Project Risk

Management Guide
Part I: Guidance for WSDOT Projects
Part II: Guidelines for CRA-CEVP Workshops

November 2014

Engineering and Regional Operations

Development Division, Design Office, SAEO

Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Information

Materials can be provided in alternative formats by calling the ADA Compliance Manager
at 360-705-7097. Persons who are deaf or hard of hearing may contact that number via
the Washington Relay Service at 7-1-1.

Title VI Notice to Public

It is Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) policy to ensure no person
shall, on the grounds of race, color, national origin, or sex, as provided by Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise
discriminated against under any of its federally funded programs and activities. Any person who
believes his/her Title VI protection has been violated may file a complaint with WSDOTs Office
of Equal Opportunity (OEO). For Title VI complaint forms and advice, please contact OEOs Title
VI Coordinator at 360-705-7082 or 509-324-6018.

To get the latest information on individual WSDOT publications, sign up for email updates at:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/publications/manuals

Foreword
Inaccurate cost estimating has vexed transportation projects for years. A noted study by B.
Flyvbjerg on the results of transportation project estimating found that, for the past 70 years,
the cost of transportation projects has been consistently underestimated in many parts of the
world, including the U.S.
The future is uncertain, but it is certain that these questions will be asked about our projects:
(1) How much will it cost? (2) How long will it take? And, of course, the obvious follow-up
question: Why? (Why that much and why that long?)
These questions are posed in the future tense, and we are being asked
to predict an uncertain future. Because the future is uncertain, the
fundamental answer to these questions is that an estimate is more
accurately expressed, not as a single number, but as a range. To
determine an accurate estimate range for both cost and schedule, risk
and uncertainty must be quantified.

What gets us in
trouble is not what
we dont know. Its
what we know for
sure that just aint
so.
~ Mark Twain

Estimates have two components: the base cost component and the risk (or uncertainty)
component. Base cost is defined as the likely cost of the planned project if no significant
problems occur. Once the base cost is established, a list of uncertainties is created of both
opportunities and threats, called a risk register. The risk assessment replaces general and
vaguely defined contingency with explicitly defined risk events and with the probability of
occurrence and the consequences of each potential risk event. Scope control is necessary for
project management and estimating. Cost estimates are reviewed and validated, and a base
cost for the project is determined.

Project risk management is a scalable activity and should be commensurate with the size and
complexity of the project under consideration. Simpler projects may utilize simple qualitative
analyses, as found in WSDOTs Project Management Online Guide in the Risk Management Plan
spreadsheet. Larger, more complex projects may wish to use more robust analysis techniques
via Monte Carlo simulation models.
The guidance in this manual has been developed by the Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office
(SAEO) in alignment with the goals of the Statewide Program Management Group. This
document would not have been possible without the contributions of dozens of key WSDOT
people who participated in the development and review of these guidelines. Credit is also due
to many of the consultant partners, academics, and others who continually advance the cause
of project risk management in the transportation industry.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page i

Foreword

Page ii

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Comment Form
NOTE: This document is a working draft. Your feedback and input are greatly appreciated.
From:

Date:
Phone:

To:

Subject:

WSDOT Headquarters
Development Division, Design Office
Attn: Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office
Mailstop 47330 PO Box 47330
Olympia, WA 98501-7330
Project Risk Management Comments

Comment (marked copies attached):

Preserve this original for future use. Submit copies only.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page iii

Comment Form

Page iv

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Contents
Foreword.. ................................................................................................................................................... i
Comment Form ............................................................................................................................................ iii
List of Exhibits .............................................................................................................................................viii

Part I: Guidance for WSDOT Projects

Chapter 1 Project Risk Management Planning ....................................................................................... 1-1
1-1 Introduction to Project Risk Management .................................................................... 1-1
1-2 Value of Risk Management ........................................................................................... 1-2
1-3 Project Risk Management Process ............................................................................... 1-3
1-4 Smart Effort = Less Risk ................................................................................................ 1-4
1-5 Statement of Policy ...................................................................................................... 1-6
1-6 Project Risk Management Planning .............................................................................. 1-6
1-7 How to Plan for Project Risk Management ................................................................ 1-10
Chapter 2 Risk Identification ................................................................................................................... 2-1
2-1 Risk Identification Throughout Project Development .................................................. 2-1
2-2 Risk Identification: Inputs, Tools and Techniques, Outputs ......................................... 2-1
2-3 Identifying Risk Events .................................................................................................. 2-3
Chapter 3 Qualitative Risk Analysis ......................................................................................................... 3-1
3-1 General ......................................................................................................................... 3-1
3-2 How to Perform Qualitative Risk Analysis .................................................................... 3-2
Chapter 4 Quantitative Risk Analysis ...................................................................................................... 4-1
4-1 General ......................................................................................................................... 4-1
4-2 How to Perform Quantitative Risk Analysis.................................................................. 4-3
Chapter 5 Risk Response ......................................................................................................................... 5-1
5-1 Taking Action ................................................................................................................ 5-1
5-2 Risk Response Tools and Techniques ........................................................................... 5-4
Chapter 6 Risk Monitoring and Control .................................................................................................. 6-1
6-1 General ......................................................................................................................... 6-1
Chapter 7 Project Risk Management Plan Template .............................................................................. 7-1
7-1
7-2
7-3
7-4

General ......................................................................................................................... 7-1

Project Risk Management Plan ..................................................................................... 7-1
Project Risk Management Process: Example Project ................................................... 7-3
Second Pillar of Risk Management (Respond, Monitor, and Control) ......................... 7-7

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page v

Contents

Part II: Guidelines for CRA-CEVP Workshops

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment ...................................................................................A-1

A-1

Section B

Purpose ........................................................................................................................ A-1

A-1.1 Helpful Hints for Project Teams...................................................................... A-2
A-1.2 Statement of Purpose..................................................................................... A-3
A-1.3 CRA and CEVP Seven-Step Process................................................................ A-4
A-1.4 Workshop Teams and Participation ............................................................... A-4
A-1.5 Preparing Workshop Participants................................................................... A-7
A-1.6 Preparing the Project Team Overview for Bias Reduction ....................... A-7
A-1.7 Preparing the Project Team Procedures..................................................... A-8
A-1.8 Preparing Subject-Matter Experts Procedures ............................................ A-8
A-1.9 Conflict Resolution ....................................................................................... A-10
A-2 Risk Assessment Workshop ....................................................................................... A-11
A-3 Risk Assessment Activities ......................................................................................... A-11
A-3.1 Elicitation (Characterizing Risk and Uncertainty) ......................................... A-11
A-3.2 Cautionary Notes Regarding Workshop Dynamics....................................... A-13
A-3.3 Report Preparation ....................................................................................... A-14
A-3.4 CEVP Results and Capital Budget Development Data Needs ..................... A-17
A-3.5 Management Endorsement.......................................................................... A-17
A-4 QA/QC: All Are Accountable for Quality .................................................................... A-18
A-4.1 Preparation ................................................................................................... A-18
A-4.2 During and After the Workshop ................................................................... A-19
A-5 Risk Response Taking Action................................................................................... A-19
Manager & Team Typical Duties ......................................................................................... B-1
B-1
B-2
B-3

Section C

Description of Work......................................................................................................B-1
Project Team Status Prior to CRA/CEVP Workshop....................................................B-2
Project Team Responsibilities and Requirements ........................................................B-3
B-3.1 Items Required from the Project Team Prior to the Workshop ......................B-4
Risk Lead Duties ................................................................................................................... C-1
C-1

Section D

C-1.1 Risk Lead Duties ............................................................................................... C-1

Cost Lead Duties ................................................................................................................. D-1
D-1
D-2

Page vi

Description of Work...................................................................................................... C-1

Description of Work..................................................................................................... D-1

D-1.1 Cost Lead Duties ............................................................................................. D-1
Base Cost Assessment ................................................................................................. D-3
D-2.1 Confirm that Cost Matches Scope .................................................................. D-4
D-2.2 Confirm Unit Prices Are Valid ......................................................................... D-4
D-2.3 Identify Internal and External Contingency .................................................... D-4
D-2.4 Split Estimate to Match Flowchart ................................................................. D-4
D-2.5 Determine Risk Costs in Collaboration with the Risk Team ........................... D-4
WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide
November 2014

Contents

Section E

Subject Matter Experts Duties............................................................................................. E-1

E-1

Section F

Description of Work...................................................................................................... E-1

E-1.1 Special Notes for Subject Matter Experts........................................................ E-1
CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region).................................................................................. F-1
F-1

Section G

Description of Work...................................................................................................... F-1

F-1.1 CRA Coordinator Duties ................................................................................... F-1
F-2 CRA Coordinator How-To .......................................................................................... F-2
F-2.1 Example Walk-Through of a Typical Project .................................................... F-2
F-2.2 Enhancing the Process ..................................................................................... F-3
Technical Notes for Risk Modelers ........................................................................................ G-1

G-1

Section H

Guidance ...................................................................................................................... G-1

G-1.1 Base Cost Uncertainty .................................................................................... G-1
G-1.2 Base Schedule Uncertainty ............................................................................. G-2
G-1.3 Distributions to Consider for Quantifying Risk ............................................... G-2
G-1.4 Interdependencies or Correlations Between Random Variables ................... G-4
G-1.5 Typical Model Settings.................................................................................... G-4
G-1.6 Directives for Implementing the Response Actions to Major Risks ............... G-4
G-1.7 Integrating Cost and Schedule Risks: A History and Practice at WSDOT........ G-4
Common Assumptions .......................................................................................................... H-1
H-1
H-2
H-3
H-4

H-5
H-6

H-7
H-8
H-9
H-10
H-11

General Overview ........................................................................................................ H-1

Scope ........................................................................................................................... H-1
General Design Criteria................................................................................................ H-2
Bridge Seismic Design Criteria ..................................................................................... H-2
H-4.1 Bridge Seismic................................................................................................. H-2
H-4.2 Wall Seismic .................................................................................................... H-2
Inflation Rate Information & Market Conditions ........................................................ H-2
Construction Market Condition Risks .......................................................................... H-3
H-6.1 Number of Bidders ......................................................................................... H-3
H-6.2 Other Market Condition Risks for Construction ............................................. H-3
Right of Way Market Condition Risks .......................................................................... H-3
Preliminary Engineering Market Condition Risks ........................................................ H-4
Design-Build (DB) versus Design-Bid-Build (DBB) ........................................................ H-4
Fuel Price Inflation ....................................................................................................... H-4
Project-Specific Assumptions ...................................................................................... H-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page vii

Contents

List of Exhibits
Part I: Guidance for WSDOT Projects
Exhibit 1-1

Balanced Risk Management (Risk Tolerance) ..................................................................... 1-2

Exhibit 1-2

Relationship Between Risk and Objectives ......................................................................... 1-4

Exhibit 1-3

Levels of Risk-Based Estimating, in Support of Risk Management (E 1053) ....................... 1-6

Exhibit 1-4

General Comparison of a Few Typical Characteristics of CRA and CEVP .......................... 1-7

Exhibit 1-5

Evolution of Project Knowledge Through Project Development ........................................ 1-8

Exhibit 1-6

Determine the Level of Risk Assessment .......................................................................... 1-11

Exhibit 1-7

Include Risk Management Milestones in the Project Schedule ........................................ 1-11

Exhibit 1-8

Simplified Workshop Timeline .......................................................................................... 1-12

Exhibit 1-9

Risk Management Schedule: With Workshop and Postworkshop Activities .................... 1-13

Exhibit 2-1

Risk Identification................................................................................................................ 2-4

Exhibit 2-2

Risk Identification Example (SMART) .................................................................................. 2-5

Exhibit 2-3

Example of a Completed Risk ID Sheet for Quantitative Analysis ...................................... 2-6

Exhibit 2-4

Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) ......................................................................................... 2-7

Exhibit 2-5

Example Risk ID Sheet from Project Management Online Guide, Qualitative ................... 2-8

Exhibit 3-1

Qualitative Risk Assessment-Related Definitions ............................................................... 3-4

Exhibit 3-2

Qualitative Project Risk Analysis (Example) ........................................................................ 3-5

Exhibit 3-3

Qualitative Terms and Translation to a Numeric Judgment ............................................... 3-6

Exhibit 4-1

Levels of Risk-Based Estimating, in Support of Risk Management ..................................... 4-1

Exhibit 4-2

CPMS Data Requirements ................................................................................................... 4-3

Exhibit 4-3

Process for CRA or CEVP Risk Management Meeting ....................................................... 4-5

Exhibit 4-4

Project Management Integrates Project Risk Management ............................................ 4-7

Exhibit 5-1

Simple Response Matrix...................................................................................................... 5-5

Exhibit 6-1

Second Pillar of Risk Management...................................................................................... 6-3

Exhibit 6-2

Total Estimated Cost Impacts of Top 5 Risks for the Example Project ............................... 6-4

Exhibit 6-3

Performance Measure of Risk Management for This Project ............................................. 6-5

Exhibit 7-1

Project Risk Management Plan Template ........................................................................... 7-2

Exhibit 7-2

Project Risk Management Plan Duties ................................................................................ 7-4

Exhibit 7-3

How to Use a Risk Breakdown Structure (Example) ........................................................... 7-6

Exhibit 7-4

Project Risk Management Performance Template (Example) ............................................ 7-9

Page viii

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Contents

Part II: Guidelines for CRA-CEVP Workshops

Exhibit A-1

Workshop Team (Typical Participants) .............................................................................. A-5

Exhibit A-2

Preworkshop: Determine Need, Learn the Process & Assemble Project Information ...... A-6

Exhibit A-3

Workshop Report Guide/Checklist .................................................................................. A-15

Exhibit A-4

Report Writing Responsibility .......................................................................................... A-16

Exhibit A-5

Workshop Report ............................................................................................................. A-17

Exhibit A-6

Cost and Risk QC Checklist ............................................................................................... A-18

Exhibit B-1

Timing of Workshops ..........................................................................................................B-2

Exhibit C-1

Flowchart Example ..............................................................................................................C-2

Exhibit C-2

Simplified Flowchart Example .............................................................................................C-3

Exhibit G-1

Combination of Base Variability and Market Conditions .................................................. G-1

Exhibit G-2

Capturing Base Market Condition Uncertainty (Example) ................................................. G-2

Exhibit G-3

Capturing Base Schedule Uncertainty................................................................................ G-3

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page ix

Contents

Page x

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Part I:
Guidance for WSDOT Projects
Chapter 1: Project Risk Management Planning
Chapter 2: Risk Identification
Chapter 3: Qualitative Risk Analysis
Chapter 4: Quantitative Risk Analysis
Chapter 5: Risk Response
Chapter 6: Risk Monitoring and Control
Chapter 7: Project Risk Management Plan Template

Chapter 1
Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Project Risk Management Planning

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk Analysis

Risk

Identification

Qualitative
Quantitative
pre-response
analysis

Update
Project Management Plan

Results of
response actions

1-1

Risk

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

Introduction to Project Risk Management

This document provides information to Project Managers, project teams, and staff
involved directly or indirectly with project risk management. It provides:

Uniformity in project risk management activities.

Techniques and tools for project risk management.
Data requirements for risk analysis input and output.
The project risk management role in overall project management.
Guidance on how to proactively respond to risks.

Understanding project risks enables project teams to more effectively fulfill public
service expectations. Assessing project risk and uncertainty informs decision making
in our project development and delivery mission. These decisions contribute to public
safety and clarify project expectations. Informed project risk management adds value
on many levels to every project we deliver.
Estimating the cost of transportation projects is a fundamental responsibility of the
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). In recognition of the
fundamental and strategic importance of cost estimating, these guidelines provide
consistent practices across the agency to enhance methods for meeting this
responsibility. These guidelines were developed by the Strategic Analysis and
Estimating Office (SAEO), with contributions from a number of specialists in cost
estimating and project development.
No construction project is risk
free. Risk can be managed,
minimized, shared, transferred,
or accepted. It cannot be
ignored.
~ Sir Michael Latham, 1994
WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide
November 2014

Page 1-1

Project Risk Management Planning

Chapter 1

Estimators must be shielded from pressures to prepare estimates that match any
preconceived notions of what a project should cost. Estimators need to prepare
estimates based on the scope of the project, the schedule of the project, and the
bidding conditions that are anticipated.

1-2

Value of Risk Management

Project risk management delivers a number of values to the project, including:

Recognizes uncertainty and provides forecasts of possible outcomes.

Produces better business outcomes through more informed decision making.
Has a positive influence on creative thinking and innovation.
Creates better project controlreduces overhead and time, and enhances
benefits.
Contributes to project success.

Project risk management is an integral component of project management and is found

at the heart of WSDOTs project management processes.
Risk management is also a key component of project cost estimating and scheduling,
as noted in National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 574.
This report is available at the WSDOT library along with other publications on project
management and risk management.
Exhibit 1-1 and depict project risk management through project development and
balanced risk management.
With effective risk management as an integral and required part of project
management, we can not only predict possible future outcomes, we can take action
to shift the odds for project success in our favor.
Exhibit 1-1

Balanced Risk Management (Risk Tolerance)

Risk-seeking behavior in an organization

is characterized by:
Paying too little attention to risk management
Not allocating resources for risk management
Surprise at bad news
Missing opportunities

Risk-aversion behavior in an organization

is characterized by:
Over-allocation of resources on risk management
Low return on investment for risk management
Money spent on low-priority risks
Tedious processes

Balanced project risk management

is characterized by:
Efficient processes that match the organizations tolerance for risk
A proactive approach to management of projects and risks
Effective allocation of resources for risk management
Well-managed projects with few surprises
Taking advantage of opportunities
Dealing with threats effectively

Page 1-2

Investment in
risk
management

Tolerance
for
risk

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

1-3

Project Risk Management Planning

Project Risk Management Process

Risk management, as an integral part of project management, occurs on a daily basis.
With proactive risk management, we look at projects in a comprehensive manner and
assess and document risks and uncertainty. The steps for risk management are provided
below.

1-3.1 Risk Management Steps

Following are the WSDOT Project Management Online Guide (PMOG) risk management
steps:
1. Risk Management
Planning

Risk management planning is the systematic process of deciding

how to approach, plan, and execute risk management activities
throughout the life of a project. It is intended to maximize the
beneficial outcome of the opportunities and minimize or eliminate
the consequences of adverse risk events.

2. Identify Risk
Events

Risk identification involves determining which risks might affect the

project and documenting their characteristics. It may be a simple risk
assessment organized by the project team, or an outcome of the
CRA/CEVP workshop process.

3. Qualitative Risk
Analysis

Qualitative risk analysis assesses the impact and likelihood of the

identified risks, and develops prioritized lists of these risks for further
analysis or direct mitigation. Project teams assess each identified risk
for its probability of occurrence and its impact on project objectives.
Teams may elicit assistance from subject matter experts or functional
units to assess the risks in their respective fields.

4. Quantitative Risk
Analysis

Quantitative risk analysis is a way of numerically estimating the

probability that a project will meet its cost and time objectives.
Quantitative analysis is based on a simultaneous evaluation of
the impacts of all identified and quantified risks.

5. Risk Response

Risk response is the process of developing options and determining

actions to enhance opportunities and reduce threats to the projects
objectives. It identifies and assigns parties to take responsibility for
each risk response. This process ensures each risk requiring a
response has an owner. The Project Manager and the project team
identify which strategy is best for each risk, and then select specific
actions to implement that strategy.

6. Risk Monitoring &

Control

Risk monitoring and control tracks identified risks, monitors residual

risks, and identifies new risksensuring the execution of risk plans
and evaluating their effectiveness in reducing risk. Risk monitoring
and control is an ongoing process for the life of the project.

More details on the steps above are found throughout this document.
Exhibit 1-2 provides a helpful comparison between risk and objectives for various types
of risk management. For this document we are interested in project risk management.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-3

Project Risk Management Planning

Exhibit 1-2

Chapter 1

Relationship Between Risk and Objectives

Type of Risk
Management
Generic

Project Risk
Management
Business Risk
Management

Description

Sample Objectives

Risk: Any uncertainty that, if it

occurs, would affect one or more
objectives.
Project Risk: Any uncertainty that, if
it occurs, would affect one or more
project objectives.
Business Risk: Any uncertainty that,
if it occurs, would affect one or
more business objectives.

Safety Risk
Management

Safety Risk: Any uncertainty that, if

it occurs, would affect one or more
safety objectives.

Technical Risk
Management

Technical Risk: Any uncertainty

that, if it occurs, would affect one
or more technical objectives.
Security Risk: Any uncertainty that,
if it occurs, would affect one or
more security objectives.

Security Risk
Management

Time, cost, performance,

quality, scope, client
satisfaction.
Profitability, market share,
competitiveness, Internal Rate
of Return (IRR), reputation,
repeat work, share price.
Low accident rate, minimal lost
days, reduced insurance
premiums, regulatory
compliance.
Performance, functionality,
reliability, maintainability.
Information security, physical
security, asset security,
personnel security.

Credit: David Hillson, Effective Opportunity Management for Projects

1-4

Smart Effort = Less Risk

1-4.1 Taking Action

The power of risk management is fully realized when a Project Manager takes action to
respond to identified risks based on the risk analysis, with effort being directed toward
those risks that rank the highest in terms of significant impact to project objectives.
1-4.1.1 Inputs

The project scope, schedule, and estimate package should include the most
current versions of the following items:
Project Summary
Detailed Scope of Work (commensurate with the level of development)
Project Cost Estimate (with Basis of Estimate completed)
o PE cost estimate
o ROW cost estimate
o Construction cost estimate
Previous Risk Analyses (if applicable)
Project Management Plan
Project Schedule

Page 1-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

Project Risk Management Planning

Overall project schedule

o Detailed construction schedule (commensurate to level of development)
QA/QC Status
Additional Information (as necessary)
o

1-4.1.2 Techniques and Tools

WSDOT provides a number of techniques and tools to assist in project risk

management. These tools and techniques provide scalability and flexibility so that
project teams can match the tool with the specific needs of their projects. Often,
the appropriate tool is determined by the size and complexity of the project. These
tools include:
Project Management Online Guide (PMOG)
o Project Management Plan (fundamental for all projects)
o The PMOG provides a risk matrix for smaller, simpler projects
o Risk planning, risk assessment, and risk management are integral
elements of project management
Risk Management Plan spreadsheet template (found on SAEO website)
Self-modeling tool for quantitative risk analysis
CRA workshops for all projects between $25M and $100M
CEVP workshops for all projects over $100M
1-4.1.3 Output

Capital Program Management System (CPMS) data requirements per Instructional

Letter (IL) 4071 Project teams must provide specific data to the region program
management office for inclusion in CPMS and the Transportation Executive
Information System (TEIS). The required data is:
1. Project scheduling data for the following milestone dates:

Project definition completion date

Date for the beginning of preliminary engineering
Completion date for the environmental document
Start date for the acquisition of right of way
Date of right of way certification
Project advertisement date
Date project is operationally complete (substantially complete)

2. Estimated project cost data (in Current Year Dollars, CY$):

Date of estimate basis (e.g., 2014 $)

Design cost estimate
Right of way cost estimate
Construction cost estimate

3. Midpoint for construction phases using the project award date and the
operationally complete date.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-5

Project Risk Management Planning

1-5

Chapter 1

Statement of Policy

1-5.1 Project Risk Management and Risk-Based Estimating

It is WSDOTs policy to conduct risk-based estimating workshops for all projects over
$10 million (PE, R/W, and Const). These workshops provide information to Project
Managers that can help them control scope, cost, and schedule, and manage risks for
all projects (Exhibit 1-3). This policy reaffirms the requirement that a Risk Management
Plan is a component of every Project Management Plan.
Exhibit 1-3

Levels of Risk-Based Estimating, in Support of Risk Management (E 1053)

Project Size ($M)

Required Process*

Less than $10M

Qualitative spreadsheet in the Project Management Online Guide

$10M to $25M

Informal workshop using the self-modeling spreadsheet

$25M to $100M

Cost Risk Assessment (CRA) workshop

Greater than $100M

Cost Estimate Validation Process (CEVP) workshop

[1]

[1][3]

[1][2]
[2]

[1] In some cases, it is acceptable to combine a Value Engineering Study with a Risk-Based
Estimating Workshop.
[2] Projects $25 million and over should use the self-modeling spreadsheet in the scoping phase of
the risk-based estimating process, followed up by the more formal CRA or CEVP process during
the design phase.
[3] An informal workshop is composed of the project team (or key project team members); other
participants may be included as the Project Manager/project team deem necessary.

