/## | ||||||||||||||||
| Impacts | |||||||||||||||||
| # | Risk Event Description What is the event? | Category Sub-project, Project Phase, Location etc. (Optional) | Likelihood | Schedule | Cost | Quality | Safety | Scope | Total Score | Risk Event Drivers What are the conditions, actions, or events that are likely to trigger the risk event to occur or is a leading indicator to the risk event occurring? | Response/ Mitigation Strategy What action(s) will be taken to limit the likelihood of these event occurring or limiting the impacts? | Contingency Plan What action(s) will be taken if this event occurs? | Owner | Risk Timeframe Critical date(s) or period of exposure | Organizational or Cross-Project Impacts | Comments | Status |
| 1 | Insufficient number of skilled internal technical resources available to support the development of the new system. | Development | H | H | H | M | L | L | 75 | Drivers to monitor: - Development schedules slips - Excessive overtime is needed to keep pace with the schedule - High number of quality errors discovered during the testing cycle Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - Train additional internal resources - Hire additional contractors - Add contingency to the budget to allow for overtime work Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - Outsource portions of the development to an outside vendor - Adjust project schedule and budget | Jane Smith | 3/1/11 - 6/30/11 | Yes | ERROR:#REF! | |
| 2 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 3 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 4 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 5 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 6 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 7 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 8 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 9 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 10 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 11 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 12 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 13 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 14 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 15 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 16 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 17 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 18 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 19 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 20 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 21 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 22 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 23 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 24 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 25 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 26 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 27 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 28 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 29 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 30 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 31 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 32 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 33 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 34 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 35 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 36 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 37 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 38 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 39 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 40 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 41 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 42 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 43 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 44 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 45 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 46 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 47 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 48 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 49 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 50 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 51 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 52 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 53 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 54 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 55 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 56 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 57 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 58 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 59 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 60 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 61 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 62 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 63 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 64 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 65 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 66 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 67 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 68 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 69 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 70 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 71 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 72 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 73 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 74 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 75 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 76 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 77 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 78 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 79 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 80 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 81 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 82 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 83 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 84 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 85 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 86 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 87 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 88 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 89 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 90 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 91 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 92 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 93 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| 94 | 0 | Drivers to monitor: - Drivers that have occurred: - | Planned Actions: - - Completed Actions: - | Planned Actions: - - | ERROR:#REF! | ||||||||||||
