on Risk & Safety

Guest Post by John Ayers (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

Studies show that the majority of companies today outsource up to 60-70% of their work scope to subcontractors to stay competitive. As a result, subcontractors are a major source of risk to a project.

How to minimize the subcontractor risk on a project is addressed in this paper. The approach to do this is based on my 30 years of project and project risk management experience and knowledge.

Guest Post by Malcolm Peart (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

I was once taught that good project management and mitigating the risk of failure was a combination of Fayol’s three pillars of planning, organising and controlling glued together by effective communication and enclosed in a bubble of morale.  I was later to learn that that if one overindulges or ignores any one pillar, or fails to communicate effectively rather than just efficiently, the oftentimes thin bubble of morale may rupture.  The unfortunate result is the loss of management coherence and the real possibility of project failure.

Guest Post by Daniel Burrus (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

These days, you can find a slurry of memes and motivational graphics on social media alluding to the concept that you must always beat out your competition in business. But contrary to popular belief, competing with other businesses is actually quite counterproductive, especially in the post-pandemic “new normal” we face – something we never expected to be facing as we entered this new decade.

Guest Post by Malcolm Peart (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

A project with a problem…not a new phenomenon and more likely than not ‘business as usual’ for most, but how do we address the problems on our projects?

Theoretically there’s the risk register and plan with a predetermined set of mitigation actions and designated owners who, although being potential scapegoats, are expected to manage risks magnificently while still dealing with the rest of their, hopefully, nonproblematic scope.  Problems plague projects despite alleged prior preparation and proper planning.  But it’s the way that people behave and interact that can make all the difference when resolving the problem and keeping the rest of the project on-track.

Guest Post by Malcolm Peart (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

“Puttin’ wood in t’ole after ‘oss ‘as bolted“… this is actually English, it really is, and it’s a Yorkshire phrase meaning ‘shutting the gate after the horse has gone’.

How often are we wise after the fact?  How often is more time and effort spent focusing on the gate rather than retrieving the horse?  There is a tendency to try and find the person responsible for not closing the gate, requiring more people to check on gate closing, writing procedures for closing the gate and this is coupled with hours of pointless and misdirected discussions by every man along with their barking dogs.  But what about catching the horse that now runs free and ensuring it can’t bolt again?

Guest Post by Andrew Sheves (first posted on CERM ® RISK INSIGHTS – reposted here with permission)

Most of the risk assessment models I’ve discussed before use a basic formula to calculate a value for risk. By adding or multiplying values for the individual factors, you’ll get a numeric value for the risk itself. That’s going to allow you to put things into order, apply a color-code or description. That gives you enough differentiation to start a risk-based discussion or determine where you need to focus your attention and resources.