*Project Managers can use a higher-level process if desired.

1-6

Project Risk Management Planning

Great project risk management requires good planning. Begin with proven project
management practices: review organizational policies and guidance; initiate and align
the project team; and follow the steps provided in the Project Management Online
Guide. Risk management must commence early in project development and proceed
as the project evolves and project information increases in quantity and quality. Plan to:
Identify, assess/analyze, and respond to major risks.
Continually monitor project risks and response actions.
Conduct an appropriate number and level of risk assessments to update the
Risk Management Plan and evolving risk profile for the project.
Consider the resources needed for project risk management and build them into the
project development budget and schedule. Risk management activities, including events
such as Cost Risk Assessment (CRA), Cost Estimate Validation Process (CEVP), Value
Engineering Risk Assessment (VERA), or other meetings, need to be part of the project
work plan and built into the project schedule and budget (Exhibit 1-4).

Page 1-6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

Exhibit 1-4

Project Risk Management Planning

General Comparison of a Few Typical Characteristics of CRA and CEVP

Details
Typical Length
Subject Matter Experts
Timing

CRA
CEVP
1 2 days
3 5 days
Internal and local.
Internal and external.
Any time; typically updated when It is best to start early in the process;
design changes or other changes
major projects are typically updated
to the project warrant an
as needed.
updated CRA.
General
An assessment of risks with an
An intense workshop that provides an
evaluation and update of costs
external validation of cost and
and schedule estimates.
schedule estimates and assesses risks.
Note: Risk assessments are orchestrated by the Cost Risk Estimating Management (CREM) Unit of the
Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office at Headquarters, in collaboration with the Project Manager.
The Project Manager submits a workshop request and works with the CREM Unit to ascertain the
type of workshop required and the candidate participants. (See Part II: Guidelines for CRA-CEVP
Workshops for more details.)

Exhibit 1-5 illustrates how project information develops and evolves over time. With
rising project knowledge comes an understanding that contending with some elements
of the project will require significant additional resources. These elements could involve:
scope; environmental mitigation and permitting; rising cost of right of way as corridors
develop in advance of the project; utilities; seismic issues; and other elements.
In the past, traditional estimating practices tended to produce the number for a
project; but the single number masks the critical uncertainty inherent in a particular
project. It implies a sense of precision beyond what can be achieved during planning,
scoping, or early design phases.
We recognize that an estimate is more accurately expressed as a range, not as a single
number. To determine an accurate estimate range for both cost and schedule, risk must
be measured. Formerly, WSDOT measured risk based on the estimators experience and
best judgment, without explicitly identifying the projects uncertainties and risks. That
has changed. Estimates are now composed of two components: the base cost
component and the risk (or uncertainty) component. The base cost represents the cost
that can reasonably be expected if the project materializes as planned. The base cost
does not include contingencies. Once the base cost is established, a list of risks is
created of opportunities and threats, called a risk register. The risk assessment
replaces general and vaguely defined contingency with explicitly defined risk events.
Risk events are characterized in terms of probability of occurrence and the
consequences of each potential risk event.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-7

Project Risk Management Planning

Exhibit 1-5

Chapter 1

Evolution of Project Knowledge Through Project Development

Executive Order (EO) E 1053 instructs employees to actively manage their projects.
EO E 1038 establishes, as policy, that WSDOT is to proactively assess and respond to
any risks that may affect the achievement of the departments strategic performancebased objectives and their intended outcomes. It further goes on to direct employees
to support the departments efforts to identify, share, and manage risk across all
organizations and functions.
Risk reviews are an integral part of budget development, with the intent that the
department makes informed decisions about risk tolerance. It can be inferred that
determined Enterprise Risk Management includes comprehensive project risk
management Project risk management is a major element in the Project Management
Plan, which is required for all WSDOT projects (EO E 1032). We, as stewards of the
public trust, must endeavor to inform decision makers of the uncertainty and risk
associated with the projects we develop. We must understand risk tolerance and
we must weigh the value of project decisions against project risks.

Page 1-8

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

Project Risk Management Planning

Chapter 5 of the book Risk, Uncertainty and Government notes, lawyers and
economists are accustomed to think of contracts for future performance as devices for
allocating risks of future events. In order for us to understand this allocation of risk,
projects must be examined and the uncertainty and risks must be documented and
characterized.

Risk Management

Identify
Analyze

Respond
Monitor/Control

We can think of risk management as two pillars (depicted above). They are: IDENTIFY
and ANALYZE the risks, then, RESPOND, MONITOR, and CONTROL project risk.
Unless we incorporate the second pillar, we are not realizing the full value of risk
management. When preparing the Project Management Plan and work activities
for our project, we must include both pillars of risk management.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-9

Project Risk Management Planning

1-7

Chapter 1

How to Plan for Project Risk Management

Do you plan to manage risk for your project? YES! Then include risk management in your
Project Management Plan.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Determine the level of risk assessment for your project (Exhibit 1-6).
Incorporate risk management activities into the project schedule (Exhibit 1-7).
Make risk management an agenda item for regularly scheduled project meetings.
Communicate the importance of risk management to the entire project team.
Establish the expectation that risk will be managed, documented, and reported.

1-7.1 Tips for Risk Management Planning

Risk assessment should begin early, but there must be enough known about
the project to understand what is being assessed. This will be to varying levels
of detail depending on the point in project development at which the risk
assessment is conducted (planning, scoping, design/PS&E); hence, schedule
risk assessments at appropriate times.
Allow time in the schedule for prep activities; this includes review and QA/QC
of project schedules and cost estimates at appropriate times (Exhibits 1-8
and 1-9).
Allow a budget for risk assessment, risk management, and risk response
activities.
Report on the status of project risk in regularly scheduled project meetings.
Know the organizations tolerance for risk. Are Project Managers (and upper
management) risk averse or risk seeking? How much risk is the organization
willing to accept? Knowing the answers to these questions will help with risk
management and contribute to the decision-making process when determining
risk response actions.
Contact the Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office (SAEO) and discuss the
possibility of combining the risk assessment workshop with a value engineering
(VE) study.

Page 1-10

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

Exhibit 1-6

Project Risk Management Planning

Determine the Level of Risk Assessment

More Formal Risk

Assessment ( Workshops)

Less Formal Risk

Assessment

Project
Size ($M)

Exhibit 1-7

Risk Assessment Level

Notes

0 to 10

Project Team Risk Assessment

Project Management Online
Guide (PMOG) Risk Management
Plan
Qualitative Tool

10 to 25

Project Team Risk Assessment

Self-Modeling Spreadsheet
Quantitative Tool

25 to 100

Cost Risk Assessment (CRA)

Workshop
Quantitative Tool

Over 100

Cost Estimate Validation

Process (CEVP) Workshop
Quantitative Tool

The project team assesses each identified

risk for its probability of occurrence and
its impact on project objectives. Project
teams may request assistance from
subject matter experts or functional units
to assess the risks in their respective
fields. The self-modeling spreadsheet can
be used for any project.
The team, working collaboratively with
independent subject matter experts,
reviews and/or validates cost and schedule
estimating and identifies, characterizes,
and analyzes risks. Workshops are
accomplished in a structured setting.
Modeling can be accomplished with offthe-shelf software or using the selfmodeling spreadsheet.

Include Risk Management Milestones in the Project Schedule

Less Formal Risk Assessment*

Formal Workshop (CRA/CEVP)

Milestones include:

Milestones include:

Project Scope, Schedule, and Estimate are

Workshop Request Form Submitted

Project Scope, Schedule, and Estimate are

Complete (apt for the level of development)

Prep Meeting (initial review of areas of

concern; determine tool: qualitative or selfmodeling)

Risk Meeting (risks are identified and

characterized)

Risk Response Actions Developed

Risk Response Actions Implemented

Complete (apt for the level of development)

Prep Session (flowchart project; determine

subject matter experts; additional prep items)

Workshop
Preliminary Results Presented
Draft Report
Final Report

*Does not require a formal workshop.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-11

Project Risk Management Planning

Exhibit 1-8

Chapter 1

Simplified Workshop Timeline

Request form
submitted by
Project Manager

Typical duration from request to final report is about 90 days

Prep activities
Typical duration 45 days
(range: 30 to 60 days)

Risk Assessment Meeting

Typical duration 3 days
(range 2 days to 10 days)

Final
workshop
report

Post activities
Typical duration 45 days
(range: 30 to 180+ days)

Typical prep activities include:

Prep meeting
Prepare agenda
Review materials
Advance elicitation
Process task orders
Negotiate contracts
Identify cost-risk team
Confirm & invite participants
Schedule activities (pre- and post-)
Determine type of risk assessment
Establish duration of risk assessment

Typical post activities include:

Perform action items
Prepare Monte Carlo models
Prepare draft and final reports
Conduct risk treatment follow-up meeting
Prepare preliminary presentation
Review and process consultant invoices

Causes of delay to the start or analysis

Poorly defined scope of work
Poorly prepared cost estimate
Poorly prepared schedule estimate
No current project management plan

Causes of delaying the finsih

Delays in decision-making
Unresolved isses at end of meeting
Requested information not provided

Note: If the project team cannot clearly

describe the project to be evaluated, with
a well-defined problem statement, and
provide a cost and schedule estimate, the
risk assessment meeting should be
postponed.

Note: Once the risk assessment meeting

is over, it is over. Allow the process to
come to a conclusion so the report can
be delivered. Endless permutations and
combinations of hypothetical scenarios
that will not contribute to the decisionmaking process do not add value to the
process. Evaluate the results, then develop
a risk response plan; update the Project
Management Plan as appropriate.

Page 1-12

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 1

Exhibit 1-9

Project Risk Management Planning

Risk Management Schedule: With Workshop and Postworkshop Activities

DURATION RANGE (days)

TASK NAME
Risk Assessment Process (90 days +/-) Typical timeline for CRA/CEVP

Shorter

Common

Longer

~30

~90

~120 +

Request Form submitted by the Project Manager to the Cost Risk Estimating Management
(CREM) Unit of the Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office (SAEO)
PREWORKSHOP ACTIVITIES

Start
24

30

44

5 or more

10

45

90 +

CREM works with PM to identify appropriate cost-risk team

CREM determines appropriate workshop type and length
CREM works with PM to schedule risk assessment activities (including pre- and post-)
Project team prepares materials for prep session and begins preparing for workshop
REALITY CHECK (is project team ready?) > Scope, Schedule, Estimate for workshop
CREM prepares and distributes PREP Session agenda and sends invites
PREP SESSION (run by CREM results in: Draft Flowchart, Estimate, Participants List)
MILESTONE > PREP SESSION COMPLETE
PM sends email reminder to region participants/SMEs for workshop
CREM schedules and conducts advance elicitation with appropriate parties
CREM sends invites to all workshop participants for workshop
Project team prepares for workshop (review Flowchart, Estimate, and Participants List)
CREM, working with PM, finalizes workshop agenda and sends to participants
Project team makes project information available via email, ftp, and/or other
WORKSHOP ACTIVITIES
WORKSHOP (run by CREM)
MILESTONE > WORKSHOP COMPLETE
POSTWORKSHOP ACTIVITIES
Cost Lead prepares their portion of the DRAFT REPORT
Risk Lead prepares models and writes DRAFT REPORT
Risk Lead prepares preliminary presentation
Risk Lead delivers preliminary presentation
Preliminary presentation complete
RISK LEAD ASSEMBLES DRAFT REPORT
MILESTONE > DRAFT REPORT COMPLETE
PROJECT TEAM REVIEWS & COMMENTS ON DRAFT REPORT
Cost Lead prepares their portion of the FINAL REPORT
Risk Lead finalizes models and writes FINAL REPORT
MILESTONE > FINAL REPORT COMPLETE
PM makes sure payment groups are set up in TRAINS
POSTREPORT ACTION (RISK RESPONSE)
PM updates Project Risk Management Plan (collaborates w/CREM)
PM implements risk response actions (collaborate w/CREM)
PM initiates monitoring for effectiveness of risk response actions
Update Risk Management Plan: response costs and estimated value of risk avoided

Project risk management

is an ongoing activity that
is performed as part of the
daily and regular project
development and delivery
activities.

Perform post-mitigation analysis and report

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 1-13

Project Risk Management Planning

Page 1-14

Chapter 1

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 2

Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Risk Identification

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk

Identification

Risk Analysis

Qualitative
Quantitative
pre-response
analysis

Update
Project Management Plan

Results of
response actions

2-1

Risk

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

Risk Identification Throughout Project Development

Risk identification occurs throughout each phase of project development:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Planning
Scoping
Design/Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (Engineers Estimate)
Construction

As projects evolve through project development, the risk profile evolves and understanding
grows. Therefore, previously identified risks may change and new risks may be identified
throughout the life of the project.

2-2

Risk Identification: Inputs, Tools and Techniques, Outputs

2-2.1 Risk Identification Inputs

The first and most important input is a defined project. In order to fully understand and
assess the risks that our projects are exposed to, we must first ensure there is a mutual
understanding of the project under evaluation. This means that in order to focus on the
risks and uncertainties our project will face, we must first define the project in terms of
context, scope, schedule, and estimate, commensurate with the level of project
development at the time of risk analysis. Progressive elaboration should not be confused
with scope creep. (Source: Project Management Book of Knowledge)
Projects tend to develop in small steps. This incremental process of project development
is sometimes termed progressive elaboration. Progressive elaboration means developing
in steps, and continuing by increments. For example, the project scope will be broadly
described early in the project and made more explicit and detailed as the project team
develops a better and more complete understanding of the objectives and deliverables.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 2-1

Risk Identification

Chapter 2

2-2.2 Risk Identification Tools and Techniques

The project team, sometimes in collaboration with cost risk experts and subject matter
experts, identify as many risks as possible that may affect project objectives (Exhibit 2-1).
State the assumptions for risk identification and analysis, and delineate thresholds for risks.
For example, a project team may want to describe risks with impacts below $100,000 or
less than two weeks as minor. By doing so, we do not spend excessive amounts of time on
risks that do not significantly impact our ability to meet project objectives. Focus must be
directed toward risks that can significantly impact the project. Assumptions and thresholds
for risk assessment are project-specific and are influenced by the size and complexity of the
project and project environment, and the owners tolerance for risk. There are a wide
variety of techniques used for risk identification. Some common techniques used at
WSDOT are provided below.
2-2.2.1 Documentation Reviews

Peer-level reviews of project documentation, studies, reports, preliminary plans,

estimates, and schedules are a common and early method to help identify risks
that may affect project objectives.
2-2.2.2 Information Gathering

Brainstorming Formal and informal brainstorming sessions with project

team members, specialty groups, stakeholders, and regulatory agency
representatives is a technique for risk identification. This technique can be
scaled for use on the simplest to the most complex projects. This technique
can also be tailored to specific areas of interest for the project risk; for
example, if a Project Manager is most concerned about geotech conditions,
a brainstorming session on geotech can be convened.

Lessons Learned Database Searching for lessons learned using key words
in the WSDOT Lessons Learned Database that are relevant to your project
can provide an abundance of information on projects that may have faced
similar risks.

Other Methods Other techniques include: questionnaires and surveys;

interviews, checklists, and examination of the work breakdown structure
for the project with appropriate specialty groups; and asking what if
questions (for example, what if we miss the fish window? or what if
our environmental documentation is challenged and we have to prepare
an EIS?).

2-2.3 Risk Identification Outputs

An expected deliverable from risk identification includes a preliminary risk register, 1
which documents the following information:

A list of risks comprised of potential project opportunities and threats.

Page 2-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 2

Risk Identification

Identification # for each risk identified Assign a unique number to each risk for tracking
purposes. If available, do this by utilizing an established Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS);
the WSDOT RBS is provided in Exhibit 2-4.
Date and phase of project development when risk was identified Document the date
the risk was identified and in which project development phase (planning, scoping,
design/PS&E, construction).
Name of risk (does the risk pose a threat or present an opportunity?) Ensure each
identified risk has an appropriate name; for example, NEPA Delay or Reduction in
Condemnation. Also, document the nature of the risk with respect to project objectives
(threat or opportunity; you can do this by using the RBS for naming conventions.
Detailed description of risk event The detailed description of the identified risk must
provide information that is Specific, Measurable, Attributable (a cause is indicated),
Relevant, and Time-bound (SMART). Ensure the description is clear enough and thorough
enough so that others reading about the description of the risk will understand what it
means.
Risk trigger Each identified risk must include the risk trigger(s). Risks rarely just suddenly
occur; usually there is some warning of imminent threat or opportunity. Clearly describe
and document these warning signs and information about the risk. For example, NEPA
Approval Date may be considered a risk trigger on a project that has a risk of a legal
challenge.
Risk type Does the identified risk affect project schedule, cost, or both?
Potential responses to identified risk Document, if known, possible response actions
to the identified riskcan the identified threat be avoided, transferred, or mitigated, or
is it to be accepted? Can the identified opportunity be exploited, shared, or enhanced?
Comments about risk identification Risk management is an iterative process, so regularly
review project risks. As you identify new risks, document and assess them. Consider the
resulting risk register preliminary only until the completion of additional and appropriate
activities. These may include any or all of the techniques listed above and/or more
robust processes such as Cost Risk Assessment and Cost Estimate Validation Process
(CRA/CEVP) workshops. More detail about the WSDOT workshops for CRA/CEVP
is provided later in this document, and at:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment

2-3

Identifying Risk Events

2-3.1 How to Identify Risk

1. Determine risk thresholds for the projectestablish a minimum dollar amount
and time duration considered significant for the project under evaluation.
2. Focus on identifying large significant risks that affect project objectives.
3. Carefully document and describe risks in a risk register (see Exhibit 2-4).
WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide
November 2014

Page 2-3

Risk Identification

Chapter 2

4. Characterize risks in terms of impact and probability. Note: High-impact risks with
low probabilities should be of particular interest to the Project Risk Manager. 2
2-3.2 Tips for Risk Identification
Determine, for your project, what constitutes significant risk.
Thoroughly describe the risk; there are forms on the following pages to help
with this, or you may create your own.
Include specialty groups and/or other persons who may have meaningful
input regarding the challenges the project may face.
Determine who owns the risk and who will develop a response.
Exhibit 2-1

Risk Identification

Brainstorming: An effective method, brainstorming can range from a small informal project team
effort for simpler projects to a full-blown CEVP workshop. Effective brainstorming requires a skilled
facilitator, working together with the project team and specialists who can bring additional expertise.
Checklists and/or questionnaires to specialty groups: Checklists/questionnaires are quick and easy
to use, but limited in nature; they only deal with the items on the list. Each project is unique, so a
standard list will often not capture the project-specific risks of most concern.
Though it can be limited, a checklist/questionnaire can spark thinking prior to a more formal
brainstorming process.
Examination of past similar projects: Lessons learned from past projects help us to avoid repeating
mistakes. Using past examples requires prudent and objective judgment, since a previous project
may be similar but is nonetheless different because each new project has unique requirements and
features, including uncertainties and risks.
WSDOT Lessons Learned website:
http://wwwi.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/delivery/lessonslearned/
A combination of the above methods and/or others: It is quite likely that for most projects, a
combination of the above methods will be used to identify risks. The important thing is that, once
identified, the risks are properly documented (see the following exhibits):
Exhibit 2-2 Example SMART template for documenting identified risks (tailor to your needs).
Exhibit 2-3 Example of how template is used for an actual project risk.
Exhibit 2-4 Risk Breakdown Structure for categorizing and organizing risks.
Exhibit 2-5 Example of qualitative risk identification using spreadsheet from the Project
Management Online Guide: www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/pmog.htm

 2

 High-Impact, low-probability risks, referred to as black swan events by some, can devastate a project and,
unfortunately, are not always given the attention they deserve. This is due to the fact that the expected value of this
type of risk does not always rank it highly on risk register.
Page 2-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 2

Risk Identfication Example (SMART)

(7)
specific

Construction

Active

CNS 40

Threat

Discover
hazardous
materials
during
construction

Even after significant preconstruction

site investigations are conducted, some
risk of contaminants remains. If
discovered during construction, they
can impact both cost and schedule.
The area of greatest concern is in the
latter half of the project. Hence, our
exposure is primarily during the
second year of construction.

(8)

discover
during
construction

RBS# CNS 40

MDL# PE.EV.10.10

Critical Path? yes

(10)

[10a]

(11)

33% MAX 7.00$M

Most
Likely

1.50$M

MIN

1.0Mo

MAX

6.0Mo

Most
Likely

2.0Mo

Risk Matrix
VH
Probability

Risk Owner: Mr. Haz Mat

(9)

Risk
Impact
($M, Mo)

MIN 0.50$M

Threat
Risk Trigger Details The project is over 4 miles in length. The area of
most concern, for exposure to unknown subsurface materials, is in the last
1.5 miles of construction; this risk exposure occurs in the final 12 months
of construction. Risk exposure Starts: March 2015 & Ends: March 2016.

Probability
Correlation

(6)

Risk
Trigger

Cost

Detailed Description of Risk Event

(Specific, Measurable, Attributable,
Relevant, Timebound)
[SMART]

(1) (2) (3) (5)

Summary
Description
Threat and/or
Opportunity

Type

Construction Risks

Project Phase

Dependency

Status

Risk #

Premitigated

Schedule

Exhibit 2-2

Risk Identification

Potential Response (action to be taken) (1) Increase site investigation

for the last 1.5 miles of this project; (2) use Ground Penetration Radar, if
possible; (3) cut project footprint to reduce area that is disturbed during
construction. NOTE: This risk has been discussed for some time;
concerns are known by management and regional stakeholders.