| Closed Risks | !Ox | ||||||||||||||||
| Open Item | |||||||||||||||||
| Completed Activity |
Page &P of &N
Applies to All
| H | ||||||||||||||||||||
| M | ||||||||||||||||||||
| L | ||||||||||||||||||||
| AMI Project: Risk Plan | Date: 01/27/2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Applies to All Project List | ||||||||||||||||||||
| # | Risk Event Description What is the event? | Applies to All | Likelihood | Impacts | Total Score | Risk Event Drivers What are the conditions, actions, or events that are likely to trigger the risk event to occur or is a leading indicator to the risk event occurring? | Response/ Mitigation Strategy What action(s) will be taken to limit the likelihood of these event occurring or limiting the impacts? | Contingency Plan What action(s) will be taken if this event occurs? | Owner | Risk Timeframe Critical date(s) or period of exposure | Comments | ● | ||||||||
| Schedule | Cost | Quality | Safety | Scope | √ | |||||||||||||||
| 68 | Corporate financial position changes and does not support project execution plan | Y | H | H | M | L | L | H | 75 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 4 | System integration scope is not well defined | Y | H | L | H | H | L | M | 75 | ● | √ | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 3 | System integration costs are higher than expected | Y | H | L | H | H | L | M | 75 | ● | √ | ● | Melton | Combine 3&4? | ||||||
| 1 | Project may not be funded to end and benefits may not be realized | Y | H | H | M | L | L | H | 75 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 97 | Inadequate # of IT human resources to support the project (project & operations) | Y | H | H | L | M | L | L | 55 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 53 | Required firmware/software upgrade negatively impacts production devices | Y | M | H | H | H | L | L | 51 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 86 | Operational business units / contractors not staffed properly to support project | Y | H | M | L | M | L | L | 45 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 55 | Lack of adequate vendor documentation | Y | H | M | L | M | L | L | 45 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 87 | AMI failures or problems at other utility adversely affects project | Y | M | H | M | M | L | L | 39 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 6 | MPSC disallows a component of the plan impacting benefit realization or cost recovery(example: remote disconnect) | Y | M | M | H | L | L | M | 39 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 57 | Organization human resources not adequate to accept and utilize as required (too busy, other focus) | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 49 | Catastrophic storm occurs impacting Communications (meters to AMI) | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 48 | Catastrophic storm occurs impacting rollout schedule | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 105 | Higher than expected work required at customer site due to aging infrastructure | Y | M | L | M | L | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 101 | Failure to follow proper installation procedures impacts customers | Y | M | L | L | M | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 100 | Higher than expected inclement weather conditions | Y | M | M | L | L | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 96 | Inadequately defined design freeze date & procedure | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 95 | Later than expected IT system change | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 94 | Higher than anticipated number of IT system changes | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 78 | Loss of key personnel without effective knowledge transfer or replacement (DTE & Contractors) | Y | M | M | L | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 59 | Future state business processes not properly defined prior to milestone date | Y | M | L | M | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 56 | Discover a problem in the field that was not anticipated causing cost and schedule overruns | Y | M | M | M | L | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 7 | Security vulnerability discovered with outward equipment(meters, cell relays, home area network, other) | Y | M | M | L | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 104 | DTE may not have adequate diagnostic tools to support post-meter installation | Y | H | L | L | L | L | L | 25 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 58 | Ineffective change management strategy Leads to low employee engagement | Y | M | L | L | M | L | L | 21 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | May affect ability to realize benefits | ||||||
