This is a simulated Risk Management Plan for the fictional company Intwit's development of Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition. It was created for a Project Management Class at the Illinois Institute of Technology
15
Confidential Slowen 2020 Risk Management Plan February, 2011 Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project Project Risk Management Plan February, 2011 Department: Software Development Department Product or Process: Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Document Owner: Sean McBride Project or Organization Role: Project Manager, Development of Slowen 2020 Version Date Author Change Description 1.0 14FEB2011 Sean McBride Initial Release for review by stakeholders.
Transcript
Confidential Slowen 2020 Risk Management Plan February, 2011
Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project
Project Risk Management Plan February, 2011
Department: Software Development Department
Product or Process: Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition
Document Owner: Sean McBride
Project or Organization Role: Project Manager, Development of Slowen 2020
Version Date Author Change Description
1.0 14FEB2011 Sean McBride Initial Release for review by stakeholders.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 2 3/21/2011
1. Introduction 1.1 Review of Project Importance The project to develop the cloud-based Intwit Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition software package is of inestimable importance for the future of the Intwit. This project is being developed for our most important customer: the state of Illinois. Our government contract with the state of Illinois offers the potential to expand our expertise in personal and corporate financial software into the realm of government budgeting and tax policy. Given the connection between Illinois and the current administration in Washington, success with the state of Illinois will open opportunities for Intwit to develop similar cloud-based financial software packages at the federal level. Our aggressive bid for this government contract was based on our estimates that the development of this project would take six months and cost $1 million. According to the contract, 50% of cost overruns between $1 and $1.1 million are reimbursed by the state of Illinois, and absolutely nothing is reimbursed above $1.1 million. The absolute deadline for the delivery of the product for validation by the office of the State Treasurer is 31AUG2011. Failure to meet this deadline results in a $100,000 penalty per calendar month. Due to state policy, this software must be developed using the Windows Azure platform. 1.2 Purpose Given the importance of this contract, this Project Risk Management Plan (RMP) seeks to ensure project success by minimizing the likelihood and impact of risk by thoroughly identifying, estimating, and evaluating risk in order to develop a robust plan to implement and monitor cost-effective mitigation steps. Because this project involves a new technology, a new and important client, a very aggressive timeline, and strict penalties for time overruns, it is essential to project success that the RMP be given far greater importance than on previous projects. 1.3 Scope The scope of this document pertains to the Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project and its internal and external risks. The risk management methodology of this project will be used primarily by the Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project throughout its project cycle. 1.4 References 1.4.1 Best Practices Website For guidance on the Intwit risk management methodology, please refer to the Intwit best practices website at http://bestpractices.intwit.com. Note: Intwit user authentication is required. 1.4.2 External References
• The template for this Risk Management Plan (RMP) is modified from the California Office of Systems Integration (OSI) Best Practices website at http://www.bestpractices.osi.ca.gov/sysacq/documents/risk%20management%20plan%20(3283).doc. It also uses the Microsoft Word RMP template developed by Pcubed and found at http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/templates/project-risk-management-plan-TC001145558.aspx
• PMBOK Guide, 4th Edition. • Illinois State Office of the Chief Information Officer Information Technology Project
Oversight Framework- Section 3: Risk Management and Escalation Procedures • FAR 402.709 on Government Contracts.
Refer to the Project Risk Database located at <imaginary server address>. 1.5 Document Maintenance This document will be reviewed periodically and updated as needed. When a change is made, the updated revision number, date, author, and change description must be included on the table located on the cover sheet.
2. Stakeholder Roles and Responsibilities
Role Risk Management Responsibility Assignment
Project Manager
Responsible for (1) writing and implementing the Project Management Plan for the Intwit 2020: Indominable Edition Development Project and (2) reporting progress to the Project Sponsor and the office of the Illinois State Treasurer.
Sean McBride
Project Team:
Responsible for completing the project work by following the guidance of the PM in completing the components of the Work Breakdown Structure according to requirements.
