Risk Metalanguage & Risk Responses
In order to understand a risk fully it is helpful to identify its causes as well as its effects. We can do this by using risk metalanguage to develop risk responses saysd David Hillson...
In order to understand a risk fully it is helpful to identify
its causes as well as its effects. We can do this by using risk
metalanguage to develop risk responses...
By Dr David Hillson
[Register and post your own comments
on this article below...]
In order to understand a risk fully it is helpful to identify
its causes as well as its effects. Risk metalanguage can help by
separating cause-risk-effect in a three-part description, such
as “Because of , might occur, which would lead to .” This
structured description not only ensures clear definition of the
risk, but can also be useful when developing responses.
There are four basic types of risk response:
1. Aggressive responses, either to avoid a threat by making
it impossible, or to exploit an opportunity by making it
definitely happen
2. Involving a third party to manage the risk, either
transferring a threat, or sharing an opportunity
3. Changing the size of a risk, tackling probability
and/or impact to reduce a threat or enhance an opportunity
4. Taking residual risks which cannot be managed
proactively or cost-effectively, accepting either a threat or an
opportunity
Each of these strategies can be linked to the cause-risk-effect
structure. For
threats (i.e.
risks with negative
impacts) this means the following:
• Avoidance can be achieved by removing or changing a cause, or
by breaking the cause-risk link so that the threat is no longer
possible. For example risks arising from lack of expertise might
be avoided by outsourcing or partnering. Exchange-rate risk
might be removed by using only local currency.
• Transfer tackles the risk itself, by involving others in its
management, though it does not change the risk directly.
Insurance is the classical example of threat transfer, though
contract terms can also be used.
• Reduction targets the probability of a threat by seeking to
weaken the cause-risk link, or aims to minimise negative impact
by addressing the risk-effect link. For example, knowing that
use of a new supplier creates the risk of misunderstood
requirements, familiarisation workshops can be held to make this
less likely.
• Acceptance focuses on the effect, recognising that some
threats are not controllable and might happen. This strategy
might simply involve setting aside contingency funds to recover
from negative impacts, or could involve developing a specific
fallback plan to be implemented if we were unlucky and the
threat occurred.
Similar thinking applies to
opportunities (i.e.
risks
with positive impacts):
• Exploit the opportunity by leveraging its cause so that the
opportunity is realised. For example a positive decision might
be taken to include an optional item in the scope of a project
to create additional benefit.
• Sharing an opportunity addresses the risk part of the
cause-risk-effect chain, by getting others involved in managing
the opportunity, perhaps through a risk-sharing partnership or
incentivised contract.
• Enhancing requires either strengthening the cause-risk link to
increase the probability that the opportunity will occur, or
reinforcing the risk-effect link to maximise its positive
impact. If attending a trade show creates the opportunity for
new business, action can be taken to maximise visibility and
attract contacts.
• Accepting that an opportunity cannot be influenced proactively
means that attention is focused on its effect. Contingency funds
might be allocated to take advantage of positive impacts, or a
specific fallback plan could be developed for use if we were
lucky and the opportunity happened.
The value of risk metalanguage in risk identification is already
well-known. Now the same technique can provide a framework for
development of appropriate responses to both threats and
opportunities, ensuring that actions effectively achieve the
desired results.
© April 2006, Dr David Hillson, PMP FAPM
About The Author:
Dr David Hillson PMP FAPM writes and consults ON risj management
across a range of businesses. To provide feedback on this
Briefing Note, or for more details on how to develop effective
risk management, contact the Risk Doctor (
info@risk-doctor.com), or
visit the Risk Doctor website (
www.risk-doctor.com).
Comments
You must be logged in to comment.