| 2 | New firmware technology does not perform to specifications | Y | M | M | L | L | L | L | 21 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 16 | Itron is acquired by a competitor which leads to technology change | Y | L | H | H | M | L | H | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 15 | Itron goes out of business / defaults on contract | Y | L | H | H | M | L | H | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 8 | Security breach takes place with outward equipment(meters, cell relays, home area network, other) | Y | L | H | H | H | L | M | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | Safety is M for SmartCircuits | ||||||
| 108 | Significant schedule delay may result in technology obsolescence | Y | L | M | H | M | L | M | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 102 | Customer complaints may be higher than expected | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 98 | Ineffective stakeholder engagement | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 73 | Installation causes higher levels of property damage than projected | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 61 | Takes longer than anticipated for Operations to understand and effectively utilize new technology & processes | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 39 | DOE payments to DTE come in later than expected. | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 83 | Project cost is grossly underestimated | Y | L | M | H | L | L | M | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 70 | DOE terminates grant for convenience | Y | L | H | H | L | L | L | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Would return to original project plan pre-DOE | ||||||
| 34 | DOE grant is not executed - Never reach agreement | Y | L | H | H | L | L | L | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Scope =H for other projects | ||||||
| 81 | Higher than expected failure rates of meters | Y | L | M | L | H | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 43 | Itron may not be able to keep up with the schedule | Y | L | H | M | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 42 | Itron may not provide materials according to the schedule | Y | L | H | M | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 17 | Itron could introduce security risk into product | Y | L | M | H | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 9 | DTE employee misuse role resulting in sabotage | Y | L | M | H | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 107 | Lack of effective Testing Plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 84 | Itron system fails to perform according to standards | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 82 | DOE(or other Federal) rule change impacts project execution plan | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 80 | New technology standards require infrastructure change | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 79 | Communication technology may change impacting meter operation / communication(AT&T) | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 72 | Union employees go on strike | Y | L | M | L | L | M | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 65 | DOE rejects customer behavior study plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 64 | DOE rejects risk analysis/benefits plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 63 | DOE rejects project execution | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 62 | DOE rejects cyber security plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 52 | Single point vulnerability with communications architecture | Y | L | L | M | L | L | M | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 38 | Supply chain does not do proper debarment due diligence | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 37 | Supply chain does not include necessary flow-down provisions to vendors | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 36 | DOE audit disallows some costs | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 35 | Unanticipated action related to Davis-Bacon Act | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 33 | Improper costs are included in DOE accounting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 32 | Time keeping for DOE reporting is inaccurate or incorrect | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 31 | DTE time keeping system cannot provide necessary information for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 30 | Accounting for DOE reporting is inaccurate or incorrect | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 29 | DTE accounting system cannot provide necessary information for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 28 | Vendors do not provide in kind-services (Cost share) | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 27 | Terms of DOE grant are violated | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 26 | Vendors / contractors do not provide timely info for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 25 | Vendors / contractors do not provide proper info for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 24 | DOE Reporting is not completed in a timely manner | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 23 | Report to DOE is inaccurate | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Regardless of Rating DOE related Items need to be closely tracked. | ||||||
| 22 | Third party claims that the technology we are using violates a patent or trade secret | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 110 | Project does not take appropriate steps to maintain confidentiality of Customer data | Y | L | L | M | L | L | L | 7 | Hull | Would affect company not necessarily the project | |||||||||