Sue – system architect
Joe and Sam – programmers
Mary – business analysis / customer rep (requirements)
Pete – quality assurance
Project Sponsor Responsible for reviewing the project and assisting the PM in coordinating with key corporate and government personnel.
Dennis Hood
Client Responsible for (1) coordinating with the PM each Wednesday at 10am throughout the project lifecycle, (2) contacting the various departments and determine the specific customization and functionality they need, and (3) maintaining this information in the departmental functionality roster located on the Intwit servers.
The state of Illinois. POC is the office of the Illinois State Treasurer.
End-Users Responsible for coordinating with the POC in the office of the Illinois State Treasurer to determine required custom features for the department.
The various government departments of the state of Illinois.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 4 3/21/2011
3. Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Ed. Development Project Risk Management 3.1 Identify Risks Due to Intwits relative inexperience (i) working with state government and (ii) developing a cloud-based software package using the Windows Azure platform, the most critical risks involved in the Slowen 2020: Indefatigable Edition Development Project revolve around government requirements and competence in the new technology. Risk Type Risk and Description Example
Risk 1
Scope
The customer (state of Illinois) insists on new requirements.
Illinois realizes that the product requires a special capability to track National Guard expenses
Risk 2
Scope
A change in applicable federal regulations occurs unexpectedly.
The Obama Administration creates a new set of requirements for state government information systems that detail programs involved in federal revenue sharing
Risk 3
Human Resources
The software developers lack experience working with a required technology.
Because Intwit has previously used different technologies, Joe and Sam have little experience developing for the Windows Azure platform, potentially causing delays in project completion.
Risk 4
Communications
Unanticipated bureaucratic paperwork result in time-consuming process overhead
Intwit underestimates the time needed to fill out government forms required of state contractors.
Risk 5
Human Resources
The process of obtaining government-mandated security and credit checks takes longer than anticipated
It takes an extra six weeks for key project personnel to obtain the necessary background checks to work with government data.
Confidential Slowen 2020 Risk Management Plan February, 2011
The customer (state of Illinois) insists on new requirements.
Due to the structure of state government, a sudden increase in scope requirements would likely relate to the specific departmental capability demands. Due to our Object-oriented methodology, such changes would allow us to leave our core program unchanged while using inheritance and polymorphism for the new requirements. Based off previous experience working with the various “silos” of older corporations, Intwit assumes that an unanticipated increase in project scope would likely increase personnel costs by $15,000 and delay the project by one week. This delay would trigger a $100,000 penalty from the state of Illinois.
Medium
$115,000
Because the state of Illinois has approximately 75 separate departments that would each use this software package, the likelihood of unanticipated departmental changes to interdepartmental state projects is high. Intwit has examined previous interdepartmental initiatives and found that new department-level requirements caused time-overruns 60% of the time.
High
60%
Medium
$69,000
Risk #2:
A change in applicable federal regulations occurs unexpectedly.
An unanticipated change in federal regulations would likely concern issues of information security and interoperability. Because these issues would require a substantial redevelopment of the software package at the most basic level, core components of the software system would have to be redesigned and re-implemented. Previous experience with this sort of redesign has led Intwit to estimate a cost overrun of $200,000. Additionally, this overrun would likely lead to a month delay, which would trigger a $100,000 penalty from the state of Illinois.
High
$300,000
Intwit recently consulted with Booz Allen Hamilton on the likelihood of a INFOSEC overhaul during the lifecycle of the project. Their report states that far reaching federal regulations that affect state level initiatives generally only occur every few years following election cycles, but that recent financial concerns have dramatically reduced the likelihood of such legislation. They forecast a 15% chance that the project will be impacted by federal regulations during the course of the government contract.
Low
15%
Medium
$45,000
Risk #3:
Key personnel lack needed experience in certain technologies.
