HeaderSIS.jpg

Difference between revisions of "IS480 Team wiki: 2012T1 Timber Werkz Risks"

From IS480
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 200: Line 200:
 
*Use a collaborative file management software (e.g. Google Documents) to organise respective folders of the project. Consensus amongst team members to adhere to proper version labelling.
 
*Use a collaborative file management software (e.g. Google Documents) to organise respective folders of the project. Consensus amongst team members to adhere to proper version labelling.
 
|style="text-align: center; color:#008000"|
 
|style="text-align: center; color:#008000"|
'''Risk eliminated'''|}
+
'''Risk eliminated'''
 +
|}

Revision as of 00:45, 6 August 2012

HOME   PROJECT
DESCRIPTION
  PROJECT
MANAGEMENT
  DOCUMENTATION   RESOURCES LEARNING
EXPERIENCES
SCHEDULE & SCOPE MILESTONES METRICS RISKS & MITIGATION PROJECT FRAMEWORK


Risks & Mitigation



The following diagram shows the risks and mitigation table for the project.


S/N Risk Description Impact Impact Level
(High/Med/Low)
Likelihood
(High/Med/Low)
Mitigation Strategy Status

1

Project Management

1.1

  • Many change requests expected from client as Casting3 application is built from scratch
  • Change requests may affect the scope and schedule of the project

High

High

  • Deploy a separate development environment that allows clients to preview on-going development work of the application, so that change requests can be raised earlier.
  • Create a Change Request Log to manage change requests more effectively.

Mitigation strategy
in force

1.2

  • Overestimation of Man Days for a Chapter
  • Project Schedule is delayed

High

High

  • Plan for buffer time for each sprint. In addition, Project Manager gets quick updates from developers regarding their status

Mitigation strategy
in force

2

Business and IT Management

2.1

  • Business requirements of the Casting3 application might be unclear
  • Application may not serve the needs of the company effectively

High

Medium

  • Using UI mockup to communicate and ensure that requirements are properly understood. Low fidelity prototype helps to eliminate unnecessary wastage of time developing what may not be the clients' needs

Mitigation strategy
in force

2.2

  • Team’s design of the systems UI might not meet the expectations of the client’s designer
  • Project schedule is affected as work has to be redone

High

High

  • Weekly correspondence with the client and their designer to get on the same page with the design and user interface of the system. UI mock-up to be done and shown to client before the start of the sprint

Mitigation strategy
in force

3

Team Management

3.1

  • Insufficient manpower during Milestone 1 as three members are overseas (summer studies and community service)
  • Possible delay in schedule. Members may be unaware of latest issues

Medium

Medium

  • Regular communication and updates of current happenings via meeting minutes in Google docs and messaging channels.

Risk eliminated

3.2

  • Conflict amongst team members in terms of working behviours and perspectives
  • Team's efficiency is compromised. Possible compromise in project quality and schedule

Medium

Low

  • Respect the views of other team members. If a conflict arise, conduct a meeting to "trash" out situations and resolve issues within the same day if possible.

Mitigation strategy
in force

4

Knowledge & Content Management

4.1

  • Members unfamiliar to Yii framework, PHPUnit testing, and Youtube API.
  • Insufficient skilled members to value-add to the project

Medium

Medium

  • Develop proof-of-concepts to ascertain that a particular feature or technology can be used effectively by the team. Organise knowledge sharing sessions amongst team members.

Mitigation strategy
in force

4.2

  • Project contains numerous documentation and different versions. Inefficent access to a particular document.
  • Accuracy of information used is compromised

Medium

Low

  • Use a collaborative file management software (e.g. Google Documents) to organise respective folders of the project. Consensus amongst team members to adhere to proper version labelling.

Risk eliminated