The Project Will Introduce A One-Stop Shop For Production ✓ Solved

The project will introduce a one-stop-shop for production tr

The project will introduce a one-stop-shop for production tracking of orders and material. The current methods use spreadsheet software to collect and track data around the production process, which adds waste through lost time to run reports and risk from inaccuracies in shared spreadsheets. Write a 1,050- to 1,400-word paper in which you address each of the following items: What is the purpose of a risk response plan? What is a risk owner? Who should be appointed to own risk on a project? What is a risk owner's role in the risk response plan? How should a project manager assess and deal with risk? List and describe the most common areas of the project where risks can originate. List and discuss at least two types of risk for each area. In the project described above, what were the risks, and how were they handled? Should they have been handled differently?

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

Replacing ad-hoc spreadsheet practices with a centralized one-stop-shop production tracking system reduces wasted time and spreadsheet-derived errors, but it introduces its own set of project risks. A structured risk response plan and clear ownership of risks are essential to ensure the transition achieves benefits while minimizing negative impacts (PMI, 2017; ISO, 2018).

Purpose of a Risk Response Plan

A risk response plan documents agreed actions for managing identified risks: avoidance, mitigation, transfer, acceptance, or exploitation (for opportunities). Its purpose is to reduce the probability and/or impact of threats, maximize opportunities, assign resources and owners, and provide contingency triggers and backup plans so the project can progress with predictable exposure (PMI, 2017; Hillson, 2009).

What Is a Risk Owner?

A risk owner is an individual accountable for monitoring a specific risk and carrying out the agreed response actions. The owner is responsible for tracking the risk’s status, implementing mitigation steps, communicating changes, and escalating as needed (PMI, 2017).

Who Should Be Appointed to Own Risk?

Risk owners should be people with the authority and capability to influence the outcomes tied to that risk. Typical choices include functional managers, technical leads, procurement managers, or the project sponsor for high-level strategic risks. Appoint those closest to the area of impact and who can commit resources or decisions to respond (Kerzner, 2017).

Risk Owner’s Role in the Risk Response Plan

The risk owner develops and maintains the response actions in coordination with the project manager and stakeholders. Responsibilities include monitoring triggers/indicators, executing mitigation steps, updating risk likelihood and impact, reporting to the project risk register, and implementing contingency plans if triggers occur (PMI, 2017; Hillson, 2009).

How a Project Manager Should Assess and Deal with Risk

A project manager should apply a systematic risk process: identify, analyze (qualitatively and quantitatively), prioritize, plan responses, implement actions, and monitor and control (PMI, 2017). Methods include risk workshops, interviews with subject-matter experts, risk probability-impact matrices, and quantitative modeling (e.g., Monte Carlo or triangular distributions) for cost/schedule exposure (Hulett, 2011; Aven, 2015). The PM must ensure ownership, allocate contingency reserves, and integrate risk activities into status reporting and change control so decisions are timely and informed (Kerzner, 2017).

Common Project Areas Where Risks Originate and Types of Risks

1. Technical/Systems

Risks: (a) Integration failures—new tracking system incompatible with legacy databases or ERP, causing data loss or duplication; (b) Data migration errors—incorrect mapping, transformation, or validation that corrupts order or material records (Hulett, 2011; Panko, 1998).

2. Schedule

Risks: (a) Implementation delay—underestimated development or testing time; (b) Late dependencies—third-party deliveries or approvals slipping and pushing go-live (PMI, 2017).

3. Cost/Financial

Risks: (a) Budget overrun—unexpected licensing or integration costs; (b) Unquantified total cost of ownership—ongoing maintenance or staffing costs beyond estimates (Kerzner, 2017).

4. People/Organizational

Risks: (a) User resistance—employees preferring spreadsheets causing low adoption; (b) Skill gaps—insufficient training for new system administrators and users (Towers Watson; Davenport, 1998).

5. Procurement/Supplier

Risks: (a) Vendor failure—supplier misses deliveries or support obligations; (b) Contract ambiguity—insufficient service-level agreements or unclear deliverables (PMI, 2017).

6. Security/Compliance

Risks: (a) Data breach—sensitive production or customer data exposed; (b) Regulatory non-compliance—insufficient controls for industry or privacy regulations (ISO, 2018).

7. Scope and Requirements

Risks: (a) Scope creep—additional feature requests increase complexity; (b) Poorly defined requirements—misunderstood workflows leading to rework (Kerzner, 2017).

Project-Specific Risks for the One-Stop-Shop and How They Were/Should Be Handled

For the production-tracking project replacing spreadsheets, primary risks included:

• Data migration and integrity: Spreadsheet data often lacked consistent structure. Mitigation: perform profiling, cleansing, and pilot migrations with validation checks and rollback plans. Assign data owner(s) for each domain and require sign-off prior to go-live (Panko, 1998; Hulett, 2011).
• User resistance and cultural bias: Staff comfortable with spreadsheets resisted change. Mitigation: active change management—stakeholder engagement, demonstration of efficiency gains, role-based training, and early champions (Davenport, 1998; Towers Watson).
• Integration with ERP and systems: Risk of interface failures. Mitigation: staged integration, interface testing, and a test environment with representative data; assign technical lead as risk owner (PMI, 2017).
• Schedule and budget overruns: Underestimated integration effort. Mitigation: quantitative schedule risk analysis (Monte Carlo or triangular estimates) and contingency reserves; regular reforecasting (Hulett, 2011; Aven, 2015).
• Vendor/service risk: Supplier support or custom development delays. Mitigation: clear SLAs, milestone-based payments, and backup vendor options; procurement manager owns contract risks (Kerzner, 2017).
• Security/compliance: Centralizing data increases exposure. Mitigation: security requirements defined early, penetration testing, role-based access control, and privacy reviews (ISO, 2018).

These risks were handled by assigning owners (data lead, IT integration lead, procurement lead, change manager), creating a risk register, using pilot deployments, and reserving schedule/cost contingency. Where gaps existed—particularly in cultural change—the project could have improved results by starting change management earlier, engaging end users in requirements and pilot feedback, and tying KPI incentives to adoption (Davenport, 1998). Greater upfront quantitative analysis of schedule/cost risk (e.g., Monte Carlo) would have better-informed contingency sizing (Hulett, 2011).

Conclusion

A one-stop production tracking implementation requires disciplined risk management: clear response plans, assigned owners with authority, and continuous monitoring. Common risk origins span technical, schedule, financial, people, procurement, security, and scope areas, each with distinct threat types. Assigning owners close to the risk domain, employing both qualitative and quantitative analysis, and integrating robust change management and data governance are practical ways to reduce exposure and increase the likelihood of a successful transition from spreadsheets to a centralized system (PMI, 2017; ISO, 2018).

References

• Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide), 6th ed.
• ISO. (2018). ISO 31000:2018 — Risk management — Guidelines.
• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling. Wiley.
• Hillson, D. (2009). Managing Risk in Projects. Gower Publishing.
• Panko, R. R. (1998). What We Know About Spreadsheet Errors. Journal of End User Computing.
• Hulett, D. (2011). Integrated Cost-Schedule Risk Analysis. Gower.
• Aven, T. (2015). Risk Analysis. Wiley.
• Davenport, T. H. (1998). Putting the Enterprise into the Enterprise System. Harvard Business Review.
• Towers Watson. (2013). Aligning Culture and Strategy for Performance. Towers Watson Research.
• Turner, J. R. (2014). Handbook of Project-based Management. McGraw-Hill Education.