| 60 | Project Team not adequately trained in new processes & technology | Y | L | L | L | M | L | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 51 | Installer commits crime/fraud in the field | Y | L | L | L | L | M | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 50 | Safety incident occurs resulting in process change or training | Y | L | L | L | L | M | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 40 | Contractor/sub-contractor fails DOE audit | Y | L | L | M | L | L | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 18 | Interveners or grassroots groups negatively impact customer opinions | (SH) | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 12 | DTE call center volume may increase due to 5,000 meter changes per day increasing wait time significantly | (SH) | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 91 | Negative media as a result of ineffective employment communications | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 67 | Communication plan with regulators is inadequate (does not explain benefits and detriments of the system) | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | Regardless of rating this issue should be tracked closely | ||||||
| 66 | Communication plan with customers is inadequate (does not explain benefits and detriments of the system) | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | Regardless of rating this issue should be tracked closely | ||||||
| 21 | Prolonged data center outage impacts AMI system | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 106 | Lack of effective Quality Management Plan | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Stasek | See # 88 | ||||||||||||
| 93 | Project or vendor scope is not adequately defined | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | See # 88 | ||||||||||||
| 88 | Inadequate project management | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | Need to expand | ||||||||||||
| 120 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 119 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 118 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 117 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 116 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 115 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 114 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 113 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 112 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| Legend | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ● | Open Item | |||||||||||||||||||
| √ | Completed Activity |
Detroit Edison Confidential Page &P of &N
Applies to All (Printable)
| AMI Project: Risk Plan | Date: 01/27/2010 | |||||||||||||||||||
| Identified Risks that Apply to All Smart Current Projects | ||||||||||||||||||||
| # | Risk Event Description What is the event? | Applies to All | Likelihood | Impacts | Total Score | Risk Event Drivers What are the conditions, actions, or events that are likely to trigger the risk event to occur or is a leading indicator to the risk event occurring? | Response/ Mitigation Strategy What action(s) will be taken to limit the likelihood of these event occurring or limiting the impacts? | Contingency Plan What action(s) will be taken if this event occurs? | Owner | Risk Timeframe Critical date(s) or period of exposure | Comments | ● | ||||||||
| Schedule | Cost | Quality | Safety | Scope | √ | |||||||||||||||
| 68 | Corporate financial position changes and does not support project execution plan | Y | H | H | M | L | L | H | 75 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 4 | System integration scope is not well defined | Y | H | L | H | H | L | M | 75 | ● | √ | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 3 | System integration costs are higher than expected | Y | H | L | H | H | L | M | 75 | ● | √ | ● | Melton | Combine 3&4? | ||||||
| 1 | Project may not be funded to end and benefits may not be realized | Y | H | H | M | L | L | H | 75 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 97 | Inadequate # of IT human resources to support the project (project & operations) | Y | H | H | L | M | L | L | 55 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 53 | Required firmware/software upgrade negatively impacts production devices | Y | M | H | H | H | L | L | 51 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 86 | Operational business units / contractors not staffed properly to support project | Y | H | M | L | M | L | L | 45 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 55 | Lack of adequate vendor documentation | Y | H | M | L | M | L | L | 45 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 87 | AMI failures or problems at other utility adversely affects project | Y | M | H | M | M | L | L | 39 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 6 | MPSC disallows a component of the plan impacting benefit realization or cost recovery(example: remote disconnect) | Y | M | M | H | L | L | M | 39 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 57 | Organization human resources not adequate to accept and utilize as required (too busy, other focus) | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 49 | Catastrophic storm occurs impacting Communications (meters to AMI) | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 48 | Catastrophic storm occurs impacting rollout schedule | Y | H | M | L | L | L | L | 35 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 105 | Higher than expected work required at customer site due to aging infrastructure | Y | M | L | M | L | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 101 | Failure to follow proper installation procedures impacts customers | Y | M | L | L | M | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 100 | Higher than expected inclement weather conditions | Y | M | M | L | L | M | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 96 | Inadequately defined design freeze date & procedure | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 95 | Later than expected IT system change | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 94 | Higher than anticipated number of IT system changes | Y | M | M | L | L | L | M | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 78 | Loss of key personnel without effective knowledge transfer or replacement (DTE & Contractors) | Y | M | M | L | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 59 | Future state business processes not properly defined prior to milestone date | Y | M | L | M | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 56 | Discover a problem in the field that was not anticipated causing cost and schedule overruns | Y | M | M | M | L | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 7 | Security vulnerability discovered with outward equipment(meters, cell relays, home area network, other) | Y | M | M | L | M | L | L | 27 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 104 | DTE may not have adequate diagnostic tools to support post-meter installation | Y | H | L | L | L | L | L | 25 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 58 | Ineffective change management strategy Leads to low employee engagement | Y | M | L | L | M | L | L | 21 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | May affect ability to realize benefits | ||||||
| 2 | New firmware technology does not perform to specifications | Y | M | M | L | L | L | L | 21 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 16 | Itron is acquired by a competitor which leads to technology change | Y | L | H | H | M | L | H | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 15 | Itron goes out of business / defaults on contract | Y | L | H | H | M | L | H | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 8 | Security breach takes place with outward equipment(meters, cell relays, home area network, other) | Y | L | H | H | H | L | M | 19 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | Safety is M for SmartCircuits | ||||||
| 108 | Significant schedule delay may result in technology obsolescence | Y | L | M | H | M | L | M | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 102 | Customer complaints may be higher than expected | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 98 | Ineffective stakeholder engagement | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 73 | Installation causes higher levels of property damage than projected | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 61 | Takes longer than anticipated for Operations to understand and effectively utilize new technology & processes | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 39 | DOE payments to DTE come in later than expected. | Y | M | L | L | L | L | L | 15 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 83 | Project cost is grossly underestimated | Y | L | M | H | L | L | M | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | |||||||
| 70 | DOE terminates grant for convenience | Y | L | H | H | L | L | L | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Would return to original project plan pre-DOE | ||||||
| 34 | DOE grant is not executed - Never reach agreement | Y | L | H | H | L | L | L | 13 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Scope =H for other projects | ||||||
| 81 | Higher than expected failure rates of meters | Y | L | M | L | H | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 43 | Itron may not be able to keep up with the schedule | Y | L | H | M | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 42 | Itron may not provide materials according to the schedule | Y | L | H | M | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 17 | Itron could introduce security risk into product | Y | L | M | H | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 9 | DTE employee misuse role resulting in sabotage | Y | L | M | H | L | L | L | 11 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 107 | Lack of effective Testing Plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 84 | Itron system fails to perform according to standards | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Moccia | |||||||
| 82 | DOE(or other Federal) rule change impacts project execution plan | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 80 | New technology standards require infrastructure change | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 79 | Communication technology may change impacting meter operation / communication(AT&T) | Y | L | M | M | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 72 | Union employees go on strike | Y | L | M | L | L | M | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 65 | DOE rejects customer behavior study plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 64 | DOE rejects risk analysis/benefits plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 63 | DOE rejects project execution | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 62 | DOE rejects cyber security plan | Y | L | M | L | M | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Hull: Review Impacts | ||||||
| 52 | Single point vulnerability with communications architecture | Y | L | L | M | L | L | M | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 38 | Supply chain does not do proper debarment due diligence | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 37 | Supply chain does not include necessary flow-down provisions to vendors | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 36 | DOE audit disallows some costs | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 35 | Unanticipated action related to Davis-Bacon Act | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 33 | Improper costs are included in DOE accounting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 32 | Time keeping for DOE reporting is inaccurate or incorrect | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 31 | DTE time keeping system cannot provide necessary information for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 30 | Accounting for DOE reporting is inaccurate or incorrect | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 29 | DTE accounting system cannot provide necessary information for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 28 | Vendors do not provide in kind-services (Cost share) | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 27 | Terms of DOE grant are violated | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 26 | Vendors / contractors do not provide timely info for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 25 | Vendors / contractors do not provide proper info for DOE Reporting | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 24 | DOE Reporting is not completed in a timely manner | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | |||||||
