Risk Management Strategy Review

Risk Management Strategy Review

Task 2 – Risk Management Strategy Review
Instructions to Learners for Risk Management Strategy Review:
• This summative assessment can be completed in class or at any other convenient location.
• Students are required to complete this task using digital tools and ensure to submit in an acceptable format, e.g. .docx, .pdf, .pptx, or as advised by your assessor.
• Please use the following formatting guidelines to complete this assessment task:
 Font Size: 12; Line Spacing: Double; Font Style: Times New Roman
• Assessment activities can be completed either in real workplace environment or in a simulated environment such as your classroom. In both cases, appropriate evidence of the assessment activities must be provided.
Instruction to Assessors:
• You must assess student’s assessment according to the provided Marking Criteria.
• You must complete and record any evidence related to assessment activities including role-plays and presentations using appropriate forms which must be attached with student assessment submission.
• You must provide students with detailed feedback within 10 working days from submission.
This assessment task requires you to populate a risk register for the program as outlined in Task 1. Using the information from the register:
1. Determine program residual risk.
2. Develop a management strategy for each residual risk identified.
3. review and analyse program risk outcomes from the available information
4. Summarise the lessons learnt in such a way that they may be applied to future programs.
Compile a management report to outline each of the above points.
Note: Use the risk register template attached as a basis for this assessment task and add a minimum of 10 risks. The risks may be identified through stakeholder engagement and this engagement may be role played.
Risk Register as at
File No.:

REPORT FOR: (Optional) e.g. Steering Committee
PROGRAM MANAGER:
PROGRAM OBJECTIVE: As stated in the Program Business Plan.
Rating for Likelihood and Seriousness for each risk
L Rated as Low E Rated as Extreme (Used for Seriousness only)
M Rated as Medium NA Not Assessed
H Rated as High

Grade: Combined effect of Likelihood/Seriousness
Seriousness
Likelihood low medium high EXTREME
low N D C A
medium D C B A
high C B A A

Recommended actions for grades of risk
Grade Risk mitigation actions
A Mitigation actions, to reduce the likelihood and seriousness, to be identified and implemented as soon as the program commences as a priority.
B Mitigation actions, to reduce the likelihood and seriousness, to be identified and appropriate actions implemented during program execution.
C Mitigation actions, to reduce the likelihood and seriousness, to be identified and costed for possible action if funds permit.
D To be noted – no action is needed unless grading increases over time.
N To be noted – no action is needed unless grading increases over time.

Change to Grade since last assessment
NEW New risk  Grading decreased
— No change to Grade  Grading increased

Id Description of Risk
(including any identified ‘triggers’) Impact on Program
(Identify consequences ) Assessment of
Likelihood Assessment of
Seriousness Grade (combined Likelihood and Seriousness)
Change Date of Review Mitigation Actions
(Preventative or Contingency) Responsibility for mitigation action(s) Cost Timeline for mitigation action(s) Work Breakdown Structure for Risk Management Strategy Review

This is to indicate that the identified mitigation action has been included in the WBS (workplan).
1 Steering Committee unavailable.
Identified triggers:
• Steering Committee meetings repeatedly rescheduled due to lack of availability;
• Members do not attend despite prior confirmation of attendance. Lack of availability will stall progress (ie. delayed decisions will defer output finalisation, extend program timelines and staff resources will be required for longer than anticipated) H H A NEW 15/02/06 Preventative:
• Highlight strategic connection – link Program Objective to relevant Agency strategic objectives
• Confirm 2006 meeting schedule in January
• Confirm SC membership
• Widen representation (include other Agencies) Program Manager NA 15/03/06 Y
2 Inadequate funding to complete the program
Identified triggers:
• Funding is redirected;
• Costs increase (poor quality materials/ inaccurate cost estimates) Budget blow out means cost savings must be identified – ie. reduced output quality, timeframes are extended, outcomes (benefits) will be delayed and/or reduced. M M B No change 15/02/06 Contingency:
Re-scope program, focusing on time and resourcing Program Manager TBC TBC N
3 Staff reject new procedures
Triggers include
• Staff don’t participate in training (not prepared for new roles);
• New procedures not applied (work-arounds still used). Rejection means additional time and resources required to achieve successful implementation – i.e. outputs languish; more training is required (additional cost, time delays); potential for ‘falling back into old ways’ (more change mgt required); loss of credibility for program (perception of failure). H H A NEW 15/02/06 Preventative:
High level reinforcement of policy changes;
Provide opportunity for staff feedback prior to policy/procedure finalisation;
Develop Training Plan that allows for repeat attendance (perhaps 2 stage training?);
Identify staff ‘champions’ to promote adoption of new procedures (buddy system);
Circulate information to staff that
• promotes how new procedures have improved processes (e.g. 10 steps reduced to 4 steps etc);
• proportion of staff that have successfully completed the training.
• Identifies local ‘buddies’ for troubleshooting.
Sponsor

Program Manager

Consultant

Program Manager

Program Manager
NA

NA

$3,000

NA

NA
21/02/06

21/02/06

30/03/06

30/03/06

30/04/06
Y

Y

N

N

N

 

Place an order with us on https://assignmentsproficient.com/ and expect the best grades and help from qualified writers

 
"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Order now and Get 10% Discount! Use Code "Newclient"