Reem Maswadeh PM595/ Week 7 Risk Paper

Which case study does a better job at identifying risks? Explain why. I think that phase one does a better job at established in organizating structure to use for identify risk versus phase two. According to the case study, Phase one is concerned with establishing a baseline against which tenders can be assessed prior to bids being recieved, while phase two on the other hand, compares each submitted tender offer with the baseline, to develop a comparative risk assessment for each one. Phase one is concerned with establishing and documenting a risk baseline against which individual tender responses can be compared (Cooper, Grey, Raymond & Walker, 2005). Phase two then takes the work that was done under phase one and modifies it to extract the information that it would need. Which case study does a better job at quantifying risks? Explain why. Phase one does not attempt to derive an 'abolute measure of risk'; the main goal is to provide a comparison between the tender responses and proposed methods for fulfilling the contract. The main objective of phase two is to provide comparative guidance to the tender evaluation team on the potential effects of risk on the project, given each tenderers approach. Absolute measures of risk are of secondary importance. Phase one was more associated with sitting up the

process that will document the information and identify risks, while phase two is more focued on abolute measure of risk. The tender review process builds on the risk baseline established in Phase 1 and the documented assumptions associated with it. Its objective is to provide comparative guidance to the tender evaluation team on the potential effects of risk on the project, given each tenderers approach. Absolute measures of risk are of secondary importance (Cooper, Grey, Raymond & Walker, 2005). Which case did you find easier to follow with regards to the risk assessment? Explain why. I find that both phases are built on each other, but I rather follow phase two because it has more of the quantifying aspect versus phase one. To me, understanding how the risk has an impact on the project and to what extent takes more of my attentions versus phase one. Which had the more compelling assessment of risk? Explain why. Phase one has a more compelling assessment of risk versus phase two. The information that is used in phase two is all deprived from phase one. Also, the processes that are used to measure the likelihood/impact of the risks are all deprived from phase one. Phase two simply takes the informations and processes then alters it to generate the information that it needs to generate its information. Explain how these two cases were different and how they were similar.

The two cases are similar because they are analyzing the same scenario. Also, both cases are bulit on each other. For example, the information generated in phase one is taken and used to generate the information for phase two. The two cases are different because they ultimate goal of each phase is different. Phase one is concerned with establishing a baseline against which tenders can be assessed prior to bids being recieved, while phase two on the other hand, compares each submitted tender offer with the baseline, to develop a comparative risk assessment for each one. In phase one abolute measure of risk is not something that is of importance, while phase two has abolute measure of risk as secondary importance (Cooper, Grey, Raymond & Walker, 2005).

References Cooper, D., Grey, S., Raymond, G., & Walker, P. (2005). Project risk management guidelines: Managing risk in large projects and complex procurements . (p. 149). England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Retrieved from http://online.vitalsource.com/?printed=&submit.x=11&submit.y=2

Cooper, D., Grey, S., Raymond, G., & Walker, P. (2005). Project risk management guidelines: Managing risk in large projects and complex procurements . (p. 154). England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Retrieved from

http://online.vitalsource.com/?printed=&submit.x=11&submit.y=2

Cooper, D., Grey, S., Raymond, G., & Walker, P. (2005). Project risk management guidelines: Managing risk in large projects and complex procurements . (p. 156). England: John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Retrieved from http://online.vitalsource.com/?printed=&submit.x=11&submit.y=2