H
M
L
VL
VL

VH

Impact

Additional notes: What needs to be done? Who will do it? Due date?
Specific What is the specific issue of concern? Provide a detailed description.
Measurable Estimate the probability that this risk will occur; estimate the impact if it does occur.
Attributable What will trigger (cause) this risk to occur? How do we know? Who owns this risk?
Relevant Why is this risk important to our project? How critical is this risk?
Time-bound When are we at risk? Project risks have a shelf-life they do not last forever.
MDL = Master Deliverables List (Work Breakdown Structure)

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 2-5

Risk Identification

Exhibit 2-3

Page 2-6

Chapter 2

Example of a Completed Risk ID Sheet for Quantitative Analysis

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 2

Exhibit 2-4

Risk Identification

Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS)

Level
1

Project Risk

------------------------

Level
2

Level 3

-----------

Environmental
& Hydraulics
ENV

Structures &
Geotech
STG

Design / PS&E

Right-of-Way

Utilities

Railroad

Partnerships
Stakeholders
PSP

Management /
Funding
MGT

Contracting
Procurement
CTR

Construction

DES

ROW

UTL

RR

ENV 10
NEPA/SEPA

STG 10
Design Changes

DES 10
Design Changes

ROW 10
ROW Plan

UTL 10
Coordination

RR 10
Design
Coordination

PSP 10
Tribal Issues

MGT 10
Management
Change

CTR 10
Change in
Delivery Method

CNS 10
Traffic Control
and Staging

ENV 20
ESA Issues

STG 20
Design Changes

DES 20
Deviations' Approval

ROW 20
inflation

UTL 20
Conflicts

RR 20
Construction
coordination

PSP 20
Public
Involvement

MGT 20
Delayed
Decision Making

CTR 20
Contract
Language

CNS 20
Construction
Permitting

ENV 30
Environmental
Permitting

STG 30
Changes to
design Criteria

DES 30
architecture or
landscape changes

ROW 30
Limited Access
IJR

RR 30
Right of Entry

PSP 30
Additional Scope
for third parties

MGT 30
Cash Flow
Restrictions

CTR 30
Delays in
Ad/Bid/Award

CNS 30
Work Windows

ENV 40
Archaeological
Cultural

DES 40
Projects by other
agencies affected

ROW 40
Managed
Access Appeal

MGT 40
Political/Policy
Changes

CTR 40
Market
Conditions

CNS 40
Schedule
Uncertainty

ENV 50
Hazardous
Materials

DES 50
Changes to Design of
Traffic Items

ROW 50
Acquisition
Issues

MGT 50
State Workforce
Limitations

CTR 50
Delays in
Procurement

CNS 50
Marine
Construction

ENV 60
Wetlands /
Habitat
Mitigation
ENV 70
Stormwater,
Potential
Changes to Flow
ENV 80
Impacts during
Construction

DES 60
Design / PS&E
Reviews

ROW 60
Additional ROW
is required

CTR 60
Contractor NonPerformance

CNS 70
Earthwork
Issues (re-use,

CTR 70
Availability of
Specialty
Labor/Labor

CNS 80
Coordination
with Adjacent
Projects During
CNS 90
Contractor
Access / Staging
Coordination and
CNS 100
Construction
Accidents

CTR 900
Other CTR
Issues

CNS 900
Other CN
Issues

ENV 90
Permanent
Noise Mitigation
ENV 900
Other ENV
Issues
-----------

STR 900
Other STR
Issues

DES 900
Other Design
Issues

ROW 900
Other ROW
Issues

UTL 900
Other UTL
Issues

RR 900
Other RR
Issues

PSP 900
Other PSP
Issues

MGT 900
Other MGT
Issues

CNS

haul etc )

The RBS provides several functionsand benefitsto the project teamand to management, including:
1)Consistency with taxonomy (wording); 2) Organizesrisk events into commoncategories; 3)Helps identify trends with respect to common usage of riskeventcategories&event types,
categories&event typesalong with their probability and impact values; 4)Helps toidentify common risk events among projects that the Region and HQ offices should be aware of due to
theirpotentialcumulative effects; e.g. negotiating agreements with agencies or other municipalities;5) Provides a basisto work from for risk elicitors during CEVP workshops; 6) Provides a
basis for development of independent risk surveys for those that are unable to attend a CEVP workshop.
This RBS serves as a starting point inassessing project risks in CEVP and CRA workshops; and also for smaller projects that may not conduct a formal workshop.
RISK TRIGGER
(CAUSE or PRECIPITATING EVENT)

RBS CODE

RISK EVENT

CONSEQUENCE
(effect on project objectives)

PROBABILITY

IMPACT
($ or time)
$5M, 8 weeks

ENV 10.01

As a result of

the public involvement process

NEPA/SEPA document challenge

delays delivery of EA document

70%

ENV 10.02

Because of

public pressure and internal reviews

env documentation increases,

need to prepare an EIS

10%

ENV 10.03

Due to

reviews by WSDOT Environmental

design info deemed inadequate

additional design, cost, and time

10%

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

$0.1M, 6
months
$0.1M, 4
months

Page 2-7

Risk Identification

Example Risk ID Sheet from Project Management Online Guide, Qualitative

Project Name
Project Manager
Active Risk

Status
RBS Category

UTL

Risk Number

20

Project Phase

Design

Date

May 32, 2929

Risk Owner

M. Example

Project Identification Number (PIN)

Name of Risk Owner:
QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

RISK EVENT NAME: unknown utilities

RISK TRIGGER: discovery
THREAT

10
9
8

Areas outside of R/W have not been

investigated for conflicts. Additional
work is required for sewer/storm,
water, gas, power, communications.
Triggers include: utilities found late in
design or during construction.

7
6
5

Very High
High
Medium

4
3

X
1

Very Lo to Lo
Impact

some

2
1
9

Low
Very Low

10

Hi to Very Hi

RISK 1

Name of Risk Owner:

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS

RBS Category

ENV

Risk Number

90

Project Phase

Design

10
9

possibility that a noise wall will have

to be added to the project - pending
results of the type 1 analysis; this is a
high impact high probability threat

8
7
6
5
3
2
1

Risk Owner

Green Jeans

High
Medium

May 32, 2929

Date

Very High

Very Lo to Lo
Impact

some

Low
Very Low

10

Hi to Very Hi

Name of Risk Owner:

RBS Category

ENV

Risk Number

40

Project Phase

Design
May 33, 2929

Date
Risk Owner

Green Jeans

RISK EVENT NAME: cultural resources

RISK TRIGGER: discovery
THREAT

10

discovery of artifact; triggered during

design if field investigation results in
discovery; also trigger if discovered
during construction | deemed low
probability - this area has been
investigated previously and very little
new ground is being disturbed.

9
8
6
5
3
2
1
2

High
Medium

X
1

Very High

Very Lo to Lo
Impact

some

subsurface
utility
investigations
immediately;
assign team
member to
this full time.
RISK RESPONSE
STRATEGY
ACTION
TO BE TAKEN

press for
noise analysis
ASAP

Low
Very Low

RISK RESPONSE
STRATEGY

accept

probability

Item of Interest

ACTION
TO BE TAKEN

MONITOR and CONTROL

Date, Status and
review comments

update at the next

Quarterly Project Report
(QPR) meeting

MONITOR and CONTROL

Date, Status and
review comments

analysis due August

39th.

RISK 2

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
Status

RISK RESPONSE
STRATEGY

avoid

probability

Active Risk

Status

RISK EVENT NAME: noise wall

RISK TRIGGER: analysis results
THREAT

Date:

avoid

probability

Exhibit 2-5

Chapter 2

ACTION
TO BE TAKEN

monitor

MONITOR and CONTROL

Date, Status and
review comments

supplemental field
investigation report due
November 31.

10

Hi to Very Hi

RISK 3

2-3.3 After Risk Identification

Risk identification prepares us for risk analysis. The next two chapters present the two
types of risk analysis: qualitative and quantitative.

Page 2-8

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 3

Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Qualitative Risk Analysis

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk

Identification

Risk Analysis

Qualitative
Quantitative
pre-response
analysis

Update
Project Management Plan

Results of
response actions

3-1

Risk

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

General
Qualitative Risk Analysis assesses the impact and likelihood of the identified risks and
develops prioritized lists of these risks for further analysis or direct mitigation.
The project team assesses each identified risk for its probability of occurrence and its
impact on project objectives. Project teams may elicit assistance from subject matter
experts or functional units to assess the risks in their respective fields. (Source: WSDOT
Project Management Online Guide)
Qualitative risk analysis can be used by project teams:
As an initial screening or review of project risks.
When a quick assessment is desired.
As the preferred approach for some simpler and smaller projects where robust
and/or lengthy quantitative analysis is not necessary.
Qualitative: Observations that do not involve measurements and numbers; for
example, the risk of a heavy rainstorm affecting our erosion control is Very High.
Qualitative assessment: An assessment of risk relating to the qualities and subjective
elements of the riskthose that cannot be quantified accurately. Qualitative
techniques include the definition of risk, the recording of risk details and relationships,
and the categorization and prioritization of risks relative to each other.
Source: Project Risk Analysis and Management Guide, 2004, APM Publishing

Qualitative analysis provides a convenient and user-friendly way to identify, describe,

and characterize project risks.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 3-1

Qualitative Risk Analysis

Chapter 3

Risk identification, as mentioned in 2-2.3, results in the generation of a risk register. The
risk register can be sizeable; it is necessary to evaluate and prioritize the risk events
identified in the risk register. Evaluation and prioritization is typically accomplished
by the project team and is an iterative process and can take place at various points in
project development. In some cases, the project team may enlist help from cost risk
experts and subject matter experts to evaluate and prioritize the risks.
A thoroughly developed register of risks that may affect project objectives is helpful.
We sometimes find ourselves in situations where moving forward is difficult because of
indecision. Identifying, describing, and assessing project risks allow us to prioritize them.
Prioritization can free us from indecision by providing specific, documented risk events
that we can act on to shift the odds in favor of project success. Prioritizing risks that
present the highest potential for significantly affecting project objectives gives Project
Managers the information necessary to focus project resources. Prioritization helps us
make decisions in an uncertain environment and address project risk in a direct and
deliberate manner.
Exhibit 3-2 offers an example of a qualitative risk matrix. Qualitative analysis can provide
a prioritized list of risks.
Qualitative analysis utilizes relative degrees of probability and consequence for each
identified project risk event in descriptive non-numeric terms (Exhibit 3-3).

3-2

How to Perform Qualitative Risk Analysis

Once a risk is identified, including a thorough description of the risk and risk triggers,
it can be characterized in terms of probability of occurrence and the consequence if
it does occur.
1. Gather the project team and appropriate persons to discuss project risk. Establish
which of the qualitative risk matrices you intend to use, and define the terms you
plan to use (Very High, High, Medium, Low, etc.).
2. Review the risk information from the risk identification step.
3. Discuss the risk with the group.
4. Evaluate the likelihood of the risk occurring by asking the group, How likely is
it that this risk will occur? Record the result that the group agrees on.
5. Evaluate the consequences if the risk does occur by asking the group, What will
be the impacts if this risk does occur? Record the result that the group agrees on.
6. Prioritize the risks based on the results of the qualitative analysis. If it is desirable,
the risks can also be grouped by category (e.g., Environmental, Structures/
Geotech) and ranked within each category.

Page 3-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 3

Qualitative Risk Analysis

3-2.1 Helpful Hints for Qualitative Risk Analysis

Invite appropriate participants (not too many, not too few).
Define terms.
Stay focusedput a time limit on discussion if necessary.
Record the results.
Prioritize the risks based on the results.
People who are relatively new to risk analysis sometimes claim that it is nothing more
than guessing. However, this does not represent the actuality that assigning values for
probability and impact relies on the expertise and professional judgment of experienced
participants.
The determination of a value for the probability of occurrence and its consequence to
project objectives, if it occurs, is for many a new activity and can seem strange at first. In
any field, with experience, professionals develop intuition and an ability to understand
projects to a greater degree than those not involved with project development and
delivery. This experience and intuition is extremely valuable; in a risk workshop forum,
we surround ourselves with wise counsel to seriously and thoroughly discuss the
project. It might be helpful to examine the word guess and compare it to other
words, such as discernment and judgment, that more appropriately describe risk
assessment. The definitions in Exhibit 3-1 come from the Merriam-Webster Online
Dictionary/Thesaurus (with edits).

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 3-3

Qualitative Risk Analysis

Exhibit 3-1

Chapter 3

Qualitative Risk Assessment-Related Definitions

Risk-Assessment Terms

Definitions / Synonyms / Related Words

Discernment

Definition: The quality of being able to grasp and comprehend what is

obscure; skill in discerning (insight and understanding); the process of
forming an opinion or evaluation by discerning and comparing; an opinion
or estimate so formed; the capacity for judging; the exercise of this
capacity.
Synonyms: Perception, penetration, insight, and acumen mean a power
to see what is not evident to the average mind. DISCERNMENT stresses
accuracy; PERCEPTION implies quick discernment; PENETRATION implies a
searching mind that goes beyond what is obvious or superficial; INSIGHT
suggests depth of discernment coupled with understanding; and ACUMEN
implies characteristic penetration combined with keen practical judgment.

Judgment

Definitions: (1) The process of forming an opinion or evaluation by

discerning and comparing; (2) An opinion or estimate so formed; a formal
utterance of an authoritative opinion; a position arrived at after
consideration; an idea that is believed to be true or valid without positive
knowledge; an opinion on the nature, character, or quality of something.
Synonyms: Acumen, astuteness, sense, common sense, perception,
insight, reckoning, reason, logic, savvy, horse sense, street smarts.

Guess

Definition: To form an opinion from little or no evidence.

Synonyms: Assume, conjecture, presume, speculate, suppose, surmise,
suspect, suspicion.
Related Words: Gather, infer, hypothesize, theorize, believe, conceive,
expect, imagine, reckon.

Decision

Definitions: (1) a: The act or process of deciding, b: a determination

arrived at after consideration: <make a decision>; report of a conclusion;
(2) A position arrived at after consideration <after much deliberation, we
made a decision about what to use for an estimated unit price>
Synonyms: Conclusion, determination, diagnosis, judgment, resolution,
verdict.
Related Words: Mandate, finding, ruling, sentence, choice, option,
selection.

Page 3-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 3

Qualitative Risk Analysis

Exhibit 3-2

Qualitative Project Risk Analysis (Example)

Qualitative Risk List

Risk

Threat or
Opportunity

Risk Breakdown Structure

a
b
c
d

threat
threat
threat
threat

ROW 40.1
ENV 30.1
UTL 20.1
STG 20.4

Risk Title

Impact

Probability

managed access challenge

permits and permit appeals
unidentified utilities conflicts
substructure assumptions change

high
very high
low
low

medium
high
very low
very high

RBS #

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS
10
9

Very High

High

7
6

Medium

4
3

Low

c
1

some

Very Lo to Lo
Impact
Risk

Priority
Ranking

Risk Breakdown Structure

a
b
c
d

2
1
4
3

ROW 40.1
ENV 30.1
UTL 20.1
STG 20.4

RBS #

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Hi to Very Hi

10

probability

Very Low
qualitative
risk analysis

Risk Title

Impact

Probability

managed access challenge

permits and permit appeals
unidentified utilities conflicts
substructure assumptions change

high
very high
low
low

medium
high
very low
very high

Page 3-5

Qualitative Risk Analysis

Exhibit 3-3

Chapter 3

Qualitative Terms and Translation to a Numeric Judgment

Probability
(likelihood)

[1]

Synonyms

Approximate%

very high

almost certain

very sure

>90%

high

likely

pretty sure

80%

medium

possible

maybe

50%

low

unlikely

seldom

20%

very low

rare

improbable

<10%

Impact
(consequence)

[1]

Synonyms

Approximate%

very high

very critical

very strong

>10%

high

critical

strong

8%

medium

moderate

average

4%

low

mild

minor

2%

very low

very mild

very little

<1%

[1] Percentages may be adjusted as project teams deem appropriate.

Page 3-6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 4

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk Analysis

Risk

Qualitative
Quantitative

Identification

pre-response
analysis

Update
Project Management Plan

Risk

Results of
response actions

4-1

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

General
Quantitative Risk Analysis numerically estimates the probability that a project will meet
its cost and time objectives. Quantitative analysis is based on a simultaneous evaluation
of the impacts of all identified and quantified risks. (Source: WSDOT Project
Management Online Guide.)
The Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office (SAEO) at WSDOT offers several tools for
quantitative analysis of risk. These tools are described in Executive Order E 1053 and
summarized in Exhibit 4-1.
Exhibit 4-1

Levels of Risk-Based Estimating, in Support of Risk Management

Project Size ($M)

Required Process*

Informal workshop using the self-modeling spreadsheet[1][3]

$10M to $25M
Quantitative
Cost Risk Assessment (CRA) Workshop[1][2]
$25M to $100M
[2]
Greater than $100M Cost Estimate Validation Process (CEVP) Workshop
[1] In some cases, it is acceptable to combine a VE Study with a Risk Assessment.
[2] Projects $25M and over may use the self-modeling spreadsheet in scoping, followed up by the
more formal CRA or CEVP process during design.
[3] An informal workshop is composed of the project team (or key project team members); other
participants may be included as the Project Manager/project team deem necessary.
Note: For projects less than $10M, qualitative analysis is sufficient, although a higher level may be
used if desired.
*Project Managers can use a higher-level process if desired.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 4-1

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Chapter 4

Quantitative techniques, such as Monte Carlo simulation, can be a powerful tool for
analysis of project risk and uncertainty. This technique provides project forecasts with
an overall outcome variance for estimated project cost and schedule. Probability theory
allows us to look into the future and predict possible outcomes.
Note: Use of quantitative analysis, while very powerful, also can be misleading if not
used properly. WSDOT provides a comprehensive guide for risk workshops that, if
followed, helps ensure a consistent process and safeguards against biased and/or
misleading results. The comprehensive set of workshop guidelines is posted at:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/
The following caution comes from the paper Top Down Techniques for Project Risk
Management by Martin Hopkinson, presented at the 2006 PMI Conference in Madrid.
Poor modeling can produce an output that looks convincing to managers
but is so flawed that the results are dangerously misleading. On a project
with unrealistically tight targets, poor risk analysis may thus become a tool
that fosters management delusions about the prospects for success.
Project risk management is an integral component of ongoing project management.
Project Managers sometimes ask, when is the best time to conduct a CRA or CEVP
workshop? This is answered by reviewing the status of project development. When
a Project Management Plan is being developed and is kept current (i.e., appropriate to
the level of project development), with a well-written scope that can be communicated
and comprehended, along with the associated schedule and cost estimate, a project
team can begin in earnest preparing for risk assessment meetings.
For personalized service and guidance through preparation for the risk assessment,
contact the Cost Risk Estimating Management (CREM) Unit of the Strategic Analysis
and Estimating Office (SAEO). The CREM staff can offer assistance through the process,
including scheduling consultants and WSDOT resources to effect the completion of a
quantitative analysis, through either the workshop process or use of the self-modeling
spreadsheet.
When a project team prepares for a workshop, much of the work that is performed on
a daily or regular basis becomes the input for the analysis. This includes scope of work,
schedule estimate (with backup and assumptions), cost estimate (including the Basis of
Estimate), assumptions, and backup information. Estimates are used to make financial
decisions. Therefore, in order to facilitate this process, materials should be developed
that result in an informed decision-making process. Capital Program Management
System (CPMS) data requirements are listed in Exhibit 4-2.

Page 4-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 4

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Exhibit 4-2

CPMS Data Requirements

Required CPMS Data

Project teams must provide specific data to the region program management office for
inclusion into CPMS and the Transportation Executive Information System (TEIS). The required
data is:
1. Project Scheduling Data for the Following Milestone Dates
Project definition completion date
Date for the beginning of preliminary engineering
Completion date for the environmental document
Start date for the acquisition of right of way
Date of right of way certification
Project advertisement date
Date project is operationally complete (substantially complete)
2. Estimated Project Cost Data (in Current Year Dollars, CY$)
Date of estimate basis (e.g., March 2015 $)
Design cost estimate
Right of way cost estimate
Construction cost estimate
3. CPMS Modifications
CPMS will be modified to calculate the midpoint for construction phases using the
project award date and the operationally complete date

4-2

How to Perform Quantitative Risk Analysis

4-2.1 General Process

Once risks are identified and have been screened via qualitative analysis, they can be
analyzed quantitatively. Recall that identification includes a thorough description of
the risk and risk triggers (see Chapter 2). With quantitative analysis, the probability
of occurrence and consequence if the risk event occurs must also be documented.
Exhibit 4-3 depicts the workshop process.
4-2.1.1 Tools and Techniques
1. Gather and Represent Data

Quantitative analysis is generally led by a cost risk expert from the

Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office, sometimes augmented by

consultant staff and in collaboration with the Project Manager.

Interviews: Can be formal or informal settings, such as smaller

group meetings or larger formal workshops.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 4-3

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Chapter 4

Subject matter expert input: Participate collaboratively with

the project team and cost-risk team; you can also participate in
interviews or contribute opinions in other ways such as surveys
(questionnaires).

Data: Represent data in terms of probability and impact; you can

represent impacts using discrete distributions or continuous

distributions.

2. Quantitative Risk Analysis and Modeling

Project simulation: Use the Monte Carlo technique to generate

a probability distribution of project cost and schedule based on

uncertainty and risk effects.

4-2.1.2 Quantitative Risk Analysis Outputs

1. Risk Register

The risk register begins during risk identification and is further developed
during analysis (qualitative and/or quantitative). The risk register is a key
component of the Project Management Plan, and includes the following:
Prioritized list of quantified risks: Those risks that have the most

significant impact (threats or opportunities) to project objectives

(tornado diagrams, expected values, decision trees).

Probabilistic analysis of the project: Estimated cost and completion

dates and associated confidence levels.

Quantitative analyses: Can be conducted several times throughout

project development; trends can be identified, and mitigation

strategies can be implemented and monitored. The risk profile
of a project evolves and changes as the project is developed,
knowledge is gained, and design changes occur.

2. Informal Workshop (Meeting)

For smaller projects, it may suffice to have an informal workshop composed

of the project team and/or key project team members and other participants
(such as specialty groups involved with critical items).
Risk management is ongoing and iterative; periodically, workshop members
can regroup to evaluate the project and associated uncertainty and risks.
Workshops typically occur for a project every 12 to 24 months or at key
project milestones. Project risks and mitigation efforts should be discussed
at regular project meetings, to make changes as appropriate and, following
those changes, re-run the risk model. Value is gained when action is taken
to respond to risks, resulting in cost and schedule savings to the project.

