S/N
|
Risk Description
|
Impact
|
Impact Level (High/Med/Low)
|
Likelihood (High/Med/Low)
|
Mitigation Strategy
|
Status
|
1
|
Project Management
|
1.1
|
- Underestimation 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
|
1.2 (New as at MidTerm)
|
- Many issues might be raised during Usability Tests 1 and 2; time is required to rectify these issues
|
- Project Schedule is delayed
|
Medium
|
High
|
|
Mitigation strategy in force
|
2
|
Client Management
|
2.1
|
- 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
|
|
Mitigation strategy in force
|
2.2
|
- Clients do not know the exact requirements of the new application
|
- Application may not serve the needs of the company effectively
|
High
|
Medium
|
- Using Low fidelity prototype (UI mockups) to communicate and ensure that requirements are properly understood. helps to eliminate unnecessary wastage of time developing what may not be the clients' needs
|
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
|
Technological Implementation
|
4.1 (New as at MidTerm)
|
- Self-developed schedule interview feature may be too challenging. Customised codes is needed to suit the business process of Oak3 Films
|
- Possible delay in schedule
|
Medium
|
Medium
|
- Devise alternatives. For example, if self-written calendar code cannot be implemented, switch to external plugins etc.
|
Mitigation strategy in force
|
4.2
|
- Members unfamiliar to technologies used (e.g. Yii framework, PHPUnit testing, and Youtube API).
|
- Insufficient skilled members to value-add to the project
|
Medium
|
Medium
|
- Organise knowledge sharing sessions amongst team members.
|
Mitigation strategy in force
|
4.3
|
- Unsure if a particular feature can be developed with current technologies.
|
- The extent where the application can value-add to the business might be affected
|
Medium
|
Medium
|
- Develop Proof-Of-Concepts for such features (Search, Crop Photo).
|
Mitigation strategy in force
|
4.4
|
- 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
|