Description
Evaluation is a systematic determination of a subject's merit, worth and significance, using criteria governed by a set of standards. It can assist an organization, program, project or any other intervention or initiative to assess any aim, realisable concept/proposal, or any alternative, to help in decision-making; or to ascertain the degree of achievement or value in regard to the aim and objectives and results of any such action that has been completed.
Project Cost Risk Analysis: The Risk Driver Approach Prioritizing Project Risks and Evaluating Risk Responses
David T. Hulett, Ph.D. Keith Hornbacher, MBA Waylon T. Whitehead
Hulett & Associates, LLC Los Angeles, CA USA www.projectrisk.com
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
1
Outline
• Some limitations of the traditional 3-point estimate quantitative risk analysis • Introducing the Risk Driver Method to cost risk analysis
– Method illustrated – Data collection considerations – Some benefits of the Risk Driver approach – Simple refinery construction example
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
2
Risk Prioritization – New approach
• More complete and powerful than the standard qualitative risk analysis using the Probability and Impact approach • Compute the effect of individual risks on the cost, then sort risks by priority • Risks are prioritized by probability and impact as they affect the cost through simulating the model of the project • Assists risk mitigation decisions
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 3
Limits of the Traditional 3-point Estimate Approach (1) • Traditionally we estimated the risk of each line item by applying a 3-point estimate of and a probability distribution to the line item cost • This approach does not use the results of the qualitative risk analysis well • We want to know which risks are important to guide risk responses. Instead we find out which line items are important. There is a difference
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 4
Limits of the Traditional 3-point Estimate Approach (2)
• What is the probability that the risk will occur? Traditional approach assumes 100% risk occurrence and deals with impact uncertainty only • What is the correlation between activity costs? We will model it instead of estimate it from interviews • Which risks (not which line items) are most important? If a risk affects several line items it may be more important than it appears at first
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 5
Benefits of the Risk Driver Approach (1)
• Focus on the risks, not their impact on line item costs • Provide management with prioritized list of risks, not activities, that need mitigation • Interviews are conducted at the level of risk where people think of risk, not line items. They are more intuitive for all parties and simpler to verify and validate • Interviews are generally shorter than when using traditional 3-point estimating
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 6
Benefits of the Risk Driver Approach (2)
• Correlations occur often in cost risk
– If steel prices increase, the prices for structural steel, pipe and vessels will increase together – If labor productivity declines, direct and indirect labor will cost more, together
• Traditionally we have to estimate correlation coefficients – not easy because no data, concept is not familiar to most people • Risk Driver method models how correlations come about due to risks affecting more than one line item. No more guessing at correlation coefficients.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 7
Introducing the Risk Driver Method
• Start with the Risk Register risks – the linkage to the qualitative risk analysis exercise is obvious and direct • Characterize the risks by their probability as well as impact, not just impact range as traditional analysis • Probability and impact are the TWO dimensions of a risk
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 8
Risk Driver Methodology
• Identify risks to be included from Risk Register • Quantify risks’ probability and impact range
– The impact is a factor – The line item costs will be multiplied by the factors
• Assign risks to cost line items
– Risks can affect several line items – A cost line item can be affected by several risks
• Run Monte Carlo simulation for overall cost risk • Prioritize risks for further mitigation
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 9
Identify Risk Drivers Use the Risk Register Directly
Risk Register - Model Input Data ID R.1 R.2 R.3 R.4 R.5 R.6 R.7 R.8 R.9 R.10 Risk Name Contracting Strategy (LSTK) may cause bidders to bid high Design Changes may be greater than anticipated Equipment Suppliers may be busy Quality Key Staff JV / PMT may not be available Number of Bidders may be limited due to availability of other work Integration Management of detailed engineering may be inadequate Labor Rate may differ from expectations Construction Labor Productivity may differ from expectations Bulk Material Cost may differ from expectations Construction Management Staff may be lacking in experience