Page 4-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 4

Exhibit 4-3

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Process for CRA or CEVP Risk Management Meeting

Preworkshop Activities
1. METHOD
a) Project team Determine need:
Confirm project title, PIN, WIN,
mileposts; set up Work Order;
and submit request form.
Assemble project information:
Current Basis of Estimate, cost
estimate, scope of work,
schedule. List issues of concern;
prepare to host the prep session
and risk assessment meeting.
b) CREM Negotiate with
consultants and prepare task
orders; prepare prep and risk
assessment meeting agendas;
provide orientation to the
process.
2. PREP meeting
a) SAEO Risk Lead & Coordinator
Develop flowchart; discuss
project scope of work, schedule,
and cost estimate. Document
assumptions and constraints.
Determine invitees and who will
invite them. Provide Risk
Identification sheets to the
project team; review how to use
them. Develop draft agenda and
plan for attendees.
b) Invitations Invites are sent by
the SAEO and Project Manager.
Invites are sent with a cover
memo and agenda.
3. REVIEW estimates
Project team works with CREM to
begin advance review of cost and
schedule estimates.

Meeting Activities
5. MEETING is convened
Project Manager hosts meeting.
Meeting Leader SAEO and/or
region coordinators direct the
meeting.
Risk Lead takes the lead during risk
elicitation.
Cost Lead takes the lead during cost
and schedule review and validation.
Project team provides:
Meeting venue
Internet connection(s)
Visual aids, such as:
story boards
plan sheets
aerial photos
r/w plans
project exhibits
other items
Project information, including:
Basis of Estimate
project cost estimate
project schedule
backup documentation
environmental documentation
r/w parcels information
r/w cost information
other pertinent information
Meeting Format for CRA/CEVP
Process overview
Review and finalize:
flowchart
base cost estimate
base schedule
base uncertainty
Finalize risk elicitation
Identify potential risk responses
Agree on mitigation meeting date

4. ADVANCE RISK ELICITATION

SAEO with Project Manager to
arranges elicitation interviews.

Postworkshop Activities
6. PERFORM analysis
a) Risk Leads Prepare preliminary
results presentation and draft
report; send to SAEO CREM Unit
for review and comment; then
send to Project Manager and Cost
Lead.
b) Project team Review draft
report; comments go to SAEO,
who works with the cost-risk team
to finalize report.
7. RESPOND to risks
a) Project team Develop and
implement risk response
strategies.
b) Postmitigation analysis CREM
works with project team to assess
impact of responses
c) MONITOR and control Monitor
responses and risks.

TASK ORDER CLOSEOUT

Consultants submit final invoices.
SAEO prepares closing task order and
makes final payments; advises Project
Manager and appropriate Program
Manager that the task order is closed.

7-Step Process
1. Method
2. Prep meeting
3. Review estimates (cost and schedule)
4. Advance risk elicitation and identify uncertainty, initial
5. Meeting convened elicit risk and identify uncertainty, final
6. Analysis and documentation
7. Implement risk response actions, monitor and control

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 4-5

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Chapter 4

4-2.1.3 What is Known

In order to fully understand our projects, we must determine what we know and
what we do not know about a project. In our industry, Civil Engineering
Transportation, we have devoted many resources to clearly explain what is known
of a project. We have many specialty offices that gather and provide data in
support of project delivery, including: aerial photography, surveying, site
investigations, bid histories, real estate services, right of way, utilities, access
management, environmental, hydraulics, structures, geotechnical, railroad, tribal,
planning and programming, ad/bid/award, construction, tolling, economic,
programming, external resource agencies and stakeholders, public interest groups,
and others.
Just as important is to devote some energy and resources to assess what is not
known and/or is uncertain about a project. One tool for accomplishing this is
intentional, thoughtful, and deliberate project risk management, as part of an
overall Project Management Plan. Risk assessment is not a measure of estimate
accuracy, as shown in the following:
The project team must examine each critical item and predict its possible extreme values
considering all risks, including compounding effects. It is important to understand that the
range, as considered in this method, is not the expected accuracy of each item. This is a key
issue. Risk analysis is not an analysis of estimate accuracy. Accuracy is dependent upon
estimate deliverables and estimate maturity.
AACE International Recommended Practice No . 41R-08
RISK ANALYSIS AND CONTINGENCY DETERMINATION USING RANGE ESTIMATING
TCM Framework: 7 .6 Risk Management
June 25, 2008

Risk management must be partnered with a well-organized and properly

documented project base cost estimate. Risk management introduces reality into
our project management process by recognizing that every project has a risk of
cost overrun. This does not mean cost overrun is inevitable, it means it is possible.
Quantitative analysis is a natural activity that fits into a standard project
management process, which is depicted in Exhibit 4-4.

Page 4-6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 4

Exhibit 4-4

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Project Management Integrates Project Risk Management

Initiate
and
Align
Project description
Boundaries
Team identification
Team mission
Milestones
Roles, responsibilities
Measures of success
Operating guidelines

Plan
the
Work

EPS/WBS
Schedule development
Estimate/Budget
Risk Management Plan
Change Management Plan
Communication Plan
Quality (QA/QC) Plan
Transition and Closure Plan

Endorse
the
Plan

Endorsement

Risk Planning
The project team, as part of their normal project
development and management activities, need to include
risk management in the work plan.
The team prepares a cost and schedule estimate based
on what is known about the project at that time. The
estimate reflects the project if things go as planned.
The team identifies and characterizes project
uncertainties and risk.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Manage scope,
schedule, budget
Manage risk
Manage change
Communicate
progress, issues, and
lessons learned

Transition
and
Closure

Transition and closure

Lessons learned
Rewards and
recognition
Archiving

}
Identify and Analyze Risk

Project Description The subject of the risk assessment

Task planning, scheduling, This produces a project
and estimating.
estimate and schedule.

Work
the
Plan

Respond, Monitor, and Control

Risk management is an integral component of

day-to-day project management. Project
teams implement and continually upgrade the
Risk Management Plan throughout the life of
the project. Primary risk management
functions include:

Monitor risks
Identify new risks
Evaluate and update risks
Devise and implement response strategies
Determine effectiveness of responses
Report to management and stakeholders

Page 4-7

Quantitative Risk Analysis

Page 4-8

Chapter 4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 5

Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Risk Response

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk

Identification

pre-response
analysis

Update
Project Management Plan

Risk

Results of
response actions

5-1

Risk Analysis

Qualitative
Quantitative

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

Taking Action
Following identification and analysis of project risks, Project Managers and project
teams must act. Accountability demands a response to identified project risks. Focus
should be directed toward risks of most significance. Effective project risk management
can shift the odds in favor of project success.
Early in project development, activities and information can seem chaotic, coming to us
from multiple directions and multiple sources. Risk management provides a structured
and disciplined way to document, evaluate, and analyze the information, so we emerge
with a well-organized and prioritized list of project risks. This prioritization rescues us
from indecision, with information we can use to direct our project risk management
resources.
In order to maximize the benefits of project risk management, we must incorporate
the project risk management activities into our Project Management Plan and work
activities. This means building risk management activities into our Work Breakdown
Structure (WBS). WSDOT has a readymade WBS in the form of its Master Deliverables
List (MDL) to help ensure our project work plans are comprehensive, consistent, and
complete. As shown above, the risk management steps include: Risk Management
Planning, Risk Identification, Qualitative Risk Analysis, Quantitative Risk Analysis, Risk
Response, and Risk Monitoring and Control.
Risk response requires effort to develop and implement response actions; we must plan
for expending this effort following the results of our risk analysis. To this end, we have a
number of tools readily available, including the Risk Management Planning spreadsheet
( www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/).

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 5-1

Risk Response

Chapter 5

As indicated in Chapter 2, the Project Risk Manager should pay special attention to highimpact, low-probability risks. Team awareness and conscious monitoring of these risks
can be accomplished via team meetings, informing upper management, and seeking
counsel from appropriate experts.
5-1.1 Actions in Response to Risks
Threats
1. Avoid
2. Transfer
3. Mitigate

Opportunities
1. Exploit
2. Share
3. Enhance
4. Accept

5-1.1.1 Risk Response

AVOID (threats)
Action taken
to ensure the
probability or
impact of a
threat is
eliminated.

Avoidance actions include: changing the project scope to eliminate a threat;

clarifying requirements, obtaining information, improving communication, or
acquiring expertise. (Source: Project Management Body of Knowledge [PMBOK])
There are two types of action: (1) remove the cause of the risk (risk trigger), or
(2) execute the project in a different way while still aiming to achieve project
objectives. Not all risks can be avoided or eliminated, and for others this approach
may be too expensive or time-consuming, but this should be the first strategy
considered for each risk. (Source: Effective Opportunity Management for Projects by
David Hillson)

EXPLOIT (opportunities)
Action taken to
ensure the
benefit of an
opportunity is
realized.

The opposite of avoid, this strategy is to ensure a positive impact, or realize an

opportunity. Take action to make the opportunity happen; such response actions
include: assigning more talented resources to a project to reduce time to
completion and/or providing better quality than originally planned. (PMBOK)
Eliminate the uncertainty associated with a particular upside risk. An opportunity
is defined as a risk event that, if it occurs, will have a positive effect on
achievement of project objectives. Avoid and Exploit are the most aggressive of
the response strategies and should be reserved for those golden opportunities
with high probability and impacts. (Effective Opportunity Management for Projects by

David Hillson)

TRANSFER (threats)
Action to
allocate
ownership for
more effective
management
of a threat.

Page 5-2

Transferring a threat does not eliminate itthe threat still exists; however, it is
owned and managed by another party. Transferring risk can be an effective way
to deal with financial risk exposure. Transferring project risk involves payment of
a risk premium to the party taking the risk; for example, insurance, performance
bonds, or warranties. Contracts may be used to transfer specified risks to another
party. (PMBOK)

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 5

Risk Response

Transferring risk involves finding another party who is willing to take responsibility
for its management, and who will bear the liability of the risk should it occur. The
aim is to ensure that the risk is owned and managed by the party best able to deal
with it effectively. Risk transfer usually involves payment of a premium, and the
cost-effectiveness of this must be considered when deciding whether to adopt
a transfer strategy. (Effective Opportunity Management for Projects by David Hillson)
SHARE (opportunities)
Action to share
with a third party;
enhance/ exploit
opportunity.

Sharing a positive risk involves allocating ownership to a third party who is best
able to capture the opportunity for the benefit of the project. Examples of sharing
actions include forming risk-sharing partnerships, teams, or joint ventures, which
can be established with the express purpose of managing opportunities. (PMBOK)
Allocating risk ownership for an opportunity to another party who is best able to
handle it, in terms of maximizing probability of occurrence and increasing potential
benefits if it does occur. Transferring threats and sharing opportunities are similar
in that a third party is used; those to whom threats are transferred take on the
liability and those to whom opportunities are allocated should also be allowed
to share in the potential benefits. (Effective Opportunity Management for Projects

by David Hillson)

MITIGATE or reduce (threats)

Action taken to
reduce the
probability and/or
impact of a threat.

Risk mitigation implies a reduction in the probability and/or impact of an adverse

risk event to an acceptable threshold. Taking early action is often more effective
to repair than trying to repair the damage after the risk has occurred. Examples of
mitigation strategies include: adopting less complex processes, conducting more
tests and/or field investigations, developing a prototype. Measures to address
impacts include: targeting linkages that determine the severity, such as designing
redundancy into a subsystem, may reduce the impact from a failure of the original
component. (PMBOK)
Mitigation or acceptance are the strategies most often used since the number
of threats that can be addressed by avoidance or transfer are usually limited.
Preventive responses are better than curative responses because they are more
proactive and if successful can lead to risk avoidance. Preventive responses tackle
the causes of the risk; where it is not possible to reduce probability, a mitigation
response should address the adverse impact, targeting the drivers that determine
the extent of the severity. (Effective Opportunity Management for Projects by David

Hillson)

ENHANCE (opportunities)
Action to
enhance
opportunity.

This response modifies the size of an opportunity by increasing probability

and/or impact. Seeking to facilitate or strengthen the cause of the opportunity,
and proactively targeting and reinforcing its trigger conditions. Impact drivers can
also be targeted, seeking to increase the projects susceptibility to the opportunity.
(PMBOK)

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 5-3

Risk Response

Chapter 5

This response aims to modify the size of the positive risk. We enhance the
opportunity by increasing the probability and/or impact of an opportunity thereby
maximizing benefits realized for the project. If the probability can be increased to
100%, this is effectively an exploit response. (Effective Opportunity Management for

Projects by David Hillson)

ACCEPT

The term accept refers to risks that remain after response actions and/or for
which response is not cost-effective are accepted; risks that are uncontrollable (no
response actions are practical) are also accepted. (Effective Opportunity Management

Action taken to
document
acceptance of
the risk.

for Projects by David Hillson)

Ultimately, it is not possible to eliminate all threats or take advantage of all

opportunities; we can document them and at least provide awareness that these
exist and have been identified; some term this passive acceptance. In some cases,
in some industries, a contingency reserve is established to deal with the aggregate
residual risk that has been accepted; some term this active acceptance.
As we continue through project development, the project risk profile will change. As we
successfully respond to risks and our project knowledge increases, our risk exposure will
diminish.

5-2

Risk Response Tools and Techniques

After we have identified and analyzed the risks, we know where to focus our efforts.
The output from the analysis provides a ranked risk register with the risks of greatest
significance to project objectives determined. Apt response actions to significant risks
must be cost-effective and realistic.
Critical risks must be met with vigorous response actions; lower-ranking risks should
receive response actions commensurate with their significance.

5-2.1 Documentation of Response Actions

Document the response action by describing the action, which work activities it will
affect, and the cost of the response action. Identify the person(s) responsible for
successful implementation of the response action. Also, consider the time impacts
of the response action and how the risk response may affect the overall project
and/or other risks.

Page 5-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 5

Risk Response

5-2.2 Planning Risk Response Actions

Select a response action The project manager determines how to respond to each
risk. The action selected is influenced by the level of the risk. Consider Exhibit 5-1:

high

High impacts demand attention. If risk

has a high impact and high probability,
it is intuitively recognized that it
deserves a response. Also, high-impact
risks with low probability require
attention. WARNING: In many cases,
it is the low-probability risks with high
impacts that we hear about in the
news because they were not given the
attention they deserved.

transfer
(share)

avoid
(exploit)

low

Simple Response Matrix

Probability

Exhibit 5-1

accept

mitigate
(enhance)

low

high
Impact

5-2.3 Notes
5-2.3.1 General

For risks with a very high probability, consideration should be given

to including this estimated cost in the base.

The power of risk management is realized when response actions

are implemented.

5-2.3.2 Threat Risks

1. Threat risks that have an estimated high impact and low probability can
create enormous havoc for a project. These types of risks are frequently
neglected when it comes to project risk managementbut they deserve
our attention. A high-impact risk with a low probability may have a
moderate expected value for ranking purposes, but it is much more
important than the ranking might reveal. It is these types of risks that
we read about in the news because they are not given the aggressive
risk response they merit. Pay attention to these risks!
2. Do not underestimate threats and the need to respond.
3. Most people pay attention to high-impact risks with high probabilities
as is appropriate.
4. Insignificant risks do not belong on the risk register and minor risks may
be aggregated or put on a list of things to look out for.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 5-5

Risk Response

Chapter 5

5-2.3.3 Opportunity Risks

1. Take advantage of all opportunities where you can do so in a costeffective manner.

2. Do not overestimate the opportunities and do not ignore low-hanging
fruit.

Page 5-6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 6

Current Status
Project Management Plan
Scope, Schedule, Estimate

Risk Monitoring and Control

Risk

Management
Planning

Risk

Identification

Update
Project Management Plan

Risk

Results of
response actions

6-1

Monitoring
and Control

Implement Risk
Response Plan
TAKE ACTION!

Risk Analysis

Qualitative
Quantitative
pre-response
analysis

Risk Response
post-response
analysis

General
Perhaps the phrase control is an illusion is familiar. Maybe weve had experiences
when this was true; however, this phrase does not tell the whole story. We may have
little or no control over the external environment, but we do have control over how we
interact with it. We have control over our state of readiness; we can look ahead and
improvise and adapt. We can actively monitor significant project risks, including highimpact, low-probability risks, and control the robustness of our response to identified
risk events and the quality of our documentation. Very importantly, we have control
over how earnestly we integrate risk management into our Project Management Plans.

6-1.1 Risk Monitoring and Control

As we continue through project development, the project risk profile will change.
Typically, as we successfully respond to risks and our project knowledge increases,
our risk exposure will diminish.
6-1.2 Risk Monitoring and Control Tools and Techniques
After we have implemented response actions, we must track and record their
effectiveness and any changes to the project risk profile. Did the response actions
have a positive or negative effect on achieving project objectives? If so, explain how
and why in the Risk Management Plan.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 6-1

Risk Monitoring and Control

Chapter 6

6-1.2.1 Documentation of Response Actions

This section is devoted to measuring project risk management per performance,

and determining whether a project is tracking to plan or deviating in a negative
manner. This will require a blend of qualitative judgments and quantitative
measures to determine the health of the project. The Project Manager must
document the response action by describing the action, the work activities it will
affect, and the cost of the response action. Identify the person(s) responsible for
successful implementation of the response action. Also, consider the time impacts
of the response action and how the risk response may affect the overall project
and/or other risks.
The Project Manager determines appropriate metrics for the project, ensuring
they are not burdensome and do not affect behavior. Too often, metrics change
behavior to provide better metrics, not better performance. Set the amounts and
conditions for use of the project risk reserves. Establish the final objectives of the
project with stakeholders to improve the chances of project success. Confirm
endorsement of team members and stakeholders as the project plan evolves.
6-1.2.2 Monitoring and Controlling Project Risk

The Project Manager and project team apply their Project Management Plan
through project development and completion of their deliverables. Monitor
the project status, looking for trends that can indicate variations (good and bad)
in the project execution. Results of the analysis need to be communicated and
adjustments made through a change management and/or issue resolution process.
The ability to describe the history of the project and how it evolved is essential to
developing lessons learned for the future.
Helpful Hints
Be thorough and tenacious in gathering status update information for

risks.
Monitor status and trends continually (scope, schedule, cost estimates,
quality of product, etc.).
Address problems and issues immediately; in fact, anticipate and discuss
in advance if possible.
Communicate.

6-1.2.3

Risk Management Planning (RMP) Spreadsheet

The RMP spreadsheet is easy to use and provides an effective way to summarize
project risk management activities for projects that have conducted a quantitative
risk analysis ( www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment). The
spreadsheet is typically used for the most significant risks as determined via the
quantitative risk analysis; some term these risks candidates for mitigation.

Page 6-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 6

Risk Monitoring and Control

The spreadsheet is conveniently arranged into four sections: (1) risk identification,
(2) risk analysis, (3) risk response, and (4) monitor and control. In this chapter, we
focus on monitor and control.
Exhibit 6-1 focuses on the second pillar of risk management, as recorded in the RMP
spreadsheet, and indicates how to use the entries to document the risk response
actions and their effectiveness in the monitoring and control portion of the spreadsheet.
Exhibit 6-1

Second Pillar of Risk Management

The following pages describe how to use the RMP spreadsheet to monitor and control
project risk.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 6-3

Risk Monitoring and Control

Chapter 6

Notice that the first group of columns in the RMP spreadsheet is devoted to IDENTIFY
and ANALYZE: the first pillar of risk management (see Chapter 2). The remaining
columns are devoted to the second pillar of risk management: RESPONSE, MONITOR,
and CONTROL.
In Chapter 5, we reviewed in some detail risk response actions; in this chapter, we
follow up and follow through with monitoring and control. The way we monitor and
control risk is to regularly review the effectiveness of the response. Are the response
actions working? Are things getting better? Are we more confident about our ability
to meet project objectives after the response actions have been implemented?
In effect, response, monitor, and control are natural components of our day-to-day
project management activities (e.g., communicate with the project team and ascertain
how things are going; make note in the Risk Management Plan and document the
results).
It is always prudent to quantify and analyze the project risks. Although a project may
have very few risks, which may appear easily manageable, some of these risks could
have a high likelihood of occurring or a high impact. Only by initiating a quantitative
analysis will the likelihood, value, and impact of these risks be identified.
In Exhibit 6-2, the example project had identified over 50 risks, of which 23 were
deemed significant enough to warrant inclusion in the quantitative risk analysis model.
There were only 5 that emerged as the top-ranked risks. These few had the expected
value of $7.1M and provided the Project Manager with the appropriate prioritized list
of risks to manage. The other 40+ risks were not simply ignored; they provided issues
awareness for the various specialty groups and were dealt with as each specialty group
deemed appropriate for the relevant risks. These additional risks also acted as a watch
list for the project.
Exhibit 6-2

Page 6-4

Total Estimated Cost Impacts of Top 5 Risks for the Example Project

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 6

Risk Monitoring and Control

Exhibit 6-3 depicts a performance measure for the effectiveness of risk management
on this project.
Exhibit 6-3

Performance Measure of Risk Management for This Project

When reporting on the risk management efforts for this project, we can summarize as
follows:
The total dollar amount planned for response actions was $0.6M, to achieve
reduced project risk exposure by an estimated $3.8M (expected value of risk
reduction). After implementing the response actions, we found the total cost
of the response actions was $0.7M, which avoided an estimated $3.7M in
project costs.
This example illustrates an excellent return on the dollar for risk management efforts.
Other benefits, less quantifiable, included:
Improved communication among team members and externally with

stakeholders and the public.

Identified areas of concern for each specialty group as it helped develop the

risk register during risk elicitation.

Greater confidence by the Project Manager and project team during project

development.

Fewer surprises as upper management was informed of the issues.

More informed decision making, due to information gleaned from the overall

risk workshop and risk management effort.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 6-5

Risk Monitoring and Control

Page 6-6

Chapter 6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 7
7-1

Project Risk
Management Plan Template

General
A project Risk Management Plan (RMP) describes how a project team will incorporate
the risk management process into its Project Management Plan. Particular emphasis
should be given to how a project team will respond to risks and monitor and control
risk throughout the life of the project. By identifying and analyzing risks, and then
responding to risks aggressively and monitoring the effectiveness of the response,
project teams can improve the odds of meeting project objectives.
The template in Exhibit 7-1 is a convenient tool for project teams wishing to develop
a detailed Risk Management Plan document; typically, this is more common for highly
complex projects and/or projects with significant risk.
The template presents an organized approach and is meant as a starting point only;
project teams must tailor the document to meet the needs of the Risk Management
Plan for their project.

7-2

Project Risk Management Plan 1

A formal project RMP is a detailed plan of action for the management of project risk.
Project risk planning involves the thoughtful development, implementation, and
monitoring of appropriate risk response strategies. It is the process to: develop and
document an organized, comprehensive, and interactive risk management strategy;
and determine the methods to be used to execute a risk management strategy and plan
for adequate resources. The project RMP may be specific in some areas and general in
others. The key to this tool is its scalability. Every project should have a formal RMP,
but the level of detail varies with project complexity.

