MSD Project Risk Assessment Template

Transcription

1 Likelihood Severity Importance MSD Project Risk Assessment Template Risk Item Effect Cause Describe the risk briefly What is the effect on any What are the possible or all of the project cause(s) of this risk? deliverables if the cause actually happens? We spend too much time in the planning stage of design Concept flexibility Ineffective meetings Inaccurate criteria weights Best options are too expensive Skill set of engineers Container is overconstrained for design Packaging time constraints not met We will run out of time for the design and build phase Either pursue multiple concepts or group stagnates Meetings will not accomplish enough Design is optimized for needs other than the needs of the customer Device design will need to involve compromises between quality and cost The skill set of the engineers is not sufficient to design the device The device will not be able to meet all constraints and will not be adequate The device will not satisfy the needs of the customer (1-3) (1-3) L*S Action to Minimize Risk What action(s) will you take (and by when) to prevent, reduce the impact of, or transfer the risk of this occurring? Indecision on concepts, team dysfunction Force ourselves to make is unable to come to a consensus for concepts Unorganized objectives/goals in meetings Insufficient communication with customer Technology or material constraints Project staffing was insufficiently evaluated in project planning Customer has unrealistic demands Time to package is longer than expected planning/design concept decisions Pugh matrix to objectively compare concept quality Keep Agendas/Meeting minutes Consult with customer after initial customer needs are determined Explore other material/concept options Ensure that engineers are doing work that is appropriate for their skill set Constantly consult w/ customers Prototype concepts and perform dry runs for packaging Owner Who is responsible for following through on mitigation? Jason

2 Long lead order Design time (late system design) Components do not interface Feasibility of design components Components are more expensive than expected Under estimating manufacturing costs Cost of material based on quantity Resources (test equipment) Verification Satisfactory Design Initial Testing Parts will not be received in a timely manner, project will not be completed by the deadline Delays other project needs (prototyping, detail design, etc.) Overall concept is ineffective Final concept is ineffective in meeting customer needs Tests cannot be performed on prototype The device is not acceptable an d the project is a failure The package is not to necessary specs and is considered a failure The package does not offer the required protection Far distance, complicated part, part shortage Over-constrained design, ineffective scheduling Design Error Design Error (engineering analysis) Inadequete Project Planning Inadequete Project Planning Cost of creating a single container is much greater than making a large number Inadequate availability or capability of test resources Kodak s customers will not accept product in our new package Kodak is not satisfied with our final concept Inadequate prototype design/flawed analysis Investigate lead time on parts as early as possible Keep a detailed schedule throughout project. Designers collaborate on container concepts and development. Focus on accuracy in 3D models Perform appropriate engineering analysis to determine feasibility Optimize price vs quality of chosen materials Research cost prior to concept finalization Specify a prototype compared to final production cost Reserve test equipment/resources well in advance Consult with Kodak to determine customer needs Consult with Kodak to determine their needs Conservative analysis and contingency prototype that will definitely work Phil ME ME Tom

3 Material Unavailable Real World Failure Vibration Test Double Stack Vibration Test Fail Cost of Package Testing Drawing Collaboration Tolerances Transporting Package Different materials will need to be used The package does not offer the required protection Design is a failure since it cannot withstand shipping vibrations Design is a failure since it cannot meet double stack specification Unable to have undamaged visual to present at Imagine RIT Unable to access testing necessary for package validation Suggestions from Marshall Boxes are counter-productive Potential for package failure due to incorrect Delay and missing of testing/presenting dates Suppliers have a shortage/ unreasonable material request (i.e. 5 plywood) Test isn t representative of real world conditions Undesired result while testing at RIT with double stack Undesired result while testing at RIT with double stack Single package fails Kodak purchasing dept. chooses inadequate testing facility option Unable to accurately convey design concept to Marshall Boxes Inaccurate tolerances considered for design Inability to access vehicle to transport roll and package Stay in contact with Marshall Boxes to be aware of capabilities of materials Also perform a real world test (i.e. ship to a customer and document any damage) Design the package with the consideration of withstanding high intensity vibration cycles Design the package with the consideration of withstanding a double stack impact Determine the least damaged package of the three used in RIT tests Convey the importance of using RIT s packaging facilities to test Have many visuals and be elaborate on main focus points for package. Use predetermined tolerance and analyze stacked tolerances Assure that Kodak transportation vehicles are available at a given time ME ME ME ME Phil Likelihood scale Severity scale 1 - This cause is unlikely to happen 1 - The impact on the project is very minor. We will still meet deliverables on time and within, but it will cause extra work 2 - This cause could conceivably happen 2 - The impact on the project is noticeable. We will deliver reduced functionality, go over, or fail to meet some of our Engineering Specifications.

4 3 - This cause is very likely to happen 3 - The impact on the project is severe. We will not be able to deliver, or what we deliver will not meet the customer's needs. Importance Score (Likelihood x Severity) use this to guide your preference for a risk management strategy Prevent Action will be taken to prevent the cause(s) from occurring in the first place. Reduce Action will be taken to reduce the likelihood of the cause and/or the severity of the effect on the project, should the cause occur Transfer Action will be taken to transfer the risk to something else. Insurance is an example of this. You purchase an insurance policy that contractually binds an insurance company to pay for your loss in the event of accident. This transfers the financial consequences of the accident to someone else. Your car is still a wreck, of course. Accept Low importance risks may not justify any action at all. If they happen, you simply accept the consequences. Phase Budget and Schedule Risk Technical Risk MSD I Planning Minimize planning time(don t plan forever) Concept Development function Concept flexibility Ineffective meetings Best options are expensive, unsafe; Unrealistic goals

5 System Design Detailed Design Inaccurate criteria weight Skill set of engineer Concept indecision Vendor Selection Long lead order Design Time (late system design review) Did not identify a design constraint Container is over constrained for design Time to package is longer than expected, Misestimation of concept specifications (does not meet them but we thought it would) Components do not interface (design failure), Feasibility of Design Components Components are more expensive than initial predicted Underestimation of manufacturing costs MSD II Build Parts delivery Cost of material based on quantity Build failure ( cannot build concept with orderd parts) Verification Resources(test equipment, labs) Verification (Kodaks Customers will not accept the product in our new packaging) Verification (Kodak is not satisfied with the final product)