| 23 | Report to DOE is inaccurate | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Hull | Regardless of Rating DOE related Items need to be closely tracked. | ||||||
| 22 | Third party claims that the technology we are using violates a patent or trade secret | Y | L | L | H | L | L | L | 9 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 110 | Project does not take appropriate steps to maintain confidentiality of Customer data | Y | L | L | M | L | L | L | 7 | Hull | Would affect company not necessarily the project | |||||||||
| 60 | Project Team not adequately trained in new processes & technology | Y | L | L | L | M | L | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Switala | |||||||
| 51 | Installer commits crime/fraud in the field | Y | L | L | L | L | M | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 50 | Safety incident occurs resulting in process change or training | Y | L | L | L | L | M | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Jamerson | |||||||
| 40 | Contractor/sub-contractor fails DOE audit | Y | L | L | M | L | L | L | 7 | ● | ● | ● | Kret | |||||||
| 18 | Interveners or grassroots groups negatively impact customer opinions | (SH) | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 12 | DTE call center volume may increase due to 5,000 meter changes per day increasing wait time significantly | (SH) | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | McCormick | |||||||
| 91 | Negative media as a result of ineffective employment communications | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | |||||||
| 67 | Communication plan with regulators is inadequate (does not explain benefits and detriments of the system) | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | Regardless of rating this issue should be tracked closely | ||||||
| 66 | Communication plan with customers is inadequate (does not explain benefits and detriments of the system) | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Sitkauskas | Regardless of rating this issue should be tracked closely | ||||||
| 21 | Prolonged data center outage impacts AMI system | Y | L | L | L | L | L | L | 5 | ● | ● | ● | Melton | |||||||
| 106 | Lack of effective Quality Management Plan | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Stasek | See # 88 | ||||||||||||
| 93 | Project or vendor scope is not adequately defined | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | See # 88 | ||||||||||||
| 88 | Inadequate project management | Y | 0 | ● | ● | ● | Norlin | Need to expand | ||||||||||||
| 120 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 119 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 118 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 117 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 116 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 115 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 114 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 113 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| 112 | 0 | ● | ● | ● | ||||||||||||||||
| Legend | ||||||||||||||||||||
| ● | Open Item | |||||||||||||||||||
| √ | Completed Activity |
Detroit Edison Confidential Page &P of &N
Mitigation Results
Risk Mitigation Results
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Event Did not Occur / No Action Taken Event Did not Occur / Mitigation Succesful Risk Transferred Risk Avoided Risk Accepted Event Occurred - Impacts Mitigated Event Occurred - Treatment Ineffective Duplicate / Combined with Other Risk
# of Risk Events Identified and Closed
Risks to Consider
| Risk Categories to Consider | |
| Capital Project Portfolio | |
| 1 | Funding availability (likelihood of approval) |
| 2 | Project justification (IRR, need, fleet strategy…) |
| 3 | Timing of the project |
| 4 | Regulatory influence |
| 5 | Commitment to the project (FosGen, GenOpts) |
| Engineering | |
| 6 | Overall project concept |
| 7 | Scope (definition, supporting documentation, realistic goals, stability…) |
| 8 | As-built conditions (known, assumed, documented...) |
| 9 | Technology (existing at DTE, established, new concept…) |
| 10 | Design (complexity, integration, past similar experience…) |
| 11 | Configuration management |
| 12 | ESO resources (availability, experience, knowledge, track record…) |
| 13 | A/E resources (availaibility, experience, knowledge, track record…) |
| 14 | Schedule (likelihood to meet agreed upon deadlines) |
| 15 | Cost (likelihood to control the engineering cost within the agreed upon budget) |
| Project Management | |
| 16 | Project team composition (experience level, competence and skills, compatibility, track record…) |
| 17 | Roles and responsibilities (established, understood, agreed…) |
| 18 | Communication (stakeholders identified) |
| 19 | Scope (expectations understood and agreed upon, realistic goals, stability…) |
| 20 | Plant Management commitment to the project |
| 21 | Weather (impact on outdoor construction work) |
| 22 | Past experience on a similar project (lessons learned incorporated…) |
| 23 | Plant operational constraints |
| 24 | Outage constraints (limited flexibility and opportunities, labor and contractors mandates, micro management, additional requirements…) |
| 25 | Cost estimating (scope quality, WBS, task duration, unit costs, labor plan, outage project or not…) |
| 26 | Scheduling (scope, WBS, task duration, dependencies, integration with outage or plant operation…) |
| 27 | Adherence to the PMP process by all project team members |