Although the Windows Azure platform is touted as quick to learn, lack of experience in the project team would cause Intwit to develop the software package much less efficiently than on other recent projects. A recent study in an industry publication states that transitioning to Windows Azure effectively adds an additional 25% of man hours to complete over the first five projects, after which the technology is 25% more efficient than other technologies. Intwit estimates that the project would require 25% more development time if the personnel were to learn Azure on-job, which would lead to a $100,000 penalty and cost $50,000 in personnel expenses that otherwise would work on future projects.
Medium
$150,000
Both Joe and Sam claim some remedial knowledge of Windows Azure (through a conference they went to last year). Although they claim that they could learn the technology on-job without any major delays, neither of them has actually used the software before. Additionally, although both claim strong experience with cloud-computing through previous employers, a recent career survey indicated that some 25% of programmers exaggerate their expertise to be hired for a job. Because Intwit has never before developed on the platform before, there is a high chance that development on this platform would require the project team to work overtime. Intwit estimates this likelihood at 90%.
High
90%
High
$135,000
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 6 3/21/2011
Risk #4:
Unanticipated bureaucratic paperwork result in time-consuming process overhead
Our business rep, Mary, has no experience dealing with government clients. According to a recent survey on government red tape, Illinois requires on average five times as many documents as a similarly sized corporate project. The state of Illinois recently tried to become more efficient by switching to a propriety paperless digital document system. We estimate that these additional documents and the new state digital document system would create project bottlenecks of up to 2.5 weeks, which would lead to a $100,000 penalty and $10,000 in additional personnel costs
Medium
$110,000
Because Intwit has little experience working with state governments, it is important to compare to known statistics. A recent article in the Harvard Business Review states that over 80% of first-time government contractors experience significant project bottlenecks due to bureaucratic paperwork.
High
80%
Medium
$88,000
Risk #5:
The process of obtaining government-mandated security and credit checks takes longer than anticipated
According to the state security office website, while it takes on average three weeks for 80% of applicants to obtain the necessary state clearances, numerous extraordinary factors can lead to additional delay (averaging 2 months) for 20% of applicants. Intwit estimates that one member of the project team will experience abnormal delays, which will delay the project by two months. This would lead to penalties of $200,000 and additional personnel costs of $50,000
Low
$250,000
According to the state website, 20% of applicants experience a significant delay. Because there are five team members (the PM already has clearance from military service), each with an 80% chance of delay, there is an aggregate 57% chance of at least one person experiencing a delay
Medium
57%
High
$142,500
Confidential Slowen 2020 Risk Management Plan February, 2011
3.3 Plan Risk Mitigation
Risks and their Exposure
Risk One: $69k
Risk Two: $45k
Risk Four: $88k
Risk Five: $142.5k
Risk Three: $135k
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Likelihood (%)
Imp
act
($)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 8 3/21/2011
Risk 1: The state of Illinois insists on new requirements due to departmental demands. Mitigation Option 1: Renegotiate Late Penalty at a Per-Diem Rate Risk 1 Net Exposure Reduction of $46.601.40 at the cost of $50,000 Aggregate Net Exposure Reduction of $98,605.50 at the cost of $50,000 The high exposure of Risk One relates to the 60% likelihood that superficial last-minute department-level demands for functionality will trigger the contract’s $100k penalty for exceeding the deadline by up to one month. Because this risk would likely only lead do delays of one week, Intwit could renegotiate the contract with the state of Illinois to have the $100,000 penalty reassessed at a per diem date of $3,333. Intwit’s legal department claims that there is precedent for this renegotiation and estimates that the renegotiation would cost $50,000. Once renegotiated, a one week delay would cost $23,331 rather than $100,000, which (after adding the added $15,000 of personnel costs) would reduce net exposure to $22,398.60. Please note that this mitigation option would affect the time-overrun penalty for all risks. This would significantly reduce the impact of all Risks across the board.