7-2.1 What is a Project Risk Management Plan?

A project RMP gives a summary of the project and outlines the steps of the risk
management process and how the Project Manager and project team are approaching
them.
The RMP employed will vary based on the complexity of the project, but most project
RMPs should include an outline similar to the following:
1. Introduction
2. Summary
3. Definitions
4. Organization and roles
5. Risk management strategy/approach
1

6.
7.
8.
9.

Risk identification
Risk assessment and analysis
Risk Response actions/allocations
Risk monitoring and control

From NCHRP 7-60 review draft with edits.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 7-1

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Exhibit 7-1

Chapter 7

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Project Risk Management Plan

Official Project Title:______________________________________________________________
SR

###,

MP

limits:

__________________________________Project Manager:_______________________________
__________________________________Risk Manager:__________________________________
__________________________________WIN:_________________________________________
PIN:__________________________________
L#:___________________________________
Introduction
This document is the Risk Management Plan for this project. It is a plan of action that describes
how this project team will deal with uncertainty and risk. Project risk management is an ongoing
and integral part of project management and is performed throughout the life of the project.
The Project Manager is responsible for reviewing and maintaining the Risk Management Plan
to ensure that risk is appropriately dealt with by the project team.
Project Manager Review
Initial and date after each review and update of this Risk Management Plan:
Year

Quarter 1

Quarter 2

Quarter 3

Quarter 4

2015
2016
2017

Page 7-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 7

Project Risk Management Plan Template

7-2.2 Why use a project RMP?

A project RMP explains how a Project Manager and project team manage risk for their
project. It provides guidance and requirements, and serves as a communication tool
for those who wish to be informed of a projects risk management approach. The plan
formalizes the ideas presented during the risk management process and may clarify
some of the assumptions the project team has regarding the risk management process.
7-2.3 How do you use a project RMP?
The project RMP is used to determine the risks of a project and how to respond in
a manner that is forthright and accountable. The project RMP can be referred to
regularly and should be updated throughout the life project.
7-2.4 What are the benefits of a project RMP?
A project RMP provides specific guidance for the project team members in all steps
of the risk management process for their project. It documents the processes to use
throughout the project for identifying, assessing, and managing risk.
7-2.5 When is the best time to develop a project RMP?
The formal plan should be developed by the Project Manager early in project
development, typically early in scoping. The RMP must be updated during subsequent
project development phases (Exhibit 7-2).

7-3

Project Risk Management Process: Example Project

This project complies with all WSDOT directional documents and guidance for project
risk management, including the following:
WSDOT Project Risk Management References
Project Management Online Guide
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/pmog.htm
(preconstruction)
Project Risk Management, Part I:
Guidance for WSDOT Projects
Risk Management Plan Spreadsheet
Reference materials on the topic of risk
management and risk workshops at
WSDOT

www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/

WSDOT Directional Document References

IL 4071, Inflation and Market Conditions Applied to Base Estimates
E 1032, Project Management
E 1038, Enterprise Risk Management
E 1053, Project Risk Management and Risk-Based Estimating
E 1090, Moving Washington Forward: Practical Solutions
Project Delivery Memo 07-01, Cost Estimating Guidance

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 7-3

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Exhibit 7-2

Chapter 7

Project Risk Management Plan Duties

Project
Manager

Approve the project RMP.

Approve and ensure implementation of response actions to identified risks,
particularly significant risks that emerge as prospects for risk response.
Confirm who will carry out response actions and when action will be taken;
incorporate into work plan.
Monitor effectiveness of response actions.
Regularly review and update the project RMP.
Promote aggressive risk management for the project.
Actively participate in risk workshops.
Communicate to senior management the risk and uncertainty the project is
exposed to and the action that will be taken to address it.

Project Team
Member

Proactively identify risks and their characteristics in terms of probability of

occurrence and impact.
Proactively respond to risks within specialty areas.
Document actions and report to Project Manager and Project Risk Manager
for inclusion in risk management updates.
Monitor effectiveness of response actions.
Communicate with Project Manager regarding risk management actions and
changing project risk profile (addition of new risks or retirement of old risks,
as appropriate).

Prepare and update the project RMP.

Develop a schedule for key check-in milestones for review and update of
the RMP.
Determine when risk workshops will be needed and ensure appropriate
preparation is accomplished prior to the workshop.
Collaborate with the Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office, CREM Unit, to
coordinate preworkshop, workshop, and postworkshop activities, including the
need for consultants and/or other participantsboth internal and external.
Oversee and manage day-to-day risk management process for the project.
Ensure quality of risk data.
Track and monitor effectiveness of response actions.
Promote risk management activities within the project team and with
stakeholders.
Communicate with Project Manager on all matters related to risk.
t
Risk Owner
Implement agreed-upon response actions.
(Action Owner) Report on effectiveness of the risk actions to the Project Manager/Risk
Manager and affected project team members.
Identify new risks that may emerge after response actions.
Communicate with Project Manager regularly, including the need for other
risk response actions if needed.
Project Risk
Manager

Page 7-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 7

Project Risk Management Plan Template

7-3.1 Risk Management Planning

Risk management will be a directed, focused, and intentional effort for this project.
To that end, the following items are included in this RMP:
1. Level of risk assessment has been determined.
As indicated in EO E 1053, this project will conduct a Cost Risk Assessment
workshop as required for all projects between $25M and $100M.
2. Risk management activities are in the project schedule.
Risk management activities are included in the appropriate sections of the project
schedule, using the appropriate WSDOT Master Deliverables List (MDL) codes.
MDL Code
PE.PD.04

MDL Name
Cost Risk
Estimate &
Management

Description
Cost Risk Assessment (CRA) is an integral element of project risk
management at WSDOT, and quantifies, within a reasonable range,
the cost and schedule to complete a project. We will identify, assess,
and evaluate risk that could impact cost and/or schedule during
project delivery.
PE.PD.04.20 CRA
CRA is a workshop process similar to, but less intense than, Cost
Workshop
Estimate Validation Process (CEVP). The CRA workshop for this
project is planned for January 2015 and is included in the project
schedule; pre- and postworkshop activities are also included in the
project schedule.
Note: Project teams need to add tasks and subtasks as appropriate to their project work activities
using the appropriate MDL items.

3. Risk management is an agenda item in regularly scheduled project meetings.

Risk management is included as an agenda item in our monthly project meetings
and is the number one agenda item each quarter.
4. Communication regarding our risk management effort and expectations has
been communicated to the project team.
During Initiate and Align, Plan the Work, and Endorse the Plan, risk management
has been communicated as an item of work for this project. Specifically, it is
included in the Team Mission/Assignment and in our Roles and Responsibilities.
5. Risk will be managed, documented, and reported.
Risk will be incorporated into the project schedule and monthly meetings is an
item for reporting on the status of risk response actions. In addition, this team will
use the RMP spreadsheet for summarizing and tracking risk response action efforts
for significant risks.
This project team is committed to aggressively and proactively managing risk. We
recognize that project risk management is at the heart of project management and is
an ongoing activity throughout the life of the project. We also recognize the two pillars
of risk management (see Chapter 1), and we embrace both, and we will respond to
identified risks and track the effectiveness of our response actions.
WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide
November 2014

Page 7-5

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Chapter 7

7-3.2 Identify Risk Events

This project team will begin identifying risks and building its risk register early in project
development. Our Risk Manager will maintain the risk register in anticipation of the CRA
workshop and following the risk management workshop. The WSDOT Risk Breakdown
Structure (RBS), provided in Chapter 2, is used for organizing risks via appropriate
categories. Organizing risks in this manner provides a consistent and convenient way
to monitor and track risks at the appropriate level of detail; this also allows for the
development of a risk database by category.
An example of how to use the RBS is provided in Exhibit 7-3.
Exhibit 7-3

Page 7-6

How to Use a Risk Breakdown Structure (Example)

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 7

Project Risk Management Plan Template

7-3.3 Qualitative Risk Analysis

Initial analysis of risks will begin with a qualitative assessment; see Chapter 3 for more
detail on qualitative analysis.
7-3.4 Quantitative Risk Analysis
Quantitative analysis of risks will begin with our CRA workshop in January__________;
see Chapter 4 for more detail on quantitative analysis.

7-4

Second Pillar of Risk Management (Respond, Monitor, and Control)

7-4.1 Risk Response Planning 2

Our project team is committed to making effective use of the actionable information
that emerges from risk identification and analysis. 3 Risk response strategy is the
process of our team determining what, if anything, should be done with identified
risks significant enough to impact project objectives. It leads to specific actions we
will incorporate into our Project Management Plan (PMP) and work plans and then
proactively execute. We can pursue response actions for threats (avoid, transfer,
mitigate, reduce) and opportunities (exploit, share, enhance), or we can accept the
risk event if the response action is not cost-effective.
We will promptly develop and implement response actions following identification and
analysis. Risks have a shelf life, and Risk Management Plans (RMPs) can become stale if
not monitored and updated regularly. We are committed to making use of information
when it is fresh and keeping our PMPs and RMPs up to date so they do not lapse into
irrelevance because they have become outdated and obsolete.
Chapter 5 describes response actions for threats and opportunities. The project work
plan, including the schedule and resource assignment, establishes points at which we
will implement response actions to identified risks, including immediately following the
CRA workshop for this project. In addition, we are reminded to be vigilant regarding risk
for this project and to identify potential risk events as we think of them, so we can
respond appropriately to risks encountered.
7-4.1.1 Residual Risks and Responses (primary and secondary risks)

As a project develops, its risk profile will change. Risks are identified, and response
actions are implemented, which changes the nature of the project risk profile and new
risks are identified. During risk identification, we identify risk events. The first time this
is accomplished, it constitutes a list of primary risks; as actions are taken, secondary
risks can emerge as a result of implementing the treatment response to the primary risk.

2
3

This is also referred to as risk treatment, risk mitigation, risk management, or risk prevention in some publications.
Practical Risk Management by David Hillson and Peter Simon (with edits).

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page 7-7

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Chapter 7

Where possible, we will deal with secondary risks as part of the primary risk response
action. When developing our response actions, we will be vigilant in considering the
ramifications of the response actions. We will take measures to include strategies
that deal with the primary risk as well as secondary risks and endeavor to minimize
or eliminate residual risk as part of risk response efforts.
7-4.2 Risk Monitoring and Control
Monitoring and control are not complete unless communication has occurred.
COMMUNICATION is the lynch-pin of effective project management and risk
management.
Communication within and among the project team will be crisp, concise, complete,
correct, and timely, as will the communication to upper management and executives.
Effectiveness of the risk response actions will be monitored and reported regularly,
as indicated previously, at our project meetings; adjustments will be made as needed.
7-4.2.1 Risk Monitoring and Control (Communication)
Project Team
o
o

Record assumptions that underlie judgments and decisions.

Monitor and document results of implemented risk response actions.

Upper Management and Executives

o
o

Avoid unpleasant surprises.

Fully inform parties of risks, response actions, and trade-offs.

Accountability
o

The Project Manager documents the risk assessment process in such a

way that it can be reviewed and examined to learn the reasons particular
judgments and decisions were made.

Control of Risk and Management Activities

o
o

Page 7-8

The Project Manager must specify criteria for risk management success,
including targets and measures used to assess performance.
Follow up with risk owners regarding the status of completing the risk
response actions and the resulting effect; track resource allocation(s)
associated with risk response actions.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Chapter 7

Exhibit 7-4

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Project Risk Management Performance Template (Example)

Project Risk Management Performance

Date of This Report:________________________________
Cost-Risk Estimating Management
Project Risk Management Performance Summary Report
(Workshops held between MMMM DD, YYYY and MMMM DD, YYYY)
Performance Measures
CRA
CRA
Workshop #1
Workshop #2

CRA
Workshop #3

CRA
Workshop #4

Workshop Date(s)
CRA
Workshop #1

CRA
Workshop #2

CRA
Workshop #3

CRA
Workshop #4

CRA
Workshop #1

CRA
Workshop #2

CRA
Workshop #3

CRA
Workshop #4

Preworkshop Base Cost

Estimate for Project
Validated Base Cost
Estimate for Project

Total # of Risks Identified

Total $ Value of Threats
Total $ Value of Opportunities
$ Value of Prospects for Risk
Response Actions
$ Cost of Risk Response
$ Cost Avoided through
Proactive Risk Response
RBS
Code

Risk Breakdown Structure

Group (Level 2)

ENV
STG
DES
ROW
UTL
RR
PSP
MGT
CTR
CNS

Environmental and Hydraulics

Structures and Geotechnical
Design/PS&E
Right of Way and Access
Utilities
Railroad
Partnerships and Stakeholders
Management and Funding
Contracting and Procurement
Construction

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Number of Risks

Value of Threats $

Value of
Opportunities $

Page 7-9

Project Risk Management Plan Template

Page 7-10

Chapter 7

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Part II:
Guidelines for

CRA-CEVP Workshops
(Includes Common Assumptions)

Section A: CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section B: Manager & Team Typical Duties
Section C: Risk Lead Duties
Section D: Cost Lead Duties
Section E: Subject Matter Experts Duties
Section F: CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region)
Section G: Technical Notes for Risk Modelers
Section H: Common Assumptions

We may not be able to

get certainty, but we can
get probability
~ CS Lewis

CRA-CEVP
Project Risk Assessment

Section A
A-1

Purpose
This document establishes consistency in project risk assessment and risk-based
estimating at the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). Guidance
is provided for: Project Managers, project teams, Risk Leads, Cost Leads, region Cost
Risk Assessment (CRA) Coordinators, and subject matter experts (SMEs). The Cost Risk
Estimating Management (CREM) Unit, part of WSDOTs Strategic Analysis and Estimating
Office (SAEO), delivers the project risk assessment and risk-based estimating program
for WSDOT. Projects vary in terms of size, location, and complexity. The process
can be tailored to the needs of the project. Risk assessments are accomplished through
the committed and diligent work and contributions of our partners in the consulting
community and WSDOT staff who contributed to the development of these guidelines.
Three questions are fundamental to the search for a more accurate estimate on
projects:
(1) How much will it cost?

(2) How long will it take?

(3) Why?

One answer we found to these fundamental questions is that an estimate is more

accurately expressed as a range, not as a single number. To determine an accurate
estimate range for both cost and schedule, key risks must be identified and considered.
To present a comprehensive portrayal of a project in terms of cost and schedule, we
must begin with a solid, well-prepared, and well-documented base estimate. Base
cost is defined as the planned cost of the project; the base cost does not include
contingency. A list of risks, called a risk register, is created for both opportunities and
threats. Cost risk assessment replaces general and vaguely defined contingency with
explicitly defined risk events, which include their associated probability of occurrence
and impact on project cost and/or schedule. The risk component, for projects over
$10 million, is developed as part of a formal or informal cost risk workshop.
The process reflects the professional codes of ethics to which many of the workshop
participants are bound. The agreements below represent fundamental aspects of
estimating for public works projects, and are consistent with the nationally
recognized codes of ethics for the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
( http://www.asce.org/code_of_ethics/) and the association for the advancement
of Cost Engineering International (AACEI)
( http://www.aacei.org/aboutus/govdocuments/canonethics.shtml).

A note about risk, uncertainty, and estimating: It

is better to be approximately right rather than
precisely wrong.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-1

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section A

Ten Agreements for Workshop Participants:

I agree to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

Observe the highest standards of my profession.

Communicate honestly and effectively.
Be accountable and open in my estimating practice.
Listen as others speak, without regard to position or title.
Foster broad participation in the process.
Exercise authority appropriately and not pressure others to develop estimates to
a predetermined dollar figure.
7. Be a good steward of public funds on projects for the public good.
8. Strengthen my understanding/practice of the principles and values of estimating
uncertainty and risk.
9. Work to deepen my understanding of estimating project costs and schedules.
10. Continue my education and encourage the education of others.

A-1.1
1

2
3
4
5

6
7

Helpful Hints for Project Teams*

Be prepared: Be able to describe what is to be evaluated at the risk assessment meeting. Have a
well-organized, up-to-date, and easy-to-present project scope, schedule, and cost estimate
appropriate to the level of project development.
Submit the request form after it is clear what project alternatives and/or scenarios are to be
evaluated. Allow at least 8 weeks advance notice from the time the workshop request form is
submitted to when the first prep session will be held.
Use the project management process as outlined in the WSDOT Project Management Online
Guide.
Follow the guidance provided throughout this document.
Manage the number of attendees: Effective meetings have all of the essential people present,
but not more than is necessary. Too many people in a meeting can make it less effective, slow,
and cumbersome. Read the sections on Preworkshops and Workshop Meetings, particularly
Cautionary Notes Regarding Workshop Dynamics.
Ensure the Project Manager or Assistant Project Manager attends the meeting: It is crucial that
someone able to speak from the owners perspective be present throughout the workshop.
Become familiar with the workshop process: The Strategic Analysis and Estimating Office can
provide a representative from the CREM Unit to conduct training and orientation.
When its over, its over! A project risk assessment is a snapshot examination of the project,
and issues of concern should be brought up during the meetings. Elicitation of risks and their
characteristics are completed and then the risk modelers complete the analysis using the
provided information. The analysis is best performed without interference and disruption due to
wrangling and debate after the meeting. Following the completion of the analysis, the Project
Manager and project team develop risk response actions. The response actions become part of
the Risk Management Plan, and the necessary resources and time to implement the responses
should be reflected in the updated Project Management Plan and work plans. Benefits of project
risk management resonate for weeks and months as the project team uses information in their
day-to-day decision-making and project development activities.

*Use as a quick reference; more detailed information is found throughout this document.

Page A-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

A-1.2

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Statement of Purpose
The purpose of cost risk assessment is to: (1) provide the Project Manager and project
team with actionable information that can be used to shift the odds in favor of project
success, and (2) provide a useful, sound, and objective analysis and report that the
project team will own and act upon to improve, as well as to validate and confirm, their
project cost and schedule.
The following steps should be followed by those embarking on a project risk
assessment; the process provides a number of tangible benefits:
1. Review or validate base estimates of cost and schedule using WSDOT specialists/
estimating experts to serve as Cost Leads and to schedule reviewers, subject
matter experts, and others as appropriate.
2. Document assumptions and constraints to develop the estimated project cost and
schedule ranges.
3. Replace (or greatly reduce) the traditional project contingency with defined
risks that can be more clearly understood and managed.
4. Identify and quantify major risk events in a project that can cause significant
deviations from the base cost or schedule.
5. Use a Monte Carlo simulation analysis that models the collective impact of base,
uncertainties, and risks for the project to produce an estimated cost and schedule
range.
6. Develop possible responses to risks. Promote proactive risk management by
project teams. Provide the project team with actionable information on risk events
that allows them to manage the risks (threats/opportunities) on an ongoing basis,
to better control project costs and schedules.
7. Perform a post-response analysis to ascertain the effectiveness of planned
and/or implemented risk response actions.
The project risk management performance can be measured by the Project Manager or
risk analyst by comparing premitigated to postmitigated results, then identifying risk
responses to ascertain the amount of risk relief to be accomplished through risk
management efforts.
The workshop process provides a tool for the project team to evaluate the quality and
completeness of the current project estimate. It is intended to increase confidence in
the project cost and schedule forecasts and to identify areas of uncertainty.
The workshop process is not intended to recreate the wheel or second-guess the
project team. It is not a substitute for other necessary project management functions
such as project control and value engineering.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-3

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section A

Typical applications of workshop results are as follows:

Presentation of cost estimate range
Project assessment and management
Risk management
Value engineering
Integrated project/program management
Design-build and other applications
Communications
Financial management

Note: Risk-based estimating, such as CRA/CEVP (Cost Estimate Validation Process),

does not provide an answer book with all uncertainty removed from the project.
Probability, not certainty, is the outcome of the workshop process.
The CRA/CEVP workshop effort is an analysis of data produced by the team in
collaboration with subject matter experts and cost and risk experts. It provides
useful information for risk management and is an integral part of the overall Project
Management Plan. The Project Manager owns the workshop report and results, which
helps in the development of an action plan to respond to identified risks. The report
is not a decision documentit is an information document for decision makers.
CRA and CEVP Seven-Step Process

A-1.3

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
A-1.4

Select the project and method.

Structure the project team effort.
Define and evaluate the base cost estimate and schedule.
Assess uncertainty and risk.
Quantify uncertainty in the project cost and schedule.
Apply probabilistic analysis, and document.
Implement and measure risk response actions, monitor, and control.

Workshop Teams and Participation

A-1.4.1

Critical Participants

The main criterion for project workshop participation has to be, Who is absolutely
critical to identify the problems we are dealing with? The criterion of criticalness
should include not only technical expertise and responsibility, but also problemsolving and team skills. Workshop participants should:
1. Be involved
2. Be heard (in relation to their responsibility and/or expertise)

Page A-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Recommended Participants

Preparation for the workshop may take one or several meetings depending on the
project size and complexity, and the knowledge of the participants. The Project
Manager/project team should work with the workshop coordinator and cost-risk team
(described below) to identify the best combination of participants at each meeting
(Exhibit A-1). All participants do not need to attend all meetings. The goal is to
effectively use time for all parties in a manner that ensures a sound and objective
analysis (Exhibit A-2).
Exhibit A-1

Workshop Team (Typical Participants)

Project Team Members

Project Manager*
Project Risk Manager**

Estimator*
Scheduler*
Lead Designer*
Key Technical Experts
Subject Matter Experts
Project Team Experts
Agency Experts (HQ, et al.)
Other Stakeholders
External Consultants
Cost-Risk Team Members
Risk Lead*
Risk Lead Assistant
Cost Lead*

Roles & Responsibilities

Acts as project resource and decision maker.
Prepares and maintains the project risk management plan so that
it is always current. Develops a schedule for key check-in milestones
for review; collaboratively works with the Strategic Analysis and
Estimating Office Cost Risk Estimating Management (CREM) Unit to
determine when risk workshops will be needed and that appropriate
preparation is accomplished prior to the workshop. Oversees and
manages the day-to-day risk management process for the project.
Ensures quality of risk data. Tracks and monitors the effectiveness
of response actions. Promotes risk management activities within the
project team and communicates with the Project Manager on all
matters related to risk management.
Prepares and documents project estimate.
Prepares and documents project schedule.
Acts as the primary resource for design questions.
Participate in specialty groups as needed.
Roles & Responsibilities
Internal subject matter experts (SMEs) work with external SMEs
to review and validate project cost and schedule estimates. They
provide objective review and comment regarding project issues,
risks, and uncertainty. At the end of the workshop, the SMEs should
provide a brief (i.e., one-page) summary of their thoughts about the
workshop.
Roles & Responsibilities
Conducts risk elicitation and manages meeting during risk elicitation;
performs or directs the statistical analysis.
Assists with risk elicitation and meeting management during risk
elicitation.
Conducts base cost and schedule review and validation; manages the
meeting during the review.

