Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score?
This article examines conventional methods for risk identification and risk scoring using ‘look-up’ tables, and concludes that such methods are inherently flawed and offer false confidence in project management. The author suggests a series of searching questions to test the efficacy of traditional...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Juniper Publishers
2018
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/77233 |
| _version_ | 1848763831203921920 |
|---|---|
| author | Crosby, Philip |
| author_facet | Crosby, Philip |
| author_sort | Crosby, Philip |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | This article examines conventional methods for risk identification and risk scoring using ‘look-up’ tables, and concludes that such methods are inherently flawed and offer false confidence in project management. The author suggests a series of searching questions to test the efficacy of traditional risk assessment in order to better prepare the project for review. Important further considerations are posed in relation to non-specific, irrational risk exposure (i.e. Black Swans), and the author presents two approaches for improved preparedness against undefined risk. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T11:09:42Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-77233 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T11:09:42Z |
| publishDate | 2018 |
| publisher | Juniper Publishers |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-772332021-01-08T07:54:29Z Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? Crosby, Philip risk score likelihood Consequences mitigation Project Management Assessment Task Force Preparedness Black Swan This article examines conventional methods for risk identification and risk scoring using ‘look-up’ tables, and concludes that such methods are inherently flawed and offer false confidence in project management. The author suggests a series of searching questions to test the efficacy of traditional risk assessment in order to better prepare the project for review. Important further considerations are posed in relation to non-specific, irrational risk exposure (i.e. Black Swans), and the author presents two approaches for improved preparedness against undefined risk. 2018 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/77233 10.19080/ETOAJ.2018.01.555551 English http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Juniper Publishers fulltext |
| spellingShingle | risk score likelihood Consequences mitigation Project Management Assessment Task Force Preparedness Black Swan Crosby, Philip Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title | Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title_full | Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title_fullStr | Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title_full_unstemmed | Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title_short | Risk Mitigation – What’s Your Score? |
| title_sort | risk mitigation – what’s your score? |
| topic | risk score likelihood Consequences mitigation Project Management Assessment Task Force Preparedness Black Swan |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/77233 |