Part 1 Risk Management Plan Rmrisk Strategy The General Appr

Part 1 Risk Management Plan Rmprisk Strategythe General Approach

The project’s risk management approach emphasizes early and comprehensive risk identification, categorization, prioritization, and response planning. The strategy involves determining potential risk areas associated with project activities, then systematically identifying and assessing these risks based on their probability of occurrence and impact. This proactive approach ensures that risks are managed effectively throughout the project lifecycle, reducing the likelihood of unforeseen issues disrupting project objectives.

Roles and responsibilities are clearly defined among key stakeholders. The Steering Committee, led by project sponsor Dr. Bill Mattes and the Harrisburg University Management, oversees the review of the risk register and risk management strategies, providing strategic direction to the project team. The Project Manager, Virat Kohli, is responsible for developing the Risk Management Plan (RMP), conducting risk identification sessions, devising mitigation strategies, and updating the steering committee on risk status monthly. The project team members—including heads of security, event site managers, catering managers, and others—assist in implementing risk mitigation actions, ensuring risks are minimized and unidentified risks addressed promptly.

A budget of $500 has been allocated specifically for risk management activities. This comprises $200 for known uncertainties, such as power outages or food shortages, which are categorized as contingency reserves, and $300 for management reserves to address unknown risks that might emerge during execution. These funds are earmarked to quickly respond to unforeseen challenges without jeopardizing the broader project finances.

The risk management process will be integrated into the project schedule, with defined timing and frequency for risk assessments and updates. During the planning, execution, and closing phases, routine risk evaluations will be conducted to adapt mitigation strategies as necessary, maintaining alignment with project milestones and key deliverables.

The Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) categorizes risks across three phases—planning, execution, and closing—covering management, budget, logistics, external factors, stakeholder engagement, and venue conditions. During the planning phase, risks include management requirements, guest list management, event promotion, scheduling, budget constraints, and venue licensing. The execution phase expands these to attendance, guest behavior, catering, entertainment delivery, technical equipment, security, weather impacts, and neighborhood relations. In the closing phase, focus shifts to venue conditions and vendor management, ensuring risks are addressed at each critical juncture.

The stakeholder risk appetite aligns with organizational priorities, emphasizing strict adherence to the schedule with no tolerance for delays, while maintaining a high tolerance for budget overruns up to a certain threshold. The schedule must be strictly adhered to, as the event date is fixed and cannot be changed, underscoring the importance of timely risk mitigation to prevent delays.

Risk probability and impact are quantified using descriptive and numerical scales, facilitating prioritization and response planning. For example, some risks such as minor safety concerns or slight cost increases may have a very low probability and negligible impact, whereas critical risks like weather disruptions or venue unavailability can have high probability and severe impact. A probability-impact matrix enables ranking risks by their severity, guiding resource allocation and mitigation efforts efficiently.

Threats and Opportunities

The risk identification methodology incorporates brainstorming sessions and cause-and-effect diagramming, specifically leveraging fishbone diagrams, to systematically explore the potential root causes and outcomes of identified risks. This method aids in uncovering both threats and opportunities, enabling the project team to develop comprehensive mitigation or exploitation strategies.

Key risks identified include schedule delays, budget overruns, ticket demand fluctuations, guest behavior issues, vendor failures, technical equipment malfunctions, adverse weather, neighborhood disturbances, and venue condition problems. Each risk is evaluated in terms of likelihood and potential impact, with appropriate mitigation strategies developed. For example, schedule delays are mitigated through built-in buffers and milestone reviews; ticket demand surpluses are exploited by increasing revenue opportunities; and technical failures are mitigated via backup equipment and proactive checks.

Additionally, risks such as weather changes are accepted with contingency measures like providing ponchos or rain covers, while risks like natural disasters are considered to warrant event cancellation on humanitarian grounds. For social risks involving guest safety and security, mitigation includes increased security personnel, ID verification measures, crowd control, and emergency medical preparedness.

Furthermore, the opportunities—like higher-than-expected ticket sales—are exploited by adjusting space and amenities, which can result in increased revenue. Effective risk management thus encompasses both threat mitigation and opportunity enhancement, fostering a balanced and resilient project approach.

Methodology for Risk and Opportunity Identification

The project employs the Cause and Effect diagramming technique, also known as fishbone analysis, for identifying risks. This method involves brainstorming with stakeholders, team members, and subject matter experts to trace potential causes leading to project risks and their consequences. The rationale for selecting this technique is its ability to systematically discover root causes of complex issues, facilitating targeted mitigation strategies.

The technique was applied to assess risks like schedule delays—caused by site access issues, labor shortages, or miscommunications—and financial risks such as budget overruns due to scope creep or funding difficulties. It also identified operational risks, including venue damages and security breaches, which could have cascading effects on project success.

By analyzing these causes, the project team can prioritize risks and implement specific mitigation measures, such as securing venue bookings early, enforcing safety protocols, and maintaining budget oversight. The process enables a comprehensive understanding of the interplay between various risk factors, supporting proactive management throughout the project lifecycle.

Risk Register Summary

The risk register consolidates all identified risks, assigning probability and impact scores, along with planned mitigation strategies. For instance, senior management requirements are monitored for possible changes, with contingency plans ready. Guest list modifications, such as adding celebrities, are exploited for enhanced visibility and attendance.

Logistics-related risks like venue unavailability are mitigated through early booking and contractual safeguards. Technical issues are addressed with backup generators and pre-event equipment checks. Weather-related risks are managed via contingency plans including rain covers and event cancellation policies in extreme cases. External risks, including neighborhood disturbances, are mitigated through communication and security measures.

Throughout, continuous monitoring, risk re-assessment, and stakeholder engagement are emphasized to ensure that the project responds adaptively to emerging risks, securing the event’s success within the allocated budget and timeline constraints.

References

• Hillson, D. (2017). Practical Risk Management: The Uncertainty Analysis Approach. Routledge.
• Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). 6th Edition. PMI.
• Chapman, C., & Ward, S. (2011). How to Manage Project Opportunity and Risk. John Wiley & Sons.
• Heldman, K. (2018). Project Management JumpStart. 3rd Edition. Wiley.
• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
• ISO 31000:2018. Risk Management — Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization.
• Booth, P., & Langley, A. (2014). Managing Risks in Large-Scale Events. Event Management, 18(4), 355-370.
• Marshall, D. (2019). Managing Risks in Event Planning. Event Management, 23(2), 225-239.
• Shaw, R., & Stanton, J. (2019). Resilient Event Management: Planning for Safety and Risks. Journal of Event Management, 22(1), 10-20.
• Harrison, F., & Remer, S. (2019). Strategic Risk Management Practice. Wiley.