• Risk 1: Savings of 23 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $38,331 and exposure to $22,398.60. Net exposure reduction of $46,601.40
• Risk 2: No savings • Risk 3: Savings of 7 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $119,993 and exposure
to $107.993.70. Net exposure reduction of $11,999.30 • Risk 4: Savings of 12 days of penalty at per-diem rate reduces impact to $69,994 and exposure
to $47,995.20, yielding a net exposure reduction of $40,004.80 • Risk 5: No savings.
Risks and their Exposure at Per-Diem and Monthly Penalties
R2: $45k
R5: $142.5k
R1(per-diem): $22k
R3(per-diem): $108k
R4(per-diem): $48k
R1(monthly): $69k
R3(monthly): $135k
R4(monthly): $88k
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Likelihood (%)
Imp
act (
$)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 9 3/21/2011
Mitigation Option 2: Hire Outside Contractor to formally assess Departmental Needs At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $69,000 at the cost of $50,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $22,398 at the cost of $50,000 By hiring an outside contractor to determine the exact functionality requirements of the Illinois state departments, the likelihood of last-minute departmental demands could be reduced substantially. A contractor would coordinate with the 75 state departments to check their needs in the first month of the project for $50,000. Included is a guarantee to cover any cost overages that would occur due to departmental demands after the first month of the project. This would reduce net exposure to 0 by transferring risk to the contractor at the cost of $50,000. This is logical if the exposure is $69,000 because of the penalty being assessed passed on months, but it is not logical if the exposure has already been reduced to $22,398.60 by a change to a per-diem penalty.
Risk One with Mitigation Option 2 at Per-Diem and Monthly Penalties
R1(per-diem): $22k
R1(monthly): $69k
R1 (with M2): $0k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 60% 62% 64% 66% 68% 70%
Likelihood (%)
Imp
act (
$)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 10 3/21/2011
Risk 2: A change in applicable federal regulations occurs unexpectedly. Mitigation Option 1: Clarify the Contract At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $30,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $30,000 As it currently stands, Intwit must deliver a product that “comply with federal regulations” no later than 31AUG2011. The contract is ambiguous whether this refers to the federal regulations as of when the contract was signed or as of when the project is due. The legal department believes that it can successfully argue that the contract only requires compliance with federal regulations in effect when the contract was signed for the cost of $30,000. This would reduce the net exposure of this risk to 0 by transferring this risk to the state of Illinois. Mitigation Option 2: Insure the Risk At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $60,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $45,000 at the cost of $60,000 A DC insurance company has offered insurance against all costs incurred as a result of federal regulatory changes since the signing of the contract for the cost of $60,000. This would reduce the net exposure of this risk to 0 by transferring this risk to the insurance company.
Risk Two with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R2: $45k
R2(w /M1 or M2): $0k0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
14% 14% 14% 15% 15% 15% 15% 15% 16% 16% 16%
Likelihood (%)
Impa
ct (
$)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 11 3/21/2011
Risk 3: Key personnel lack experience in the Windows Azure platform. Mitigation Option 1: Send Developers to Microsoft Training At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $102,500 at the cost of $60,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,995.45 at the cost of $60,000 Microsoft offers a three-week bootcamp for developers to learn the Windows Azure platform at the cost of $15,000 per person. The promotional material for this training event claims that graduates of this program are “experts in the technology, ready to take on any challenges using the Azure platform.” After speaking to a Microsoft representative about Intwit’s specific training needs, we estimate that sending Sue, Joe, Sam, and Pete to this training would lower the likelihood of a delay resulting in cost and time overruns from 90% to 25%. This would also reduce our estimate of cost overruns in personnel costs down to $20,000. Under the monthly penalty model, impact for this risk would become $130,000 and likelihood would be 25%. This would lower exposure by $102,500 at the cost of $60,000. Under the per-diem penalty model, impact for this risk would $99,993 and likelihood would be 25%. This would lower exposure by $77,995.45 at the cost of $60,000. Mitigation Option 2: Hire Additional Developers with the Required Skills and Clearances At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $97,500 at the cost of $140,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,995.45 at the cost of $140,000 Intwit research has concluded that hiring a Windows Azure developer with Illinois state clearances would require a $100,000 salary plus benefits, bringing the approximate annual cost of this individual to $140,000. Although reducing risk likelihood to 25% (thereby reducing net exposure by 97,500), this option would commit Intwit to hiring another person beyond this current project. The Director of Human Resources explicitly barred this option due to the need to cut long-term personnel costs.