| Supply Chain Management | |
| Material | |
| 28 | Lead time |
| 29 | Raw material (availability, cost fluctuation...) |
| 30 | Material origin (logistics, imports…) |
| 31 | Competitive situation |
| 32 | Vendor performance (level of service, reliability, track record…) |
| 33 | Technology (existing at DTE, established, new…) |
| 34 | Schedule (likelihood to meet agreed upon deadlines…) |
| 35 | On site storage requirements |
| Contracted Labor | |
| 36 | Competitive situation |
| 37 | Vendor selection (new or well established relationship, past performance, reliability…) |
| 38 | Availability and workload (contractor, supervision, key personnel…) |
| 39 | Union labor (availability, productivity, skills…) |
| 40 | Safety record |
| 41 | Construction permits |
| 42 | Contract terms (firm bid, T&M, …) |
| 43 | Cost (potential for exceeding contracted labor budget…) |
| 44 | Schedule (likelihood to meet agreed upon deadlines…) |
| Construction | |
| 45 | Access to site |
| 46 | Access to equipment (lifting, rigging, scaffolding…) |
| 47 | Weather |
| 48 | Safety requirements |
| 49 | Training requirements (safety and other) |
| 50 | Labor plan (DeCo labor or contractor) |
| 51 | DeCo labor (availability, crew consistency, productivity, …) |
| 52 | Lay down areas |
| 53 | Plant operational constraints (equipement availability, shut down potential…) |
| 54 | Outage constraints (limited flexibility and opportunities, equipment availability, shut down potential…) |
| 55 | Site conditions (soil quality…) |
| 56 | Cost (potential for exceeding the construction budget…) |
| 57 | Schedule (constraints, deadlines, key dependencies…) |
| Other | |
| 58 | Soil Assessment |
| 59 | Excavation |
| 60 | Planning and Coordinating with Vendors |
| 61 | Inclement Weather |
| 62 | Regulations and Policy |
| 63 | Inadequate Bearing Soil Layer |
| 64 | Working on or near Water |
| 65 | Special Equipment Availability |
| 66 | Improper Engineering |
| 67 | Improperly Trained Workforce |
| 68 | Poor Planning |
| 69 | Communications Problems |
| 70 | Logistics |
| 71 | Theft |
| 72 | Craft Shortage |
| 73 | Permit Delay/Inspection Delay |
| 74 | Hazardous Materials |
| 75 | Missing/Inadequate Drawings or Specifications |
| 76 | Scope Creep/Change Requests |
| 77 | Late Delivery of Material/Supplies |
| 78 | Lay down/Confined Space |
| 79 | Contract Award Process |
| 80 | Technological Advancement |
Score Defined
High = 5 Medium = 3 Low = 1 Total Score = (Schedule + Cost + Quality + Safety + Scope) x Likelihood
Components of a risk
Components of a Risk •A Source of a risk or hazard – the thing which has the potential to harm or assist e.g. a dangerous chemical, competitors, government. •An Event or Incident – Something that occurs such that the source of risk has the impact concerned e.g. a leak, competitor expands into or leaves your market, new or revised regulations, or some level of observation reaching a particular trigger level. •A Consequence, outcome or impact on a range of stakeholders or assets e.g. environmental damage, loss or increase of market/profits, regulations increase or decreased competitiveness •A Cause (what and why) for the presence of the hazard or the event occurring e.g. design, human intervention, funding, prediction or failure to predict competitor activity, failure to or expansion of market presence •Controls and their level of effectiveness e.g. detection systems, clean up systems, policies, security, training, and market research. •When could the risk occur and Where would it occur.
List of Values
| H | ● | ||||||
| M | √ | ||||||
| L | |||||||
| Life of Project | |||||||
| 2010 | 2010 | 3 | |||||
| 2010Q1 | 2011 | 3 | |||||
| 2010 Q2 | 2011 1/11 | 3 | |||||
| 2010 Q3 | 20101201 | 3 | |||||
| 2010 Q4 | 2010 Dec 1 | ||||||
| 2011 | 2010 Q1 | ||||||
| 2011 Q1 | 2010 Q2 | ||||||
| 2011 Q2 | 2010 Q3 | ||||||
| 2011 Q3 | 2010 Q4 | ||||||
| 2011 Q4 | 2011 12 01 | ||||||
| 2011 Q1 | |||||||
| 2011 Q2 | |||||||
| 2011 Q3 | |||||||
| 2011 Q4 | |||||||
Rd 2 Directions
| 1) | Major correction to wording ("wordsmithing" can be done later) | |||||||
| 2) | Does this risk apply to all SmartCurrent projects (AMI, Smart Home, Smart Circuit) | |||||||
| 3) | Identify Likelihood * | # of Risks Identified | 109 | 20 | ||||
| 4) | Identify Impacts * | Available Time | 240 | 70 | ||||
| 5) | Identify Owner | Minutes/Risk | 2.2 | 3.5 | ||||
| * | Risk Plan is a living document - these ratings can/will change | 56% |
New Process Map
| Major Enterprise Projects | DRAFT: | <<Date>> | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Risk Plan Management : Process Map | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Manager / Risk Plan Manager | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Stakeholders | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Risk Owners | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Financial Analyst | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Scheduler | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Monthly Update Coordinator | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Begin Process
Identify Key Stakeholders
Plan and Schedule Risk Assessment
Conduct Risk Identification Session
Conduct Risk Quantification Session
Develop Risk Response Strategy
Develop Contingency Plan
Send out Request for Updates
Monthly Update Cycle
Integrate Identified Risks into Forecast
Integrate Identified Risks into Schedule
Incorporate Risks into Status Update
Compile Updated Risk Plan
Update Risk Plan
Update Risk Plan
Repeat Monthly Update Cycle Until Project is Complete
Provide Final Update to Risk Plan
File Risk Plan in Historical Archive
Monitor & Control Risks
Update Risk Plan
Publish Risk Plan
Review Industry/ Vendor Information for Lessons Learned & Project Specific Risks to Consider
Review Historical Risk Database For Related Risks
Review Current Projects for Related/Common Risks
Provide Input
Provide Input
Document Interdependencies in Work Scope