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 10
Discovery of Risk Factors
• From exploratory interviews w/ all project stakeholders to arrive at their general ideas about what the risks are • From the project risk register • From general knowledge about conditions that might affect the project • Risks should be independent of each other. Related risks may be consolidated
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 11
Detailed Interviews for Information about Risk Factors
• Using the arrived at Risk Factors, conduct interviews to assess their likelihood and impact • Be alert to the discussion of new risks during the interviews • The use of pre-read information can assist with the amount of information that can be covered in a time limited interview
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 12
Applying Risk Factors
• Where possible, cover what type of cost line items the risk factor will apply to • Be alert to the need for applying the same risk factor with more than one range for different types of costs • Be alert to the need to divide cost lines in order to discretely apply Risk Factors
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
13
Use Trigen Function to Correct for Narrow Ranges from Interviews
Design Changes 3-point estimate is .95, 1.05, 1.15 Trigen makes it .87, 1.05, 1.23
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
14
A 100% Risk Factor Applied to a Cost Line Item of $1 million
A Cost of 1.00 million impacted by a 100% Risk Factor TriGen (.95, 1.05, 1.15, 10, 90)
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
15
A 40% Risk Factor Applied to Cost Line Item of $1 million
A Cost of 1.00 million impacted by a 40% Risk Factor Trigen (.95, 1.05, 1.15, 10, 90) The spike has 60% of the probability, indicating that the risk occurs only in 40% of the iterations
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
16
A Cost of $1.0 million Affected by Two 100% Risk Drivers
Affected by Two 100% Trigen (10,90) Risks (1) .95, 1.05. 1.15 (2) .90, 1.00, 1.05
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
17
A Cost of $1.0 million Affected by Two 50% Risk Drivers
Affected by Two 50% Trigen (10,90) Risks (1) .95, 1.05. 1.15 (2) .90, 1.00, 1.05
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
18
Risk Factors Model How Correlation Occurs Coefficients are Calculated (1)
Risk #1
P = 50%, Factors .95, 1.05, 1.15
Cost Item A
Cost Item B
Cost Items A and B Correlation is Calculated to be 100%
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
19
Risk Factors Model How Correlation Occurs Coefficients are Calculated (2)
Risk #2
P = 25%, Factors .8, .95, 1.05
Risk #1
P = 50%, Factors .95, 1.05, 1.15
Risk #3
P = 45%, Factors 1.0, 1.1, 1.2
Cost Item A
Cost Item B
Cost Items A and B Correlation is Calculated to be 48%
Correlation is modeled as it is caused in the project Correlation coefficients are generated, not guessed
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 20
Simplified Cost Model of a Refinery Project (1)
Refinery Construction Project Baseline Estimate (1) Cost Category Direct Field Costs Long Lead Equipment (LLE) Equipment Materials Total Direct Field Costs Indirect Field Costs Supervision Time-Related Overhead Total Indirect Field Costs Total Direct & Indirect Costs 360 315 675 1,008 0 0 0 3,465 360 315 675 4,473 15 30 288 333 Labor Equipment ($ millions) 330 1,200 1,935 3,465 345 1,230 2,223 3,798 Total
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
21
Simplified Cost Model of a Refinery Project (2)
Refinery Construction Project Baseline Estimate (2) Labor Cost Category Construction Management Material Related Home Office Engineering Staff Overhead & Fees Total Contractor Related Owner-Related Project Management Team Materials Total Owner-Related TOTAL BASE ESTIMATE Equipment ($ millions) 630 180 540 540 2,358 450 0 450 4,005 0 400 400 Total
630 720 540 560 6,923 450 400 850 7,773
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
22
Risk Factors Probability and Impact Ranges
Risk Drivers and their Properties 3-Point Estimate of RiskFactor Minimum R.1 R.2 R.3 R.4 R.5 R.6 R.7 R.8 R.9 R.10 Contracting Strategy Design Changes Equipment Suppliers Busy Availability of Key Staff JV / PMT Number of Bidders Integration Management Labor Rate Construction Labor Productivity Bulk Material Cost Construction Management Staff 40% 60% 45% 40% 40% 40% 50% 45% 40% 70% 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 ML 1.10 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.05 1.05 Maximum 1.25 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.50 1.15 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.15 ID Name Prob.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