Risk Three with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R3(monthly w / M2): $37.5k R3(monthly): $135k
R3(per-diem): $108k
R3(monthly w / M1): $32.5k
R3(per-diem w / M1): $30.2k
R3(per-diem w / M2): $30k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Likelihood (%)
Impa
ct (
$)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 12 3/21/2011
Risk 4: Unanticipated Bureaucratic Paperwork results in Time-Consuming Process Overhead Mitigation Option 1: Authorize Overtime at Double Pay to make up for Personnel Shortfall At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $77,000 at the cost of $13,500 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $41,000 at the cost of $13,500 Because Mary has proven herself as capable and quick to learn, offering her the incentive of double pay overtime would encourage her to work longer days to prevent project bottlenecks from occurring. Intuit estimates that the extra work involved with government paperwork and learning the government document system would amount to around 150 hours. Mary typically earns $45 per hour, so her double overtime rate would be $90 per hour. This would cost the firm an additional $13,500, but it would lower the likelihood of this risk to 10% by encouraging Mary to work extra hours to prevent bureaucratic paper requirements from contributing to project bottlenecks. Mitigation Option 2: Subcontract with a firm specializing in Illinois state paperwork requirement At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $88,000 at the cost of $75,000 At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $48,000 at the cost of $75,000 Intwit has enquired about the possibility of subcontracting with a firm specializing in Illinois state documents. The firm possesses all required security clearances and has experience working with the new state digital document system. For a fee of $15 per document page, the firm will complete all state documents and input them into the digital document system within a guaranteed timeframe of three business days. This would effectively reduce the likelihood of this risk to 0%. Based off an article from the Harvard Business Review, Intwit expects to have to file 5,000 pages of state documents, meaning that it would cost $75,000 to reduce exposure to zero.
Risk Four with Mitigation Options 1 and 2
R4(monthly): $88k
R4(monthly w /M1): $11k
R4(monthly w /M2): $0k
R4(per-diem): $48k
R4(per-diem w /M1): $7k
R4(per-diem w /M2): $0k
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Likelihood (%)
Impa
ct (
$)
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 13 3/21/2011
Risk 5: The process of obtaining government-mandated security and credit checks takes longer than anticipated Mitigation Option 1: Hire a Contractor for the Project with the Required Skills and Clearances At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $100,000. At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $100,000.
A contractor with the required state clearances and experience in Windows Azure has sign a six month contract to help with the project for $100,000. Taking on this contractor would reduce the impact of this risk to $0 by making up an employee held up by state clearances. Under both penalty systems, this would lead to a net exposure reduction of $142,000.
Mitigation Option 2: Authorize Overtime at Double Pay to make up for Personnel Shortfall At Monthly Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $48,000. At Per-Diem Penalty: Net Exposure Reduction of $142,000 at the cost of $48,000. Rather than hiring a contractor, Intwit could also offer the development staff that are able to obtain clearances double overtime to make up for the time lost waiting for personnel to obtain state clearances. A delay of two months for one team member would lead to a loss of 320 work hours. Due to exhaustion, overtime hours are only 2/3 as effective as normal hours for developers. Joe, Sam, Sue, and Pete all earn $50/hour, meaning that Intwit would have to pay $48,000 of overtime over the life of the project to make up for the hours lost. Under both penalty systems, this would lead to a net exposure reduction of $142,000.
The customer (state of Illinois) insists on new requirements.
Project Manager
Intwit Legal Department
The PM will contact the legal department immediately to begin operations to change the structure of the penalty in the project contract.
