Making risk assessments more comparable and repeatable

Many of the objections to implementing Risk Management and acting upon risk results hinge on the subjectivity of the risk assessment system. This subjectivity makes it difficult to make risk assessments justifiable, repeatable, and comparable over an entire project, program, or organization. One can...

Celý popis

Uloženo v:
Podrobná bibliografie
Vydáno v:Systems engineering Ročník 14; číslo 2; s. 173 - 179
Hlavní autor: Hall, David C.
Médium: Journal Article
Jazyk:angličtina
Vydáno: Hoboken Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company 01.06.2011
Wiley
Témata:
Applied sciences
Computer science; control theory; systems
Exact sciences and technology
Operational research and scientific management
Operational research. Management science
risk assessment
risk management
risk scoring system
risk subjectivity
Risk theory. Actuarial science
risk vocabulary
Software
Software engineering
Vocabulary
Multiplication
risk subjectivity
risk vocabulary
Hierarchical classification
Risk assessment
risk scoring system
Algorithm architecture adequation
Risk analysis
Risk management
ISSN:1098-1241, 1520-6858
On-line přístup:Získat plný text
Tagy: Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
Popis
Shrnutí:Many of the objections to implementing Risk Management and acting upon risk results hinge on the subjectivity of the risk assessment system. This subjectivity makes it difficult to make risk assessments justifiable, repeatable, and comparable over an entire project, program, or organization. One cannot easily justify assigning a 30% likelihood to a risk occurring when others with more, the same, or less experience are ascribing a 60% likelihood of occurrence to a similar risk. How to get all (or most) risk assessments, regardless of type (software, hardware, integration, programmatic, external, etc.), justifiable, repeatable, and comparable has been one of the holy grails of Risk Management for years. The methodology outlined in this paper meets at least some of this requirement. The methodology requires incorporating the Likelihood of Occurrence into a set of specifically defined sublevels under each risk category rather than using it as a separate multiplication factor. Basically, the assumption behind this methodology is that the more mature the process, the more experience available, the more detailed the design, etc., the lower the likelihood of occurrence of a specific risk becomes. Making this assumption, incorporating the likelihood into each specific sublevel and requiring justification for each choice then allows the establishment of more representative scores for project risks and allows risk information to be presented in a justifiable, repeatable, and comparable fashion. © 2010 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Syst Eng 14: 173–179, 2011
Bibliografie:istex:C8FEFF1E255B2626CE302C63F8CCF2B5227005FC
ArticleID:SYS20169
ark:/67375/WNG-6Q0T43MH-9
ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1098-1241
1520-6858
DOI:10.1002/sys.20169