23
Assign Risk Drivers to Cost Elements
Cost Category Direct Field Costs Long Lead Equipment (LLE) Equipment Materials Total Direct Field Costs Direct & Indirect Labor Costs Construction Management Material Related Home Office Engineering Staff Overhead & Fees Owner-Related Project Management Team Materials © 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC X X 24 X X X X X X X X x X X
Contract Strategy Design Changes
Risks
Equip. JV/PMT # of Supplier Staff Bidders Integ. Mgt. Labor Rate Labor Prod. Bulks Cost CM Staff
X X X
X X
X X X X X X
Cost Risk Analysis Results (1)
Most Likely cost is about $8 billion
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
25
Cost Risk Analysis Results (2)
Base Cost is 9.3% likely
80th percentile is $9.53 million for a $1.76 million (23%) Contingency Reserve
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
26
Cost Risk Analysis Results (3)
Percentile 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% $ mill. 7,793 7,999 8,183 8,383 8,611 8,866 9,168 9,529 10,118
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
% 0% 3% 5% 8% 11% 14% 18% 23% 30%
27
Risk Sensitivity – Beginning of Risk Prioritization
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
28
Risk Drivers Listed in Priority Order
All Risks Included 9.53 Improvement if Mitigated Risks $ Bill. Number of Bidders 0.42 Equipment Suppliers Busy 0.41 Contracting Strategy 0.30 Design Changes 0.14 Bulk Material Cost 0.12 Construction Labor Productivity 0.10 Availability of Key Staff JV / PMT 0.07 Labor Rate 0.04 Construction Management Staff 0.02 Integration Management 0.01 % Savings 4% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0%
These risks are prioritized as if they could be completely mitigated. That is not possible, but it indicates the priority for risk mitigation actions.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 29
Partial Risk Mitigation (1)
• The number of bidders in today’s heated oil and gas building environment is problematic and deemed as an important cost risk driver • With few bidders we expect contractors to feel freer to include high levels of risk premium and profit into their bids • A similar observation can be made for equipment suppliers that are busy
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 30
Partial Risk Mitigation (2)
•Suppose that we were willing to allow bidders to form Joint Ventures or funding their bidding expenses?. What could happen?
3-Point Estimate of RiskFactor Prob. Example of Risk Mitigation Minimum ML Maximum Before Risk Mitigation Number of Bidders 40% 0.95 1.00 1.50
After Risk Mitigation Number of Bidders 20%
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
0.90
1.00
1.25
31
Risk after Mitigating Number of Bidders Risk
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
32
Number of Bidders is Now Lower on the Priority List
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
33
Impact of Partially Mitigating the Number of Bidders Risk
Percentile 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% No Mitigation Partial Mitigation $ mill. 7,793 7,999 8,183 8,383 8,611 8,866 9,168 9,529 10,118 7,746 7,920 8,083 8,248 8,424 8,633 8,869 9,185 9,637
Partially mitigating Number of Bidders Risk improves the risk at the P-80 level
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 34
Summary – Quantitative Risk Analysis Results and Risk Prioritization using Risk Drivers
• Project risks are characterized by their:
– Probability of occurring – Impact range as a multiplicative factor – Cost line items they impact if they occur
• Monte Carlo simulation develops:
– Probability of achieving the cost target (without contingency) – Contingency reserve of cost needed to satisfy the organization’s appetite for risk
• Risks can be taken out of the simulation one at a time and their marginal impact (through the cost model) calibrated:
– Risk prioritization is based on this analysis – Partial risk mitigation can be studied for benefit/cost analysis
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 35
Project Cost Risk Analysis: The Risk Driver Approach Prioritizing Project Risks and Evaluating Risk Responses
David T. Hulett, Ph.D. Keith Hornbacher, MBA Waylon T. Whitehead
Hulett & Associates, LLC Los Angeles, CA USA www.projectrisk.com
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
36
doc_143972116.pdf
Evaluation is a systematic determination of a subject's merit, worth and significance, using criteria governed by a set of standards. It can assist an organization, program, project or any other intervention or initiative to assess any aim, realisable concept/proposal, or any alternative, to help in decision-making; or to ascertain the degree of achievement or value in regard to the aim and objectives and results of any such action that has been completed.