The PM will video teleconference with the POC in the office of State Treasurer each Wednesday at 10:00am to discuss progress. During this time, the PM will solicit the POC for any feedback regarding required functionality from the various state departments. The POC will update a file stored on Intwit servers that contains a departmental functionality roster that details required customization for each department. Changes to the file result in an auto-notification to smartphones of the PM and the POC. This file serves as the measurement approach, and updates to this file serve as the trigger point for updating the WBS. The individual cells associated with each department are the metrics for this risk.
Mitigation Option 1 will be initiated immediately in order to replace the current penalty structure of the government contract with a per-diem alternative. Mitigation Option 2 is the contingency option and will only be executed if Illinois denies the request to change to a per-diem structure AND over half of the departments have yet to respond with their required functionality one month into the project.
Risk #2: A change in applicable federal regulations occurs unexpectedly
Project Manager
Intwit Legal Department
The PM will contact the legal department immediately to begin operations to clarify which party bears the responsibility for Federal regulatory changes.
Until Intwit is found to not be responsible for regulatory changes, the PM will consult reports from Booz Allen Hamilton bimonthly regarding applicable regulatory changes. If applicable changes do occur before Intwit is absolved of legal responsibility, the PM will adjust the WBS and other project documents to comply with the regulatory change.
Mitigation Option 1 will be carried out immediately. Mitigation Option 2 will not be executed in any circumstance. If Mitigation Option 1 fails, then Intwit will accept the risk and seek to integrate regulatory changes into the project documents as quickly as possible.
Risk #3:
Key personnel lack needed experience in certain technologies.
Project Manager
Development Staff
The PM will enroll the Development Staff in the appropriate Microsoft Azure training ASAP.
The Development Staff will complete the training
Mitigation Option 1 will be carried out immediately. Mitigation Option 2 will not be executed in any circumstance. Intwit assumes that the Microsoft training will prove sufficient to prepare the development staff for the project, and Intwit will accept any residual exposure.
Project Risk Management Plan
Confidential Page 15 3/21/2011
Risk #4: Unanticipated bureaucratic paperwork result in time-consuming process overhead
Project Manager
Human Resources
Business Analyst / Customer Rep.
The PM will contact Human Resources to have them authorize the Business Analyst to work overtime at double pay. At the start of business each Monday, the Business Analyst will present the Project Manager with a report detailing overtime worked and the backlog of government documents to be filled. If the backlog of documents exceeds 100 pages, then the Project Manager will send all documents in excess of 100 pages to the contractor specializing in Illinois government documents.
Mitigation Option 1 will be carried out immediately. Mitigation Option 2 will be carried out as a contingency plan if the Business Analyst reports to the Project Manager a backlog of documents exceeding 100 pages, but only for those documents in excess of 100 pages.
Risk #5: The process of obtaining government-mandated security and credit checks takes longer than anticipated
Project Manager
Human Resources
Development Staff
If not all of members of the project team have received their state clearances by the start of project work, then the PM will contact Human Resources to have them authorize the development personnel to work overtime at double pay. At the start of business each Monday, the System Architect will present the Project Manager with a report detailing overtime worked and the backlog of government documents to be filled. If the combined overtime worked is less than 20 hours per week (the amount needed to provide 150% of the hours missed by a two month absence) OR if the missing staff member has not received his/her security clearance by the end of the sixth project week, then the PM will contact the contractor to offer work prorated for the time remaining in the project.
Mitigation Option 2 will be carried out immediately. Mitigation Option 1 will be carried out as a contingency plan if the remaining development staff work less than 20 hours of combines overtime each week OR if the missing members of the project team have not received the required security clearances six weeks into the project.
Risk Management Plan Approvals
Prepared by: Sean McBride, Project Manager
Approved by: Dennis Hendry, Project Sponsor Dr. C. Robert Carlson, CEO Dan Rutherford, Illinois State Treasurer