Cost Lead Assistant

Assists the Cost Lead position, as appropriate.

CREM Workshop
Coordinator

Coordinates the agenda and participants discussions; works with the

Project Manager to ensure the success of the workshop.

*These participants should also attend the prep session.

**In many cases, the Project Manager is also the project Risk Manager.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-5

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

A-1.4.2

Section A

Preworkshops

The Project Manager, working with the SAEO, accomplishes the prep activities in
Exhibit A-2.
Exhibit A-2

Preworkshop: Determine Need, Learn the Process & Assemble Project Information

Strategy Session

Orientation Session

Assemble Project Info

Determine: Does the project

need a risk-based estimating
workshop? If yes, what type:
informal, CRA, CEVP, combined
VE-CRA? (See WSDOT directional
document IL 4071.) Determine
timing and scheduling of
workshop events. This can
typically be accomplished via
telecon between the CREM Unit
and the Project Manager.

Process: Participants must

understand the process and their
role in it. Formal training provides
a comprehensive presentation of
the process. However, there are
varying levels of experience and
proficiency with the CRA/CEVP
workshop process. Orientation
sessions can be tailored to the
project team and participants as
appropriate.

Evaluate: The Project Manager

and project team need to know
what it is they are going to
evaluate, and clearly
communicate that to the
workshop participants. The
process provides an opportunity
to examine more than one
scenario, but it is not practical to
evaluate the universe of every
conceivable concept.

Conduct Prep Session

Prep sessions should be attended by the Risk Lead, Cost Lead, and core project team because they will be
tasked to help develop the project flowchart, assemble initial project costs/durations, and develop a list of
risks eligible for significant impact on the project schedule or cost. At this meeting, additional participants
will be identified who should attend the upcoming workshop. The identification of needed support from
subject matter experts (SME) is an especially important outcome of the prep session.
Invite Participants
Determine who will be needed to attend the workshop and when they will be needed. Determine who will
send the invitations; typically, the project team will schedule the rooms and invite region participants and
specialists from Headquarters (HQ) with whom they have been working. The CREM Unit will invite the
external cost-risk team members (consultants and other independent experts from HQ).
Review Estimate and Schedule
After the prep session and before the workshop, the Cost Lead and Cost SME review the project teams
base cost and schedule estimate and provide recommendations for their consideration. (See Section D for
a sample of Cost Lead review questions that should be asked at this stage.) The estimate review and base
cost validation should begin in advance of the workshop. The draft estimate and flowchart/schedule
should be reviewed by affected project team disciplines prior to the workshop. The preworkshop base cost
estimate and flowchart/schedule must be submitted to the WSDOT region Risk Manager and all significant
non-WSDOT stakeholders prior to the workshop.
Advance Elicitation Interviews
Prior to the workshop, the Risk Leads should meet with those specialty groups that elicit the most critical
risks and are most crucial to project success; these are the risks that have significant effects on project
objectives.

Note: The best workshops, in terms of being effective and efficient, are those that have had
ample advance work conductedparticularly in the areas listed above.

Page A-6

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

A-1.5

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Preparing Workshop Participants 1

Prior to the actual workshop, participants need to know what to expect and what is
expected of them. Participants are reminded to: (1) avoid bias and be impartial during
the workshop discussions, (2) listen open-mindedly to all opinions, and (3) not advocate
for a predetermined point of view.
The following sections offer ways for project team members and subject matter experts
to prepare themselves for the workshop. The Risk Leads and Cost Leads are expected to
be aware of potential biasing as they conduct their respective portions of the workshop.

A-1.6

Preparing the Project Team Overview for Bias Reduction

The CRA/CEVP environment provides an opportunity for the project team to share
their cost and schedule estimates with others. The assurance of an accurate project cost
estimate and schedule begins when a project team initiates and aligns their members
for the project.
Project teams work hard to maintain the quality of their estimates and schedules. They
are often optimistic about their project, particularly early in project development. An
optimistic estimate is generally a low estimate. A pessimistic or conservative estimate
is generally an estimate that, in the judgment of the estimator, is intentionally high in
order to make sure there is enough money for the project.
Project teams should guard against all forms of bias at all stages of project
development. Optimistic bias has been observed, in some cases, to reverse itself as
a project approaches completion of design. As the contract package begins to come
together in advance of the advertisement date, Project Managers/engineers may
become increasingly guarded about the financial needs of the project and give estimates
for costs and schedule that are too high, thereby driving the project cost estimate
higher.
Following the Process

The process, when properly followed, provides a sound base estimate and identifies
risk events that can cause the project to turn out differently than planned. Attempting
to revise estimates for the analysis outside this framework can make it difficult to
disentangle effects and can make the management of risks less effective.
Identification and quantification of risk events will provide the project team with
knowledge regarding identified risk events. The Project Manager must decide what
action to take in response to the identified risks: avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept
the risk. Decisions regarding risk management may affect project budget and schedule.

The human element introduces an additional layer of complexity into the risk process, with a multitude of influences both
explicit and covert. These act as sources of biaswhich affect every aspect of risk management. (Source: Understanding and
Managing Risk Attitude by Hillson and Murray-Webster.) In our processes, we attempt to condition (prepare) participants to
be aware of bias and make efforts to avoid and reduce bias in workshop inputs.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-7

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

A-1.7

Section A

Preparing the Project Team Procedures

It is important that the project team prepare themselves both before and during the
upcoming workshop. They should review the following steps, which are needed to
complete an effective cost risk analysis workshop:
1. Emphasize the Statement of Purpose to workshop participants.
2. Set up a prep meeting (ideally held a few weeks prior to the workshop).
a. Contact the project lead and arrange a visit to the project site for workshop
participants who may not know the project. This can occur any time before
the workshop. Discuss the significant risks faced by the team.
b. Send the Project Manager an example of a project flowchart from a recent
project. Inform the Project Manager that a draft project flowchart will need
to be completed by the end of the prep meeting.
The flowchart is less detailed than a project schedule and needs to

show the sequence and duration of major project activities; the

flowchart depicts the assumed project delivery strategy.

3. The Cost Lead reviews the basis for the estimate of project cost and schedule
durations, and discusses it with the project team member(s) who prepared
and/or compiled the estimate.
4. At the prep meeting, remind the project team to work up initial lists of risks to
the projectboth threats and opportunitiesthat have the potential to cause
the project cost/schedule to be significantly and measurably different than
planned.
5. Inform participants that it is okay to have outcomes significantly different from
what was plannedas long as they are plausible. At a very early stage of design,
the divergence from planned values is expected to be greater.
A-1.8

Preparing Subject Matter Experts Procedures

Proper preparation of subject matter experts and the risk elicitor is required to reduce
the bias in expert response. Three biases (described below) tend to dominate in expert
response: anchoring and adjustment bias, availability bias, and representativeness
bias. These were all researched and documented in the 1970s by Kahneman and
Tversky 2 and further refined by others. The biases tend to work in the direction of
understating the range of uncertainty.

"Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases" Tversky & Kahneman, 1974

Page A-8

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

A-1.8.1

Anchoring and Adjustment Bias

The anchoring and adjustment bias is the phenomenon of experts thinking they know
more than they actually do. If you ask an expert for their best guess first, they will tend
to provide inadequate ranges. Following are better ways to reduce biased answers:
1. Ask experts for the limits of the potential ranges first.
2. When providing extremes, experts should be able to describe the type of outcome
that will generate the extreme case.
3. Ask the expert for a plausible low and plausible high. These can be treated in
a variety of ways by the analyst who quantifies the risk. A standard needs to be
established.
a. One method is to ask the expert for a plausible minimum and plausible
maximum.
b. Another method is to ask the expert for a low and high percentile (i.e., 10%
and 90%), and then use this information to generate the distribution.
c. A third method is to request another low and high percentile that the expert
wishes to provide.
4. After obtaining the highs and lows, ask for the experts most likely value.
A Note on Risk Identification and Assessment
Consider: Those relatively new to risk analysis sometimes claim that it is nothing more
than guessing. However, this view does not represent the actuality that assigning
values for probability and impact relies on the expertise and professional judgment
of experienced participants. The determination of a value for the probability of
occurrence and its consequence to project objectives, if it occurs, is a new activity
for many people, and can seem strange at first.
In any field, with experience, professionals develop intuition and an ability to
understand projects to a greater degree than those not involved with project
development and delivery in their industry. This experience and intuition is extremely
valuablein a risk workshop forum we surround ourselves with wise counsel to
seriously and thoroughly discuss the project. It might be helpful to examine the word
guess and compare it to other words, such as discernment and judgment, that
more appropriately describe risk assessment (see Exhibit 3-1 in Part 1 for the
definitions and synonyms).

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-9

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

A-1.8.2

Section A

Availability Bias

Experts are always receiving new information to add to their knowledge base.
Frequently, when approached for their judgment, experts will have recent information
that they have not had time to blend in to their knowledge base.
One practical way to address this information availability bias is to ask the expert
a simple follow-up question regarding the issue being elicited: Is there recent
information you are using to provide your judgment? If the answer is yes, then ask,
How does that new information weigh in relative to all the other information you have
accumulated over the years? If the availability bias exists here, the expert will often say
something like, Thats a good question; let me think about it and get back to you or
Ive thought about it and I have given the new information the proper weighting.
A-1.8.3

Representativeness or Stereotyping Bias

This is the case where experts have base information, but dont use it. Instead, they
match an event with a stereotypical case. Biases, in expert response, can potentially
lead to understating the range, so it is important that the risk elicitor properly prepare
participants, and monitor and question participants if a bias is detected.
A-1.9

Conflict Resolution
Although uncommon, there may be situations where a significant difference of opinion
has arisen between workshop participants, either during or following the workshop.
There are many resources and references on the topic of conflict management and
conflict resolution. This workshop guide is not a substitute for those resources, many
of which can be found at libraries and bookstores. However, a progressive process for
resolving such disagreements at workshops is offered below:
1. Capture the difference as a range
One benefit of the CRA/CEVP workshop process is that it allows input in the form
of ranges and percent probabilities. Usually, the ability to capture input in ranges
meets the needs of participants offering input. For example, if one participant
states, This risk event could cause $1 million in additional cost, and another
says, This risk event could cause up to $3 million in additional cost, we can
simply offer to capture the risk with a $1 million to $3 million impact range.
Typically, this will satisfy the parties with differing opinions about the impact.
(Note: Participants offering opinions should be able to state why they have the
opinion and document the information used to develop the opinion.)
2. Evaluate different scenarios
If we are not able to resolve the difference by capturing it as a range, in some
cases it may be appropriate to evaluate additional scenarios that address the
different opinions being offered. This is practical in some casesto a point. Having
too many scenarios can add cost and complexity to the workshop and may not be
necessary or helpful to the overall evaluation of the project.

Page A-10

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

3. Meet with relevant parties and review the data

If a strong difference of opinion persists, and the first two options will not resolve
the matter, agree to gather data and meet to review and discuss the matter with
the relevant parties and subject matter experts. Strive to use objective data, with
guidance from the Risk Lead and Cost Lead, to reach an agreed-upon input. If, after
a concerted effort to reach a consensus decision, disagreement still exists, it may
be necessary to adopt a solution and document the dissenting opinion in the
report.
When evaluating information, consider the following:
Less Reliable (less certain)
One or very few observations
Anecdote or case study
Unpublished
Unrepeated
Dissimilar projects
No constraints or assumptions identified
No comparative explanation of information

More Reliable (more certain)

Many observations
Scientific study
Published and peer-reviewed
Results have been reproduced
Similar projects
Constraints and assumptions listed
Comparative analysis provided

Thompson, Kimberly M., Risk In Perspective, with edits.

A-2

Risk Assessment Workshop

The workshop will be attended by project team members, the cost-risk team, and
necessary SMEs and/or project specialists.
The overall workshop objectives are:
1. Review and validate base cost estimates.
2. Identify uncertainties and risks.
3. Characterize uncertainties and risk (in terms of likelihood and impacts).

A-3
A-3.1

Risk Assessment Activities

Elicitation (Characterizing Risk and Uncertainty)
Eliciting information from SMEs and project team participants is a vital part of the
process. Risks are treated as events defined by both cause and outcome. A positive
outcome presents an opportunity, while a negative outcome poses a threat to project
objectives. Elicited information is recorded into a risk register for the project and
becomes input for the Monte Carlo modeling. The risk register lists all identified risk
events (both threats and opportunities), with appropriate detail describing the risk
event. The risk register should be comprehensive and must be reviewed by the Project
Manager and project team to ensure all risks and uncertainties have been quantified
and there is no double-counting of risk events.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-11

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section A

Risk Event Properties

Likelihood (probability of occurrence)
Consequences (impact to cost/schedule relative to the base estimate if the

event occurs)
Relationship with other events (independent versus correlated with other events)
Focus on significant risks (particularly include those risks that are high-impact, lowprobability)
Nature of Event Occurrence
Frequency of occurrence
Number of occurrences during the project
Number of potential outcomes (consequences)
Event is independent or correlated with other events or among project activities
Consequences of Event Occurrence to Project Objectives
Defined in terms of cost impacts, schedule impacts, or both
Uncertainty in event outcome

Elicitation 3 can be accomplished in a number of ways and may utilize any one or
a combination of the following approaches:
In the workshop
Through a questionnaire
Through interviews of individuals or small groups in advance of the workshop
By teleconferencing
Other methods

Preparation for elicitation provides:

Base estimate and schedule (including the Basis of Estimate)
Document of assumptions as a basis for risk assessment
List of base uncertainties

Elicitor guidance provides:

Balance in participants perspectives (watch for bias in responses)
Formal elicitation
Facilitated brainstorming
o
o
o

List and discuss all credible ideas

Assess consequences for likelihood and impact (frequency/magnitude)
Combine similar risks into one well-defined risk with a comprehensive
description

Elicit To draw forth; to bring out from the data in which they are implied. To extract, draw out (information) from a
person

Page A-12

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Weed out smaller, less significant risks that do not warrant inclusion in a
formal quantitative analysis; these can be summarized into a watch list
for the project team

Guidance on:
o
o

A-3.1.1

Anchoring
Worst- and best-case scenarios for consequences

Elicitation of Subgroups

Rather than having everyone attend every elicitation session, subgroups can in some
cases provide a more efficient and effective approach to help ensure a properly focused
elicitation with the correct SMEs present. This approach can help keep the number of
individuals in the meeting to a manageable size. Group dynamics may begin to
deteriorate after a group reaches a certain large size (i.e., many contributions but not
necessarily from knowledgeable participants), and subdividing the elicitation provides
a practical offset to the size problem. The subdivision of elicitation can happen on the
same day, which could allow each of the Risk Leads to take a group into a separate room
for elicitation.
The following elicitation subgroups have been used:
1. Right of Way, Utilities, and Railroad
2. Environmental, Cultural Resources, Stormwater
3. Structures, Geotech
4. All Others: Design, Traffic, Work Zone Traffic Control, Constructability (staging/
sequencing), scope issues/uncertainties, public pressures/opposition, local
jurisdiction concerns, local market conditions/uncertainties, uncertainty in the
base, management, and other costs.
A-3.2

Cautionary Notes Regarding Workshop Dynamics

1. The size of the group needs to be kept manageable. Group dynamics deteriorate
beyond a certain-sized group. While a good mix of expert input is desired, care
needs to be taken that the number of participants does not overwhelm the
process or diminish the effectiveness of the workshops. For example, too many
people in the room attempting to speak can drown out or dominate time that
should be used to listen to the SMEs.
2. Participants who are not familiar with the workshop process and/or risk-based
estimating need to be educated/acclimated to the process. Participants should
know their roles and what will be expected from them during the workshop.
3. The workshop effort should be commensurate with project size and complexity.
Choose the right size and approach for the project. The process is scalable.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-13

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section A

4. The workshop environment itself should be large and comfortable. Workshop

participants will be working together for several days; it is best not to have venues
that are too small or confining.
5. Biases in expert response, and failures to characterize distributions and
dependencies, can result in understatement of the tails of the distribution. Elicitors
need to be well informed on the biases and have experience in reducing them.
6. Participants should be careful of discrete thinking. The risks being quantified are
schedule and cost. These are conceptually continuous random variables and can
be modeled as such. However, likelihoods are properly modeled using a discrete
distribution, as discussed under Distributions to Consider for Quantifying Risk,
in Section G, Technical Notes for Risk Modelers.
7. For some specific events, discrete probabilities are appropriate.
A-3.3

Report Preparation
The workshop report, which documents the results and process followed, is built in
service of and to support the project teams risk management and project delivery
efforts. Report preparation is a collaborative effort primarily between the project team
and the cost-risk team, with final control of editing and publishing the report resting in
the hands of the Project Manager. Exhibit A-3 provides a guide/checklist for report
writing and Exhibit A-4 provides a flow chart.

A-3.3.1

Draft Report

The draft report is due two weeks after the workshop (or after the final inputs
document has been provided to the risk modeler). Every attempt should be made
to provide inputs by the final day of the workshop. Allow one week for comments.
A-3.3.2

Workshop Report (Final)

The final report (Exhibit A-5) is due two weeks after the draft report is delivered (one
week after comments are due). This report should be ready and complete with the onepager summary of the analysis and Risk Management Plan spreadsheet. If no comments
are received for the draft report, the draft report becomes the workshop report of
record.

Page A-14

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

Exhibit A-3

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Workshop Report Guide/Checklist

Project Manager/Project Team

The Project Manager and project team actively participate in the review and editing of the report. The
Project Manager owns the results and is accountable for their use and integration of information into their
management system, including communication of results.
An accurate and complete workshop request form
Project photo for cover
Cost and schedule estimates and a brief written summary describing their preparation
Reconciliation of differences from previous estimates
Subject Matter Experts
Make notes during the workshop to provide for the report-writing efforts.
Key risks
Possible response strategies
Risk Lead
Make notes of key discussion topics during the workshop that may be helpful during report preparation,
review, and editing. Work closely with the project team and Cost Lead to ensure the report is useful and
understandable to the project team. Document the model logic and steps taken to ensure a sound and
objective analysis. Clearly identify candidates for mitigation and potential response strategies.
Prepare/assemble a written draft of the report:
Foreword
One-Pager
Executive Summary
Chapter 1: Overview (project summary/project objectives/workshop objectives/methodology)
Chapter 2: Project Description (scenario(s)/flowchart(s)/assumptions/exclusions/notes)
Chapter 3: Base Review (base cost and schedule estimate review and validation)
Appendix A Attendees
Appendix B Base Cost Estimate
Appendix C Inputs
Appendix D Outputs
Glossary
Double-check report for clear and easy-to-understand language
Check against QA/QC checklist
Bring report to final ready condition with edits in a timely manner
Cost Lead
Makes notes to aid in writing the estimate validation.
Written overview of cost and schedule estimates
Written overview of the actions taken to review and validate cost and schedule for the report
Workshop Coordinator from CREM Unit
The workshop report is reviewed against the cost and risk quality control checklist.
Review QA/QC checklist
Work with project team and cost-risk team through completion of report
Obtain final copy from Project Manager for the file

Note: It is recommended that a designated report editor/coordinator be identified prior to

the workshop. The Project Manager can work with the CREM Unit to help determine who might
serve in this role. The report editor/coordinator might be someone from the project teams
communications office, the cost-risk team, or other appropriate position.
WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide
November 2014

Page A-15

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Exhibit A-4

Section A

Report Writing Responsibility

START
Project Manager
determines need for risk
assessment report.

Cost Risk Estimating Management

Prepare QA/QC Checklist

Ensure report completion
Get final copy for records

Cost Lead

Review cost/schedule
Validate cost/schedule
Prepare report write-up

Project Manager and team actively

participate in the review and editing of
the report. The Project Manager and team
have publishing authority for their projects
risk assessment report. In addition, the Project
Manager is responsible for any edits to the
report that are made by the project team.
The Project Manager, in the end, owns the
report and its contents and has
responsibility for dissemination.

Risk Lead

Prepare draft report

Ensure easy-to-read language
Prepare QA/QC Checklist

Subject Matter Experts

Make notes
Identify major risks
Provide mitigation options

All parties involved in the report writing and review process are accountable for ensuring the
quality, accuracy, and completeness of the material they produce that is to be included in the
report. The Cost Estimate Validation Process utilizes teams of experts working on behalf of
the project team.

Page A-16

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Exhibit A-5

Workshop Report

Responsible Party
Project Manager
and Project Team
Members
Subject Matter
Experts

Risk Lead

Cost Lead
CREM Unit
Workshop
Coordinator

A-3.4

Responsibilities
The Project Manager, along with the project team, just as they did before the
workshop, owns the Project Management Plan, and all project development and
delivery responsibilities. This includes all project cost and schedule estimates and
the Risk Management Plan. The Project Manager uses the information in the
report in aiding and assisting their risk management and project management
activities.
During the workshop process, the subject matter experts are responsible for their
opinions and the objective advice offered during the workshop and report
preparation.
The Risk Lead is responsible for: preparing workshop participants; conducting the
risk elicitation; the modeling, analysis, and conclusions to be drawn from the
analysis; and writing the Risk Lead portion of the report. The Risk Lead uses a
quality control (QC) checklist as a guide to ensure an effective workshop
experience that results in a sound and objective analysis of project costs,
schedules, and risks. The Risk Lead clearly identifies candidates for mitigation
and possible strategies for mitigating these key risks.
The Cost Lead is responsible for reviewing and validating the project cost estimate
and schedule, and preparing the Cost Lead portion of the report.
The workshop coordinator is responsible for ensuring the appropriate participants
are in attendance at the appropriate times. In addition, the workshop coordinator
or others in the CREM Unit will perform the review of the report against the QC
checklist.

CEVP Results and Capital Budget Development Data Needs

Required
Data

In order to load agency management systems and provide budget information, specific
data needs to be provided to the region program management offices. This data is then
loaded into the Capital Program Management System (CPMS) and transferred to the
Transportation Executive Information System (TEIS) for use in gaining budget approval.

A-3.5

Project Schedule Data Milestone Dates

Project Estimated Cost Data

Begin Preliminary Engineering

Begin Right of Way Acquisition Phase
Advertisement Date
Operationally Complete Date

Design Cost Estimate

Right of Way Cost Estimate
Construction Cost Estimate

Management Endorsement
Along with the data provided by the project team, agency management endorses which
costs are to be used and the schedule to be assumed. Guidance on use and reporting of
CEVP/CRA results and CPMS data requirements are provided in Instructional Letter
4071 posted at: http://wwwi.wsdot.wa.gov/publications/policies/fulltext/4071.pdf

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-17

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

A-4

Section A

QA/QC: All Are Accountable for Quality

A-4.1

Preparation
The project team, Project Manager, appropriate specialty groups, and appropriate
stakeholders must perform a reasonability check on materials developed prior to the
workshop. The Cost and Risk QC checklist provided in Exhibit A-6 should be used by
the Project Manager to ensure the project team is ready for the workshop. When the
workshop is convened, most attendees should already be familiar with, and have had
an opportunity to comment on, the scope, schedule, and cost estimate that the project
team has developed. The scope, schedule, and cost estimate will be the subject of
review and analysis at the CRA or CEVP workshop. At the discretion of the CREM Unit,
region Risk Manager, or Project Manager, the workshop may be postponed if the cost
and risk quality control checklist items are not all satisfactorily completed.