Project Cost Risk Analysis: The Risk Driver Approach Prioritizing Project Risks and Evaluating Risk Responses
David T. Hulett, Ph.D. Keith Hornbacher, MBA Waylon T. Whitehead
Hulett & Associates, LLC Los Angeles, CA USA www.projectrisk.com
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
1
Outline
• Some limitations of the traditional 3-point estimate quantitative risk analysis • Introducing the Risk Driver Method to cost risk analysis
– Method illustrated – Data collection considerations – Some benefits of the Risk Driver approach – Simple refinery construction example
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
2
Risk Prioritization – New approach
• More complete and powerful than the standard qualitative risk analysis using the Probability and Impact approach • Compute the effect of individual risks on the cost, then sort risks by priority • Risks are prioritized by probability and impact as they affect the cost through simulating the model of the project • Assists risk mitigation decisions
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 3
Limits of the Traditional 3-point Estimate Approach (1) • Traditionally we estimated the risk of each line item by applying a 3-point estimate of and a probability distribution to the line item cost • This approach does not use the results of the qualitative risk analysis well • We want to know which risks are important to guide risk responses. Instead we find out which line items are important. There is a difference
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 4
Limits of the Traditional 3-point Estimate Approach (2)
• What is the probability that the risk will occur? Traditional approach assumes 100% risk occurrence and deals with impact uncertainty only • What is the correlation between activity costs? We will model it instead of estimate it from interviews • Which risks (not which line items) are most important? If a risk affects several line items it may be more important than it appears at first
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 5
Benefits of the Risk Driver Approach (1)
• Focus on the risks, not their impact on line item costs • Provide management with prioritized list of risks, not activities, that need mitigation • Interviews are conducted at the level of risk where people think of risk, not line items. They are more intuitive for all parties and simpler to verify and validate • Interviews are generally shorter than when using traditional 3-point estimating
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 6
Benefits of the Risk Driver Approach (2)
• Correlations occur often in cost risk
– If steel prices increase, the prices for structural steel, pipe and vessels will increase together – If labor productivity declines, direct and indirect labor will cost more, together
• Traditionally we have to estimate correlation coefficients – not easy because no data, concept is not familiar to most people • Risk Driver method models how correlations come about due to risks affecting more than one line item. No more guessing at correlation coefficients.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 7
Introducing the Risk Driver Method
• Start with the Risk Register risks – the linkage to the qualitative risk analysis exercise is obvious and direct • Characterize the risks by their probability as well as impact, not just impact range as traditional analysis • Probability and impact are the TWO dimensions of a risk
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 8
Risk Driver Methodology
• Identify risks to be included from Risk Register • Quantify risks’ probability and impact range
– The impact is a factor – The line item costs will be multiplied by the factors
• Assign risks to cost line items
– Risks can affect several line items – A cost line item can be affected by several risks
• Run Monte Carlo simulation for overall cost risk • Prioritize risks for further mitigation
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 9
Identify Risk Drivers Use the Risk Register Directly
Risk Register - Model Input Data ID R.1 R.2 R.3 R.4 R.5 R.6 R.7 R.8 R.9 R.10 Risk Name Contracting Strategy (LSTK) may cause bidders to bid high Design Changes may be greater than anticipated Equipment Suppliers may be busy Quality Key Staff JV / PMT may not be available Number of Bidders may be limited due to availability of other work Integration Management of detailed engineering may be inadequate Labor Rate may differ from expectations Construction Labor Productivity may differ from expectations Bulk Material Cost may differ from expectations Construction Management Staff may be lacking in experience
