Project Risk Analysis and Decision Making Training Course

Participants can identify, describe and structure project risks in a usable register.

• Work breakdown structures used to locate deliverable-level risk sources
• Risk breakdown structures categorise technical, commercial, organisational and external threats
• Prompt lists apply PESTLE, SWOT and assumptions analysis systematically
• Cause-event-effect statements replace vague risk descriptions and duplicated entries
• Interviews and facilitated workshops surface divergent expert risk perceptions
• Opportunities identified alongside threats using upside event and benefit statements

Participants can prioritise risks using calibrated qualitative assessment methods.

• Risk register fields define owners, causes, events, effects and responses
• Probability-impact matrices calibrated with project-specific scoring definitions and escalation thresholds
• Ordinal scales avoid false precision when evidence remains incomplete
• Risk proximity assesses when an event may affect project objectives
• Risk urgency combines proximity, response lead time and decision deadlines
• Risk data quality assessments expose confidence gaps before prioritisation
• Heat maps communicate priorities without treating scores as precise forecasts

Participants can select and document proportionate treatments for priority risks.

• Bow-tie analysis maps preventive controls, event escalation and recovery barriers
• Five Whys distinguishes symptoms from controllable root causes
• Response strategies select avoid, transfer, mitigate, accept or escalate actions
• Contingency reserves separated from management reserves and response budgets
• Action owners define trigger conditions, due dates and evidence requirements
• Residual and secondary risks assessed after planned treatment actions

Participants can analyse schedule uncertainty and set confidence-based completion commitments.

• Three-point estimates capture optimistic, most-likely and pessimistic activity durations
• PERT estimates calculate expected duration and variance from three points
• Critical path analysis identifies activities driving completion-date exposure
• Schedule risk analysis tests logic links, calendars and resource assumptions
• Monte Carlo simulation produces completion-date confidence levels and percentile dates
• Schedule contingency set against P-level commitments and contractual milestones

Participants can model cost uncertainty and justify contingency requirements.

• Cost risk registers connect uncertain quantities, rates, escalation and exchange movements
• Three-point cost estimates model range distributions for major work packages
• Sensitivity analysis ranks variables by influence on total project cost
• Monte Carlo cost models generate percentile forecasts and contingency requirements
• Tornado charts communicate key cost drivers to approval authorities
• Contingency drawdown rules distinguish expected risk costs from scope changes

Participants can compare response options using transparent analytical decision methods.

• Decision trees value alternative responses using probabilities, payoffs and expected monetary value
• Expected value calculations test whether mitigation expenditure is economically justified
• Decision criteria separate mandatory constraints from weighted trade-off factors
• Multi-criteria decision analysis compares options with transparent scoring weights
• Value of information determines when further investigation warrants delay
• Real options thinking frames staged commitments under material uncertainty

Participants can allocate external risks and communicate exposure to affected parties.

• Contract allocation assigns risks to parties best able to control them
• Fixed-price, reimbursable and target-cost contracts shift different risk exposures
• Supplier due diligence tests financial capacity, capability and delivery dependencies
• Risk communication plans tailor messages, thresholds and reporting frequency
• Stakeholder mapping anticipates acceptance, regulatory and community consent risks
• Escalation protocols specify decision authorities for risks beyond tolerances

Participants can maintain current risk information and trigger timely management action.

• Risk reviews update likelihood, impact, ownership, triggers and response status
• Key risk indicators connect leading signals to threshold-based management action
• Risk burndown charts track aggregate exposure through project phases
• Change control assesses risk effects before approving scope or schedule changes
• Issue logs distinguish realised events from uncertain future risk entries
• Lessons learned capture assumptions that proved unreliable and controls that failed

Participants can present risk-informed recommendations and establish a practical implementation plan.

• Integrated risk reports combine qualitative priorities, quantitative ranges and decision requests
• Risk-adjusted business cases state assumptions, confidence levels and residual exposure
• Governance packs present scenarios, recommendations, owners and required approvals
• Project risk management plans align registers, analyses, reviews and escalation routes
• Application priorities select immediate improvements for participants' active projects
• Personal action plans schedule stakeholder conversations, analyses and review checkpoints