Exhibit A-6

Cost and Risk QC Checklist

Cost and Risk Quality Control Checklist

Cost Lead Review
1 The Basis of Estimate has been completed.
2 All available project team backup has been reviewed and incorporated.
3 The estimate scope has been validated with the CEVP workshop scope.
4 All unit costs have been validated by professional judgment and/or historical cost information.
5 All spreadsheet formulas have been reviewed and totals have been cross-checked.
6 All costs and durations have been allocated to flowchart activities.
7 Contingencies are sufficiently removed from the base cost estimate, and the inclusion in the risk
estimate has been verified.
8 Risk contingencies that were removed are replaced with events on the risk register.
9 Design allowances are validated; allowances with large variations are transferred to the risk estimate.
10 All markup amounts have been verified and confirmed appropriate.
11 All estimate assumptions and clarifications have been documented.
12 Base uncertainty has been assessed and documented.
Risk Lead Review
1 The workshop process has been presented to the workshop team.
2 Project team issues and concerns have all been explored.
3 Consensus on initial risk identification list has been achieved.
4 The focus is on key risks. Minor issues have been filtered out by consistent screening criteria.
5 Remaining risks (threats and opportunities) are quantified in terms of likelihood and consequences.
6 Potential risk mitigation measures have been captured.
7 Contingencies and allowances have been coordinated with the cost team.
8 Cost Lead has verified that risks are not included in the base cost estimate (no double counting).
9 All issues, impacts, likelihoods, and mitigation measures are documented consistently.
10 All assumptions and clarifications have been documented.
11 Team consensus has been reached on all risk items.
12 All risk estimate backup has been documented (date, page number, and estimators name).

Page A-18

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section A

A-4.2

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

During and After the Workshop

1. The Project Manager, appropriate project team members, and specialty groups
perform a reasonability check on the preliminary draft results, including charts.
2. The project team, Risk Lead, and Cost Lead work together to deliver useful
products that can improve project control through managing project cost and
schedule risks. All members are equally important and must work cooperatively
to achieve this objective.
3. The Risk Lead and Cost Lead coordinate and assist each other to make sure
information is properly defined and coordinated during the workshop.
4. The person performing the risk modeling must carefully review the model to
ensure the information from the workshop is properly represented. The model
logic must be described in the workshop report, and the results presented to
the project team and the CREM Unit.
5. Throughout the analysis, the risk elicitor works with the project team, WSDOT
subject matter experts (SMEs), and external SMEs to make certain the risk
information is correctly captured for use in the analysis.
6. Throughout the analysis, the Cost Lead works with the project team, WSDOT
SMEs, and external SMEs to make certain the cost information is correctly
captured for use in the analysis.
7. The CREM Unit reviews the analysis/report for correctness and clarity; the project
team reviews the analysis/report to ensure they understand the results and can
confidently discuss them with others.

A-5

Risk Response Taking Action

Following identification and analysis of project risks, Project Managers and project
teams must take action in response to the identified project risks, focusing on risks
of most significance.
In order to maximize the benefits of project risk management, project risk management
activities must be incorporated into the Project Management Plan and work activities.
This means building risk management activities into our Work Breakdown Structure
(WBS). WSDOT has a ready-made WBS in the form of its Master Deliverables List (MDL)
to help ensure our project work plans are comprehensive, consistent, and complete.
Risk response requires effort to develop and implement response actions; we must plan
for expending this effort following the results of our risk analysis. Access the tool at:
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page A-19

CRA-CEVP Project Risk Assessment

Section A

Over time and as the project matures, the project risk profile will change. Typically, as
risks are successfully dealt with and project knowledge increases, the risk exposure will
diminish.
When it comes to Cost Risk Assessment, remember
It is iterative in nature and represents a snapshot in time of that project for

the known conditions at that point.

It normally deals with identifiable and quantifiable project-type risks (i.e., those

events that can occur in planning, design, bidding, construction, and changed
conditions).

It could also be considered a force majeure event or act of God 4; however,

at this point, these risks are generally not included. This is an area for review
and developmentin particular, how to characterize such events in a useful
manner for better management of the projects. All exclusions and assumptions
need to be clearly documented in the workshop report.

It is good to remember that risk-based estimating, as in CRA/CEVP workshops, does

not provide an answer book with all uncertainty removed from the project. Risk-based
estimating and consideration of project uncertainty and project risk does not add costs
to a project, it reveals them.
Risk-based estimating is an analysis of data provided by the project team and workshop
attendees. The analysis provides useful information for the risk management element of
the overall Project Management Plan. A report is provided that can be used by decision
makers and the project team to develop an action plan. The resulting workshop report
is information for decision makers to act upon. It is not a decision documentit is an
information document for decision makers.

We have to do the best

we know how at the
moment...; If it doesn't
turn out right, we can
modify it as we go along.
~ FDR

An event or effect that cannot be reasonably anticipated or controlled compare ACT OF GOD

Page A-20

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section B
B-1

Manager & Team Typical Duties

Description of Work
Project teams typically look to the Cost Risk Assessment/Cost Estimate Validation
Process (CRA/CEVP) workshop process as a tool to help improve the accuracy,
consistency, and confidence in their project cost and schedule estimates. This process
also helps Project Managers and project teams with their project risk management
efforts, a required component of all Project Management Plans.
During this collaborative process, uncertainty within a project is identified and
quantified. Development of risk-based estimates through the CRA/CEVP workshop
process is a collaborative effort between the project team, experts in cost and risk
analysis, and external subject matter experts. The two main elements of an estimate
are: base cost, which represents the cost if the project materializes as planned, and risk
events, a combination of the probability of an uncertain event and its consequences. A
positive consequence presents an opportunity; a negative consequence poses a threat.
Note that risk events are separate from variability that is inherent in the base.
Project schedules and cost estimates are owned by the project teams, and they must be
updated regularly. This may involve conducting workshops periodically (typically, every
one to two years). The workshop effort begins with a request from the project team. The
process focuses on the project team for input of primary information; the project team
utilizes the workshop results as they deem appropriate, to more effectively manage their
projects.
Workshops are usually held early in project development (Exhibit B-1), from late planning
to the early stages of developing the contracts plans, specifications, and estimate (PS&E).
Risk management is an ongoing project management activity; the Project Manager and
project team should continue to proactively manage risk up until advertising the
contract. Continuing risk management and risk assessment should look at the knowledge
gained through the workshop process, and pay particular attention to evaluating the
sequence of construction activities and scheduling through completion of the PS&E.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page B-1

Manager & Team Typical Duties

Exhibit B-1

Section B

Timing of Workshops

*Nothing happens until something moves Albert Einstein

B-2

Project Team Status Prior to CRA/CEVP Workshop

The project team must:
1. Provide plans and documents that describe the scope, schedule, and cost estimate
of the project. The Project Manager needs to approve of the Project Management
Plan, including scope, schedule, and cost estimate, prior to the workshop. In
addition, all key contributors need to confirm and accept the estimate that is being
presented for analysis in the workshop. The information presented by the project
team should not be a surprise to the specialty groups and stakeholders involved in
the project.
2. Describe the level of project maturity (i.e., percentage of design completion).
3. Describe the character and time frame of the project and issues of concern.
The Project Manager and project team should remain mindful of the overall workshop
objectives, which are to:
Review and/or validate base cost estimates.
Identify project uncertainties and elicitation of project risks.
Characterize uncertainties and risk, which are documented in a risk register.

Page B-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section B

Manager & Team Typical Duties

To ensure workshop quality and effectively use the participating subject matter experts,
the Project Manager and project team do the following:
Submit CRA/CEVP workshop request forms at least 8 weeks prior to the

workshop; for some projects, such as SR 520 and AWV, Project Managers have
asked that the forms be submitted at least 12 weeks in advance.

Submit the following documents 2 weeks prior to the workshop:

o
o
o
o

Updated Project Management Plan (including Risk Management Plan)

Current project schedule (to be used at the workshop)
Current estimate file (with assumptions and Basis of Estimate)
Current project summary (and detailed project scope)

The items above need to be completed and turned in early so that workshop
participants can learn the basic elements of the project and begin review of cost
estimate key items. Project estimate review and risk assessment are the main
workshop topics.

B-3

Project Team Responsibilities and Requirements

For the majority of the workshop, the project team needs to ensure the availability of
key people who can represent the project in areas essential to the project objectives.
These include:
Project management (to provide project context and relationship with stakeholders)
Engineering (design and construction)
Cost estimating
Scheduling
Environmental (permits, processes, and mitigation)

The Project Manager is to ensure the availability of project team members who can
speak to the issues raised in the workshop and are familiar with the documentation.
The project team must be prepared to identify applicable risk elements (global and
project-specific), the interrelationships of the risks, and the characterization of the risks
in terms of likelihood and impacts. If the project team is interested in pricing the project
for different delivery methods (e.g., design-bid-build vs design-build), they need to be
prepared to discuss this.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page B-3

Manager & Team Typical Duties

Section B

The project team, working collaboratively with the workshop team, should be prepared
to discuss and determine:
Exclusions.
Funding
Programmatic issues
Others
Adequate subject matter expert participation.
Authority to ensure input is objective.
The optimal process balance between effort and accuracy; level of analytical detail; and
how to handle dependence, correlations, and distributions.
The probabilistic risk-based integrated cost and schedule modeling needs.
Global versus project-specific risks and other uncertainties.
Treatment of base uncertainties.

B-3.1

Items Required from the Project Team Prior to the Workshop

The project team must produce the following items ahead of time and have them
available at the workshop:
Project team organizational chart.
Project team contact information.
Project vicinity map, informational documents, aerial photos, etc.
Project definition documents and design criteria used.
Summary or overview of project plan(s) that indicate the project elements at the type,
size, and location level. This may include concept plans, cross sections, illustrations,
public information documents, memorandums of understanding, geotech info, etc.
If there are multiple alternatives, there needs to be a description of status and
relationships sufficient to understand the options and to plan the workshop priorities.
The Basis of Estimate.
Current estimates (unit prices, parametric estimates, combination, etc.), including an
overall project/program rollup estimate. Note the base year of the estimate.
A preliminary listing of risks and the project teams issues of concern.
A preliminary project flowchart showing key tasks and relationships from current
status through completion of construction and open to traffic.
Current design and construction schedule, including description of how durations
were determined and an explanation of the construction sequencing strategy.

Page B-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section B

Manager & Team Typical Duties

Estimated durations and costs associated with completion of preliminary

engineering:
Mapping and surveys
Engineering and design
Geotechnical investigation
Environmental process and permitting
Environmental mitigation design (including administrative costs)
Hazmat remediation design
Structures
Hydraulics
All other relevant areas for the subject project
Estimated durations and costs associated with completion of right of way:
Real Estate Services
Right of way acquisition services (includes administrative costs)
Access management
Right of way property costs
All other relevant areas for the subject project
Estimated durations and costs associated with completion of construction:
Construction engineering
Construction cost of project
Lump sum items (weigh station, maintenance facility/equipment, park & ride lot,
etc.)
Utility relocations
Hazmat remediation
Environmental mitigation (cost to construct)
Allowances for miscellaneous add-ons (lighting, signing, striping, SC&DI, etc.), with
explanation as to what items are covered and percentage to be used, and why
All other relevant areas for the subject project

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page B-5

Manager & Team Typical Duties

Page B-6

Section B

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section C
C-1

Risk Lead Duties

Description of Work
Risk Leads participate in a peer-level review or due diligence analysis on the scope,
schedule, and cost estimate for various projects to evaluate quality and completeness,
including anticipated risk and uncertainty in the projected cost and schedule.

C-1.1 Risk Lead Duties

During the workshop process, the Risk Lead:
Leads the risk portion of the process, including risk elicitation and project

flowchart development for modeling.

Keeps the flowchart practical; it should be a simple but complete

representation of the project schedule. 1 It is the backbone of the analysis

and can be thought of as an abstract of the project schedule.

Participates in cost validation or review and risk uncertainty workshops for

selected projects.

Conducts prep sessions, follow-up meetings, or re-run sessions as necessary.

Provides reports and presentations documenting workshops.
Provides reports using report guide or table of contents.
Develops or implements workshops on topics such as project definition and risk

identification and management.

These functions are critical to WSDOT's success in delivering projects on time and on
budget. It is anticipated that Cost Risk Assessment (CRA) and Cost Estimate Validation
Process (CEVP) reviews for each project can be accomplished in a reasonable time
frame, including a 1- to 5-day concentrated workshop. WSDOT personnel, with the
aid of multiple specialty groups, will coordinate CRA/CEVP. Work may include the
documentation of the viability of assumptions made regarding a project's configuration,
scope, schedule, character, and, through risk analysis, the potential impact of risk events
that may occur. The project may include creating reports that document information
determined or discovered.
Risk workshops vary based on project needs, but include risk identification, probabilistic
risk assessment, development of management strategies, a probabilistic look at the
effectiveness of management strategies, and other variants. The Risk Lead must use
consistent methodology for probabilistic risk assessments.

Flowcharts should as simple as possible but still represent the project activities in a realistic manner, with proper sequence
and durations (Exhibit C-1).

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page C-1

Risk Lead Duties

Section C

The Risk Lead plays a vital role in ensuring the analysis is sound and objective. It is also
imperative that the analysis process and results are clear and usable by the project
team. The process, as documented, must include the underlying assumptions and
constraints of the analysis in a manner that is easily comprehended by the project team,
who will have to communicate the results of the workshop to others. The report should
tell the story of the project scope, schedule, and cost estimate.
Exhibit C-1

Flowchart Example

Flowchart Activities
DESIGN (18 mo)

(Design, Structures/Geo-tech, Utilities)

Env. Doc.

(EA/Tech
Reports, BO,
NEPA/SEPA)

(6 mo)

(Plans, Acquisition)

(17 mo)

Mitigation area
acquired

(county)

(16 mo)

End CN

ROW

FS
-2
M

AGREEMENTS & FUNDING (12 mo)

Const.

A/B/A
(3mo

wsdot)

Const.
(wsdot)

(36 mo)

Permitting
Start Date:
12/1/2008

(Federal, State &

Local Permits)

(12 mo)

(PE+RW+CN) Base Duration for Phase 1 = 62 mo

No Work Windows restriction,
Base schedule Ad Date: 11/1/2010

This flowchart is simple and easy to follow. It meets the needs for risk modeling.

Page C-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section C

Risk Lead Duties

Exhibit C-2

Simplified Flowchart Example

SIMPLIFIED FLOWCHART of BASE SCHEDULE

PRECONSTRUCTION

Assumed Ad
Date
Summer
(June)
2016

WSDOT
PERMITTING
AGREEMENTS
FUNDING
FONSI DEC 2013

September
2011

Assume
3 mos (ABA)

CONSTRUCTION

Assumed Construction Duration 76 months

January
2013

END
Construction
August 2021

NOTE: This flowchart is assumed for the January 2013 workshop

for the subject project and is for the purposes of analysis.
15% Design at the time of this analysis.
In water work allowed Aug 1 to Feb 15
Peak Ridership Mothers Day to Labor Day

Notice that this very simple flowchart is often all that it is needed. It focuses on the two
dates of most interest: the Advertisement Date and Completion of Construction.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page C-3

Risk Lead Duties

Page C-4

Section C

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section D
D-1

Cost Lead Duties

Description of Work
The Cost Lead serves as the major subject matter expert for cost estimating and leads
and directs those portions of the Cost Risk Assessment/Cost Estimate Validation
Process (CRA/CEVP) devoted to review or validation of the project base cost estimate.
The Cost Lead commits to supporting the cost risk assessment effort and the quality of
input and analysis.

D-1.1

Cost Lead Duties

Typical Cost Lead activities include: leadership and facilitation; preparation; preworkshop
meetings; workshop participation; documentation; follow up; reconciliation of workshop
results; technical report writing; process evaluation; communication, and traveling to and
from the workshop and project locations. The Cost Lead assists with the workshop
process by taking primary responsibility for the following:
Leads the review; validates the project teams cost estimate and Basis of

D-1.1.1

Estimate; and collaborates with the appropriate subject matter experts to

review the project schedule.
Supports the project team in refining the base cost estimate.
Supports the project team in making any adjustments to the base estimate as
a result of the review.
Supports the development of the risk register by proposing cost and schedule
risk items to deal with risks and opportunities that are identified as part of the
cost and schedule review.
Reviews the project teams work to distribute the base costs against the correct
phases or activities identified in the flowchart.
Works collaboratively with the project team to review and validate the final cost
estimate and schedule to be used in the model. Confirms concurrence of the
validated estimate with the project team and subject matter experts.
Deliverables

The Cost Lead will:

1. Provide written comments about the Basis of Estimate review and the review or
validation of the project base cost estimate and comments on the project schedule.
2. Work with the person from the project team who prepared the project estimate,
to develop base cost breakdowns for the flowchart activities of the project for use
in the risk modeling as soon as possible during or immediately following the
workshop.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page D-1

Cost Lead Duties

Section D

3. Provide a written report on the base cost estimate review and validation, and
schedule the review for inclusion in the risk analysis workshop report to the
project office and CREM Unit. The report is due within one week following the
end of the workshop or earlier if required and agreed to at the workshop.
D-1.1.2

Typical Cost Questions

Typical cost questions to be asked by the Cost Lead and subject matter experts:
Have you completed the Project Estimate Basis form? What is the basis of the

Page D-2

estimate?
o How current is it? When was it updated?
o Do unit prices correlate to similar scope projects in the area? Are they
truly comparable?
o Does the current scope of the work match the scope that the estimate
is based on?
o Does the estimate include engineering, engineering services during
construction, construction management services?
What is the stage of the design?
What is the accuracy of the survey data?
What field investigations have been done? Describe the existing conditions.
What geotechnical work has been done to date? Is there data from past
projects in the area?
Cuts and fills: What has been assumed for reuse, import, export and disposal,
temporary stockpiling, haul distances, location of imported materials?
Are there assumptions on compaction? Seasonal variability?
Are there assumptions on stability of cuts, sheeting, retaining walls, slope
protection during construction?
If dewatering is required, are there perched water tables and other
maintenance of excavations during construction, treatment of dewatering to
meet permits?
ROW: How current are surveys and estimates of costs? Partial or full parcels?
Are there temporary utilities, staging areas, parking storage, lay down?
Is there knowledge of utilities in project area, relocation requirements, ability
to isolate and shutdown? Are replacements needed prior to isolation? Can
replacements be installed at proper elevation?
Is there erosion protection?
Are there special conditions: extraordinary staffing requirements, night work,
stop times due to fish or wildlife issues, noise limits, dust control?
What has been assumed for overhead, insurance, bonding, project
management, safety, QC community liaison, trailers, utilities, parking, home
office overhead, profit?
Are there assumptions for material availability: backfill, sheeting, piles,
concrete, rebar access for delivery, double handling requirements?

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section D

Cost Lead Duties

Are production rates assumed? Is this work similar to other work done in the

D-1.1.3

area?
Are there assumptions for maintenance of traffic, staging of construction,
needed temporary barriers, ramps, bridges, supports, technology?
Is there estimated mitigation, noise walls, stormwater detention ponds,
wetlands?
What contingencies are built into the estimate?
Has a change order allowance been built into the estimate?
Typical Schedule Questions

Typical schedule questions include:

How long have similar projects taken?
How many $/month at average and at peak would have to be spent to meet the

D-1.1.4

schedule?
In what season is it expected that the Notice To Proceed (NTP) will be issued?
Will certain months be lost due to the start date?
If the NTP is issued as planned, can the landscaping be completed in the
required season for the specified plantings?
Has mobilization and demobilization time been included in the schedule? How
many workers are assumed to be working on the project at the peak of
construction?
Does the construction phasing and traffic management plan match the schedule
assumptions?
How many concurrent work areas are assumed? Are there crews available to
staff all of those areas?
What are the assumed production rates for each of the major elements:
earthwork, foundations, piers, beams, deck, subbase, base, paving, etc.?
Tips for Cost Leads

1. The project team owns the estimatelet them establish what they want out
of the process.
2. Dont get bogged down in details; keep the discussion relevant to the overall
size of the project and commensurate with the level of design at the time of
the analysis. For example, dont waste a lot of time discussing a $100,000 item
on a $50,000,000 project.

D-2

Base Cost Assessment

Estimating is a maturation process and is an integral part of project development.
Estimating is rarely a straightforward, linear process; there are assumptions, constraints,
and uncertainties that contribute to the narrative of the numbers for the project
estimate. It is imperative that we understand how the estimate was generated.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page D-3

Cost Lead Duties

Section D

Cost Leads need to take the time to listen to the project team explain the history of
the estimating process for their project. While the project team talks through how
the estimate was generated, they are mentally checking that the process is correct.
Following is a step-by-step guide through the assessment process for Cost Leads.
D-2.1

Confirm that Cost Matches Scope

Gain a comprehensive understanding of the project scope, limits, and major items of
work such as structures, construction staging, phases, etc., during the project teams
presentation. Validate that the scope description, drawings, and estimate match in
terms of work items. Use the expertise of the team to validate the design elements.
For example, if there is a curved bridge, has the team assumed steel girders and
factored that into the unit price?

D-2.2

Confirm Unit Prices Are Valid

Use experience, bid-tab data, and recent projects in the area to validate unit prices.
Estimating the per square foot unit price of bridge deck is sometimes contentious;
topics of discussion frequently center on foundation type, superstructure type, and
geometry. Unit price estimates also include confirming the tax rate, which varies by
county; the per-acre cost for right of way; mobilization markup; and engineering
markup. Bid histories are useful but not the final answer, especially if bid histories
are more than three months old. In such cases, care and judgment must be used
to ascertain the appropriate and valid current unit prices.

D-2.3

Identify Internal and External Contingency

Strip out the contingency in the base cost estimate. It will be obvious that this needs
to be done when contingency appears as an explicit line item in the estimate. There can
also be contingency hidden within the line items, such as inflated unit prices, rounding
up of quantities, etc. What needs to be taken out is a judgment call based on discussions
with the estimator.

D-2.4

Split Estimate to Match Flowchart

Cut apart the estimate to match the flowchart boxes. This is typically environmental
cost, preliminary engineering, PSE, ROW, and construction. This work needs to be
closely coordinated with the risk group and confirmed by the workshop participants
(project team, cost-risk team, and subject matter experts).