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 10
Discovery of Risk Factors
• From exploratory interviews w/ all project stakeholders to arrive at their general ideas about what the risks are • From the project risk register • From general knowledge about conditions that might affect the project • Risks should be independent of each other. Related risks may be consolidated
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 11
Detailed Interviews for Information about Risk Factors
• Using the arrived at Risk Factors, conduct interviews to assess their likelihood and impact • Be alert to the discussion of new risks during the interviews • The use of pre-read information can assist with the amount of information that can be covered in a time limited interview
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 12
Applying Risk Factors
• Where possible, cover what type of cost line items the risk factor will apply to • Be alert to the need for applying the same risk factor with more than one range for different types of costs • Be alert to the need to divide cost lines in order to discretely apply Risk Factors
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
13
Use Trigen Function to Correct for Narrow Ranges from Interviews
Design Changes 3-point estimate is .95, 1.05, 1.15 Trigen makes it .87, 1.05, 1.23
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
14
A 100% Risk Factor Applied to a Cost Line Item of $1 million
A Cost of 1.00 million impacted by a 100% Risk Factor TriGen (.95, 1.05, 1.15, 10, 90)
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
15
A 40% Risk Factor Applied to Cost Line Item of $1 million
A Cost of 1.00 million impacted by a 40% Risk Factor Trigen (.95, 1.05, 1.15, 10, 90) The spike has 60% of the probability, indicating that the risk occurs only in 40% of the iterations
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
16
A Cost of $1.0 million Affected by Two 100% Risk Drivers
Affected by Two 100% Trigen (10,90) Risks (1) .95, 1.05. 1.15 (2) .90, 1.00, 1.05
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
17
A Cost of $1.0 million Affected by Two 50% Risk Drivers
Affected by Two 50% Trigen (10,90) Risks (1) .95, 1.05. 1.15 (2) .90, 1.00, 1.05
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
18
Risk Factors Model How Correlation Occurs Coefficients are Calculated (1)
Risk #1
P = 50%, Factors .95, 1.05, 1.15
Cost Item A
Cost Item B
Cost Items A and B Correlation is Calculated to be 100%
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
19
Risk Factors Model How Correlation Occurs Coefficients are Calculated (2)
Risk #2
P = 25%, Factors .8, .95, 1.05
Risk #1
P = 50%, Factors .95, 1.05, 1.15
Risk #3
P = 45%, Factors 1.0, 1.1, 1.2
Cost Item A
Cost Item B
Cost Items A and B Correlation is Calculated to be 48%
Correlation is modeled as it is caused in the project Correlation coefficients are generated, not guessed
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 20
Simplified Cost Model of a Refinery Project (1)
Refinery Construction Project Baseline Estimate (1) Cost Category Direct Field Costs Long Lead Equipment (LLE) Equipment Materials Total Direct Field Costs Indirect Field Costs Supervision Time-Related Overhead Total Indirect Field Costs Total Direct & Indirect Costs 360 315 675 1,008 0 0 0 3,465 360 315 675 4,473 15 30 288 333 Labor Equipment ($ millions) 330 1,200 1,935 3,465 345 1,230 2,223 3,798 Total
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
21
Simplified Cost Model of a Refinery Project (2)
Refinery Construction Project Baseline Estimate (2) Labor Cost Category Construction Management Material Related Home Office Engineering Staff Overhead & Fees Total Contractor Related Owner-Related Project Management Team Materials Total Owner-Related TOTAL BASE ESTIMATE Equipment ($ millions) 630 180 540 540 2,358 450 0 450 4,005 0 400 400 Total
630 720 540 560 6,923 450 400 850 7,773
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
22
Risk Factors Probability and Impact Ranges
Risk Drivers and their Properties 3-Point Estimate of RiskFactor Minimum R.1 R.2 R.3 R.4 R.5 R.6 R.7 R.8 R.9 R.10 Contracting Strategy Design Changes Equipment Suppliers Busy Availability of Key Staff JV / PMT Number of Bidders Integration Management Labor Rate Construction Labor Productivity Bulk Material Cost Construction Management Staff 40% 60% 45% 40% 40% 40% 50% 45% 40% 70% 0.90 0.95 1.00 0.95 0.95 1.00 0.90 1.00 0.90 1.00 ML 1.10 1.05 1.05 1.00 1.00 1.05 1.00 1.10 1.05 1.05 Maximum 1.25 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.50 1.15 1.20 1.30 1.20 1.15 ID Name Prob.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
23
Assign Risk Drivers to Cost Elements
Cost Category Direct Field Costs Long Lead Equipment (LLE) Equipment Materials Total Direct Field Costs Direct & Indirect Labor Costs Construction Management Material Related Home Office Engineering Staff Overhead & Fees Owner-Related Project Management Team Materials © 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC X X 24 X X X X X X X X x X X
Contract Strategy Design Changes
Risks
Equip. JV/PMT # of Supplier Staff Bidders Integ. Mgt. Labor Rate Labor Prod. Bulks Cost CM Staff
X X X
X X
X X X X X X
Cost Risk Analysis Results (1)
Most Likely cost is about $8 billion
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
25
Cost Risk Analysis Results (2)
Base Cost is 9.3% likely
80th percentile is $9.53 million for a $1.76 million (23%) Contingency Reserve
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
26
Cost Risk Analysis Results (3)
Percentile 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% $ mill. 7,793 7,999 8,183 8,383 8,611 8,866 9,168 9,529 10,118
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
% 0% 3% 5% 8% 11% 14% 18% 23% 30%
27
Risk Sensitivity – Beginning of Risk Prioritization
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
28
Risk Drivers Listed in Priority Order
All Risks Included 9.53 Improvement if Mitigated Risks $ Bill. Number of Bidders 0.42 Equipment Suppliers Busy 0.41 Contracting Strategy 0.30 Design Changes 0.14 Bulk Material Cost 0.12 Construction Labor Productivity 0.10 Availability of Key Staff JV / PMT 0.07 Labor Rate 0.04 Construction Management Staff 0.02 Integration Management 0.01 % Savings 4% 4% 3% 1% 1% 1% 1% 0% 0% 0%
These risks are prioritized as if they could be completely mitigated. That is not possible, but it indicates the priority for risk mitigation actions.
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 29
Partial Risk Mitigation (1)
• The number of bidders in today’s heated oil and gas building environment is problematic and deemed as an important cost risk driver • With few bidders we expect contractors to feel freer to include high levels of risk premium and profit into their bids • A similar observation can be made for equipment suppliers that are busy
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 30
Partial Risk Mitigation (2)
•Suppose that we were willing to allow bidders to form Joint Ventures or funding their bidding expenses?. What could happen?
3-Point Estimate of RiskFactor Prob. Example of Risk Mitigation Minimum ML Maximum Before Risk Mitigation Number of Bidders 40% 0.95 1.00 1.50
After Risk Mitigation Number of Bidders 20%
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
0.90
1.00
1.25
31
Risk after Mitigating Number of Bidders Risk
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
32
Number of Bidders is Now Lower on the Priority List
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
33
Impact of Partially Mitigating the Number of Bidders Risk
Percentile 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% No Mitigation Partial Mitigation $ mill. 7,793 7,999 8,183 8,383 8,611 8,866 9,168 9,529 10,118 7,746 7,920 8,083 8,248 8,424 8,633 8,869 9,185 9,637
Partially mitigating Number of Bidders Risk improves the risk at the P-80 level
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 34
Summary – Quantitative Risk Analysis Results and Risk Prioritization using Risk Drivers
• Project risks are characterized by their:
– Probability of occurring – Impact range as a multiplicative factor – Cost line items they impact if they occur
• Monte Carlo simulation develops:
– Probability of achieving the cost target (without contingency) – Contingency reserve of cost needed to satisfy the organization’s appetite for risk
• Risks can be taken out of the simulation one at a time and their marginal impact (through the cost model) calibrated:
– Risk prioritization is based on this analysis – Partial risk mitigation can be studied for benefit/cost analysis
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC 35
Project Cost Risk Analysis: The Risk Driver Approach Prioritizing Project Risks and Evaluating Risk Responses
David T. Hulett, Ph.D. Keith Hornbacher, MBA Waylon T. Whitehead
Hulett & Associates, LLC Los Angeles, CA USA www.projectrisk.com
© 2008 Hulett & Associates, LLC
36
doc_143972116.pdf