D-2.5

Determine Risk Costs in Collaboration with the Risk Team

Generate risk items and determine costs (this occurs in the workshop).This should be
a high-level estimating effort. If this step becomes voluminous, consider ways to divide
and conquer. It is imperative that the cost and risk scope items match and that there
is no overlap of costs and risks, nor are there any omissions.

Page D-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section E
E-1

Subject Matter Experts Duties

Description of Work
Cost Risk Estimating Management (CREM) is a program created and developed to
better estimate transportation projects. The CREM Unit is part of the Washington
State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Strategic Analysis Estimating Office.
The program provides the framework for two comparable processes: Cost Estimating
Validation Process (CEVP) and Cost Risk Assessment (CRA). These processes involve
intensive collaborative workshops where transportation projects are examined by teams
of top engineers, Risk Managers, and external and internal subject matter experts
(SMEs) from local and national private firms and public agencies, and from WSDOT
specialty groups within the project team.

E-1.1 Special Notes for Subject Matter Experts

External and/or internal SMEs participate in peer-level systematic project review (or
due diligence analysis) and risk assessment to identify and describe cost and schedule
risks based on the information at hand. The review process examines how risks can be
lowered and how the project cost and schedule vulnerability can be reduced.
Subject matter experts should have extensive expertise in their specialty areas. In
addition to technical expertise, SMEs are expected to provide guidance and assistance
on defining the cost and schedule of project activities related to their expertise. While
SMEs should focus on their areas of expertise, it is expected that they will provide input
on one or more of the following risk categories: Management; Environmental; Third
Party; Design; Construction Cost Estimating and Cost Control; Construction Planning and
Phasing; Construction Implementation; Construction Claims and Disputes; Real Estate
and Right of Way; Maintenance and Operations; and Safety.
SMEs should understand that risk management could require a negative frame of mind,
but once identified, risks should be managed positively, so that the risks are addressed
in the best possible way to minimize their influence on a project.
SMEs should also understand that risk assessment does not need to be exact to be
useful, particularly during the early stages of a project. Risks and opportunities go hand
in hand and their analysis should have equal consideration. Much of the power of CEVP
and CRA workshops lies in the rigorous, disciplined approach and the ability of team
members to focus collectively, both inwardly and outwardly, on a broad range of topics.
SMEs should:
Provide objective input in their field and cooperate with all team members by

crossing conventional boundaries.

Have an open attitude regarding change by encouraging creative thinking by

teams and individuals.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page E-1

Subject Matter Experts Duties

Section E

Stay aligned to the workshop process and focus on fulfilling the ultimate

workshop mission: projects delivered on time and on budget.

Be familiar with the WSDOT process for CRA and CEVP workshops, including

the policy statement, common assumptions, and other guidance.

Have a clear understanding of the specific terminology used during workshops,

such as: allowances, contingency, base cost, cost uncertainty, schedule

uncertainty, risk, and opportunity.

In addition to active participation in the workshops, SMEs may be asked to provide

documentation of the viability of assumptions made regarding a projects configuration,
scope, schedule, and cost estimate, and the potential impact of risk events that may
occur.
SMEs may be asked to participate in follow-up or re-run sessions as requested, and
provide reports or presentations documenting their work.
SMEs and project team members should strive to produce clear and concise products
(CEVP or CRA report) that would help decision makers with sound and objective
analyses in order to make informed decisions.
Note: It is preferred to have at least one SME with estimating experience from a
contractors perspective. That SME would participate with the Cost Lead in the review
and critique of the project teams estimates and schedule. This discussion should take
place, if possible, in advance of the workshop.

Page E-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section F
F-1

CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region)

Description of Work
Cost Risk Assessment Coordinators1 help accomplish the Cost Risk Assessment/Cost
Estimate Validation Process (CRA/CEVP) program in accordance with department
policy and guidelines. It is expected that the Headquarters (HQ) CRA Coordinator will
provide direct support and coordination to project teams around the state. For those
regions that have a CRA Coordinator, the HQ CRA Coordinator will work with the region
CRA Coordinator to ensure the effective use of CRA/CEVP workshops in the regions.
Project Managers and project teams use the workshop results to actively manage risk.
Project teams know the details of their projects; cost-risk teams know the workshop
process, modeling, and the goals of the risk analysis effort, and the limitations of risk
analysis. The region CRA Coordinator should be familiar with Washington State
Department of Transportation (WSDOT) resources available in the field of cost-risk
management.

F-1.1

CRA Coordinator Duties

Specific CRA Coordinator duties include the following:
1. Identify the need for CRA/CEVP workshops for region projects (work with project
offices) to estimate workshops for the upcoming 12 months.
2. Establish approximate time frames for CRA/CEVP workshops, with as much
advance notice as is feasible (discuss with project offices).
3. Review workshop request forms for completeness:
Make sure all information is provided.
Make sure the project office is setting up a Work Order Authorization

(WOA) with appropriate Group Numbers, prior to the workshop.

4. Work with the project office to make sure appropriate location(s) are reserved
for the workshop (adequate size and space), and that other helpful meeting
items are available (including Internet access).
5. Be familiar with the CRA/CEVP workshop process.
6. Be familiar with the CREM website. It is frequently updated and additional
material is occasionally posted:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/default.htm
7. Help identify training needs, and take advantage of training opportunities as they
arise (cost estimating class, risk-based estimating class).

A list of coordinators is provided at:

www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/contacts.htm

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page F-1

CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region)

Section F

8. Advocate, within the regions, participation in CRA/CEVP workshops as

opportunities arise. For example, in order to have independent specialty group
representation, it may be possible on occasion to request that a person from a
neighboring region provide subject matter expertise.
9. Advocate proactive risk response actions that are documented in the project Risk
Management Plan.
10. Make sure that feedback from workshops is provided using the postworkshop
evaluation form.
11. Maintain records of CRA/CEVP accomplishments within the region. Include the
involvement of workshop participants, key risks identified, and mitigation
strategies implemented. Monitor the effectiveness of the risk assessment and
mitigation efforts.
12. Report on the risk management and estimating support needs of the region.
13. Attend training to improve skill levels and maintain and improve proficiency in
the areas of project risk management and estimating.

F-2

CRA Coordinator How-To

F-2.1

Example Walk-Through of a Typical Project

Meet with the project team.

Determine upcoming projects that will require a risk-based estimating

workshop. Work with the team early to help them identify, well in
advance (8 weeks lead time or more), appropriate timing for a
workshop. These target dates can be entered into the project work
schedule.

Advise the project team to include risk management (activities) in their

project schedule. This includes: risk planning, risk identification,

qualitative risk analysis, quantitative risk analysis, risk response
planning, and monitoring and control.

Once a time frame for a workshop is established, take the following steps:
1. Go to the Cost Risk Estimating Management (CREM) website and
download a workshop request form:
www.wsdot.wa.gov/projects/projectmgmt/riskassessment/
2. Work with the project team to make sure the form is completed in its
entirety. During this time, check Outlook Calendar WSDOT re VERA to
determine dates that may be available for workshops, and include this
information in the workshop request form.
3. Meet with the area engineer or project development engineer and design
team to give an overview of the workshop process.

Page F-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section F

CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region)

4. Work with the CREM Unit to determine appropriate Cost Leads, Risk Leads,
and subject matter experts, and help complete the participation matrix.
5. Determine who will send invitations to workshop participants. Often the
region will invite the region participants and project team, and the CREM
workshop coordinator will invite others (Cost Lead, Risk Leads, SMEs, HQ
representatives, etc.).
6. Continue to communicate/coordinate to make sure workshop materials are
being made ready and available by the project team to the cost-risk team
and subject matter experts. Follow up with certain workshop participants
to ensure their participation in the process is well timed and appropriate.
7. Attend prep sessions and workshops.
8. Postworkshop: Follow up with the CREM workshop coordinator and others
as appropriate to make sure action items are being communicated, and
follow up on them to make sure they are progressing. Help tie up any
remaining loose ends from the workshop. Make sure the risk register
properly documents the risks discussed at the workshop (particularly
the larger risks).
F-2.2

Enhancing the Process

There are several things the region CRA Coordinator can do to enhance the process:
1. Advise the project team that the project scope, schedule, and estimate need
to be current for the workshop.
The Basis of Estimate should be current and complete.
Estimates should be well organized and easy to follow, and they should

align with the flowchart.

The estimator should have a backup notebook, calculations, and

assumptions available for rapid retrieval of information, if needed.

2. Assist with coordinating advance elicitation between the project team and
Risk Leads.
3. Work with the CREM workshop coordinator to help develop an effective
agenda; i.e., participants in the workshop will know what to expect and when
to attend.
4. Advocate for early completion of appropriate specialty work for the subject
project.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page F-3

CRA Coordinator Duties (HQ/Region)

Page F-4

Section F

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section G
G-1

Technical Notes for Risk Modelers

Guidance
The following guidance is for Cost Leads, Risk Leads, and anyone preparing risk models,
and for all those interested in the technical aspects of risk-based estimating and
modeling. Be sure to emphasize that project risk management focus and prioritization
goes beyond simply ranking risks by expected value. A careful review of the results is
required and risks with high impacts, low probabilities must also be included among the
significant risks identified for focused attention and response actions.

G-1.1

Base Cost Uncertainty

Base uncertainty captures the normal noise and variations of market prices (Exhibit
G-1.
Exhibit G-1

Combination of Base Variability and Market Conditions

BASE UNCERTAINTY

(base variability; market conditions)

$

Higher cost: reflects market conditions

worse than expected.

Base cost
Base Variability + x%
Lower cost:

Reflects market conditions

better than expected.
Time

Base variability is inherent in the base

estimate. Base variability is always present
and is not caused by risk events. Variability
exists even if no risk events are present. Base
variability is captured as a symmetric range
about the estimated value; that is, of the
form: base value +x%.
Market conditions are the consequence of
supply and demand factors, which determine
prices and quantities in a market economy
and which are separate from inflation. Market
conditions include things like: competitive
environment during bidding and contracting,
the labor market, and resource availability.

For many projects, the greatest uncertainty is market conditions; given that fact, we
need to make sure we adequately capture and represent market uncertainty in the
model. There are times when we enjoy a highly favorable bidding environment (highly
competitive), and other times when the bidding climate is not as competitive. Given the
volatility in the market and the many varied factors influencing bids, we must capture
both possibilities (bids could come in worse than planned, i.e., over the Engineers
Estimate, or better than planned, i.e., under the Engineers Estimate). To that end,
Exhibit G-2 provides a simple example of how to capture this uncertainty.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page G-1

Technical Notes for Risk Modelers

Exhibit G-2

Section G

Capturing Base Market Condition Uncertainty (Example)

Bid Result
BETTER than planned[1]
WORSE than planned[2]

Base Market Conditions

Probability
40%
10%

Impact
15%
10%

[1] BETTER than planned indicates that, as a result of favorable market conditions in the
form of a highly competitive bidding environment, it is estimated there is a 40% chance
that bids will come in up to 15% below the Engineers Estimate.
[2] WORSE than planned indicates that, as a result of market condition influences in the
form of a noncompetitive bidding environment, it is estimated there is a 10% chance that
bids will come in up to 10% above the Engineers Estimate.

G-1.2

Base Schedule Uncertainty

Just as base uncertainty for the cost estimate was captured, we also need to capture a
base uncertainty for schedule (i.e., +5% or +10%) (Exhibit G-3). We should discuss base
schedule uncertainty with the schedulers: what is appropriate for this uncertainty? This
base schedule uncertainty captures the fact that we do not know for certain what is
the exact duration of an activityeven if no risk events occur, we do not have exact
precisionparticularly on large, complex projects, early in project development or
design.

G-1.3

Distributions to Consider for Quantifying Risk

When characterizing risks during workshops, some elicitors and participants may
be more comfortable using simple distributions or multipoint discrete distributions
to characterize uncertainties. The Risk Lead (elicitor) should determine the risk
characterization that meets the need of the risk elicited and fits the group dynamics
of a particular workshop membership. The distributions are representations of the
range and shape of uncertainty. Elicitors may elicit ranges of information (min/max;
low/high) and shape of information (symmetric, skewed). Consider this: simulations
are useful to the extent that they reflect reality. Cost and duration (schedule) are
conceptually continuous, random variables and should be modeled in a way that
simulates this nature. This can be accomplished through continuous distributions
or approximated with a discrete representation, as depicted above.
There are two parts to the risk, which define the risk register (a list of risks created of
opportunities and threats):
1. Probability of Occurrence: What is the estimated likelihood this event will occur?
2. Impact: If the event occurs, what is the impact in terms of cost and/or schedule?
This part typically requires only 3 inputs from the expert: minimum, maximum,
and most likely or best guess. As depicted in Exhibit G-3, the uniform distribution
is used when only the minimum and maximum values can be estimated.

Page G-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section G

Exhibit G-3

Technical Notes for Risk Modelers

Capturing Base Schedule Uncertainty

Triangular Distribution

Uniform Distribution

A triangular distribution is a continuous

distribution representing a three-point estimate.
This is one of the most common and widely used
distributions in risk modeling. It is common to
assume that there is a chance that the min and max
values will be exceeded (5/95, 10/90, etc.). These
percentiles may change to represent different
levels of uncertainty in the estimate.

A uniform distribution is a continuous distribution

where only the maximum and minimum values can
be estimated. This distribution is used when there
is considerable uncertainty over the duration of an
activity or cost impact of a risk event; hence, a
most likely value cannot be estimated.

Multipoint Discrete Distribution

Continuous Curve Distribution

0.5

0.14

0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

x1

x2

x3

x4

Relative Likelihood

0.12
0.1
0.08
0.06
0.04
0.02
0
0

X1 = 20%
X2 = 45%
X3 = 30%
X4 = 5%
Multipoint discrete distribution: In some cases, a
risk element can only take particular values (i.e., is
not continuous) or be used to approximate a
continuous distribution.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

10
Value

15

20

Three points are defined: high (max), low (min),

and best guess; then a continuous curve
distribution (such as Pert or other) is used to
characterize the potential risk impact. Although
these methods can provide a realistic
representation of uncertainty, these curves are
hard to define and so should only be used when
there is sound, documented information on the
variability of a particular risk element. It is common
to assume that there is a chance that the min and
max values will be exceeded (5/95, 10/90, etc.).
These percentiles may change to represent
different levels of uncertainty in the estimate.

Page G-3

Technical Notes for Risk Modelers

G-1.4

Section G

Interdependencies or Correlations Between Random Variables

Interdependencies between two or more uncertainties, cost and durations, risk events,
or their impacts, in an analysis, can occur due to a variety of conditions.
The uncertainties may be:
1. Mutually exclusive.
2. Conditionally dependent in terms of likelihood; independent in terms of impact.
3. Correlated (commonly, cost and duration for a given risk event).
Items 1 and 2 can easily be modeled with analysis logic. Correlation can be modeled
statistically or the relationship among correlated events can be described in terms of
conditional probability networks. The conditional probability event tree has been
used successfully in WSDOT and other transportation-oriented risk evaluations.

G-1.5

Typical Model Settings

Consider the following settings:
1. 5,000 iterations (typical).
2. Latin-hypercube sampling.

G-1.6

Directives for Implementing the Response Actions to Major Risks

Following are items for the project team to review and take action on:
A critical and useful output of the risk analysis for the project team is the ranked

risks indicating the risks, in a prioritized order, that most significantly affect
project objectives. This information provides a roadmap to the risks that have
the most promise for benefiting the project through proactive efforts to
respond to the risks.

The more significant risks, sometimes termed candidates for mitigation, are

oftentimes known by the Project Manager and project team in advance of the
formal analysis. The Monte Carlo simulation more formally quantifies and ranks
these significant risks. It identifies those risks that are most responsible for
variation in the bottom line (cost or schedule) as determined from the
modeling.

An effective way to present risks that have the largest potential impact to the

cost or the schedule is by use of a regression sensitivity chart (i.e., Tornado

diagram), depicting the candidates for mitigation in order of importance.

G-1.7

Integrating Cost and Schedule Risks: A History and Practice at WSDOT

Since 2002, when WSDOT first introduced the Cost Estimate Validation Process, the
cost and schedule risks have been integrated into the risk model as part of the Monte
Carlo simulation. It is our expectation that the risk-based estimating models used for
evaluation of WSDOT projects integrate both cost and schedule risks.

Page G-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section H
H-1

Common Assumptions

General Overview
The common assumptions in this section allow completion of Cost Risk Assessment
(CRA) and Cost Estimate Validation Process (CEVP) workshops within the time allowed
and resources available. They have been chosen to produce the best results possible
under these constraints. Consequently, workshop results are, in general, limited by
these assumptions. It is also noted that project-specific assumptions are often also
required to allow a defined project to be put forward for evaluation.
Evaluated risks reflect a snapshot of the project at the time of the risk assessment.
The snapshot is based on the project scope presented by the project team from current
plans and available information. This means that the risk model is based on current best
estimates for costs, schedules, risks, and construction phasing and activity sequencing.
Risk identification depends on the expertise of the project and cost-risk teams.

H-2

Scope
Scope The sum of the products, services, and results to be provided as a

project (i.e., the Work Breakdown Structure).

Scope Change Any change to the project scope. A scope change almost always

requires an adjustment to the project cost or schedule.

Scope Creep Adding features and functionality (project scope) without

addressing the effects on time, costs, and resources, or without customer

approval.

Scope Definition (process) The process of developing a detailed project scope

statement as the basis for future project decisions.

(Source: Project Management Institute, PMI PMBOK GUIDE, 2004, 3rd Edition)

WSDOT may elect, on its own initiative, to revise the scope of the project by adding,
removing, or revising particular elements of the project. Such items are not risk events.
Instead, these can be treated as alternative project scenarios or deltas to the base
assumed project.
Scope variations (commonly referred to as scope creep) are uncertain items or events,
not entirely within WSDOTs control, that may cause variations to the scope and hence
changes to the schedule or budget. They are considered risks and will be captured as
risk events and included in the risk-based estimate analysis.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page H-1

Common Assumptions

H-3

Section H

General Design Criteria

It is left to the project teams to ensure they are using current and appropriate practical
design considerations and design criteria for their projects, and that any design
deviations or variances are properly documented and shared. It is also expected that
project schedules and estimates provided by the project team will reflect this.

H-4

Bridge Seismic Design Criteria

Note: Check with the WSDOT HQ Bridge Office to confirm seismic design criteria.

H-4.1

Bridge Seismic
Soil Liquefaction Design Criteria: Existing criteria are provided in the WSDOT
Geotechnical Design Manual. Bridge projects built in the lowland areas of western
Washington and in Seismic Design Category D may be affected by soil liquefaction
during seismic events. Designs for new bridges and the widening of existing bridges
must identify the liquefaction risk and estimate the costs of mitigating or resisting
soil liquefaction to maintain a stable structure during a seismic event.
Check with the Bridge and Geotechnical offices to ensure the current policy is being
used. The cost of bridge projects with liquefiable soils may include soil modification,
foundation retrofit, or complete bridge replacement. The assessment of these projectspecific risks and the importance of the structure must be addressed by geotechnical
and structural engineers.
Confirm that the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design manual
being used is current and applicable.

H-4.2

Wall Seismic
Confirm that the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design manual
being used is current and applicable.

H-5

Inflation Rate Information & Market Conditions

Note: Project teams need to ensure their base estimates are current and reflect current
prices at the time the estimate is prepared for the workshop.

Page H-2

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Section H

H-6
H-6.1

Common Assumptions

Construction Market Condition Risks

Number of Bidders
Data provided from the WSDOT HQ Construction Office suggests that, as the number of
bidders is reduced, bid amounts tend to increase. Typically, with four or more bidders,
the effect on the bid amount is negligible. To capture this effect, workshops need to
consider to what extent the reduction below the normal number of bidders will
influence the bid amount. A reasonable range of impact is: a 0% to 8% increase over
Engineers Estimate for construction. The probability of the occurrence of this risk will
be determined during the workshop. The project team must explain why they feel their
project will be subject to a noncompetitive bidding environment. In addition, as part
of the workshop process, strategies for enhancing the bidding environment in order to
attract more bidders must be discussed and identified as a mitigation strategy for this
risk. Common mitigation strategies include: timing of the advertisement and work
packaging.

H-6.2

Phase

PE

R/W

Reduced Number of Bidders

n/a

n/a

Construction Cost Estimate Risk

Impact
Probability Determined
+0% to +8%
at Workshop

Other Market Condition Risks for Construction

Other market conditions 1 are typically reflected in risks captured through the risk
elicitation process. Project teams wishing to capture additional market condition risks
beyond that described above must justify why they think their project is subject to
additional market condition risks. They must provide a well-documented explanation
describing what makes their project susceptible to additional market condition risks,
and clearly state the sources for characterization of the risk (probability and
consequences).

H-7

Right of Way Market Condition Risks

Guidance: Real estate markets are best characterized by those professionals familiar
with the geographic area. In consideration of this fact, the expertise of subject matter
experts such as region Real Estate Services and region Right of Way staff, or others
considered knowledgeable about real estate markets in and around the project area,
should be elicited. These subject matter experts can provide input regarding the cost of
right of way and uncertainty associated with the real estate market in the geographic
area of the project. Issues to consider are: zoning and speculation.

Caution needs to be exercised regarding market condition risks. While Risk Leads must be thorough in making
sure to capture and recognize risk uncertainties, they must also guard against the potential of double counting.
The analysis must clearly document what is being used and why.

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014

Page H-3

Common Assumptions

H-8

Section H

Preliminary Engineering Market Condition Risks

Guidance: In general, risks related to preliminary engineering (PE) adequately reflect
market conditions. Occasionally, there may be concern regarding availability of skilled
labor, a topic that can be discussed in the workshop, if necessary. If it can be shown that
project-specific market condition risks for PE need to be captured, they must be clearly
identified and documented. Sources for characterization of the risk (probability and
consequences) must be clearly stated, along with why this project has this risk when
other projects do not.

H-9

Design-Build (DB) versus Design-Bid-Build (DBB)

To date, the DB versus the DBB decision is being made project by project. Project
Managers are expected to discuss the overall contracting approach with their Regional
Administrator, and final approval must come from Headquarters.
Workshop general guidance: With regard to added or reduced-cost expectations
resulting from going to a design-build, look at categorizing the risks that you are asking
the design-builder to assume, then estimate the cost.

H-10 Fuel Price Inflation

It is assumed the Construction Cost Index (CCI) table accounts for fuel price inflation.
It is typically assumed that no additional risk factors are needed to address fuel prices.
However, in times of high volatility, the cost risk team may discuss and determine how
best to address fuel cost uncertainty.

H-11 Project-Specific Assumptions

Project-specific assumptions, that are in addition to or different from these common
assumptions, should be documented in the project workshop report.

Page H-4

WSDOT Project Risk Management Guide

November 2014