risk assessment questionnaire - po ig 8.2 b2b system

8/11/2019 Risk Assessment Questionnaire - PO IG 8.2 B2B System

1/5

[1] Will user commit to a standardized development methodology?

Yes X

No

[2] Has user been briefed and is prepared to commit to change control?

Yes X

No

[3] How commit ted is senior user management to system?

Extremely enthusiastic X

Supportive

Neutral

[4] Prior i ty for project wi thin us er area?

High X

Low

Varied more than one branch with different priority

[5] How cri t ical wi l l system be to the user area cont inuing operat ions when com pleted?

Minor impact

Significant impact

Major impact X

[6]

Number of ou tside organizat ions involved in concurrence, approvals, and other decisions

relat ing to the s ystem?

None

1 X

Greater than 1

[7]

Number of di f ferent user branches involved in concu rrence, approvals, and other decisions

relat ing to the s ystem?

1

2 X

Greater than 2

[8]

Number of user sect ions o r subbranches invo lved in concurrence, approvals, and other

decisions relat ing to the system?

1

2 X

Greater than 2

[9] Number of unions involved in the system?

None

1

Greater than 1 X

[10] Number of us er si tes/instal lat ions involved w ith the system?

1

2-10

Greater than 10 X

[11]

What is the severi ty of procedural changes/disrupt ion in user department caused by p roposed

system?

Minor

Significant

Major X[12] Does user organizat ion have to change st ructural ly for prop osed system?

Minor

Significant X

Major

[13] Stabi l i ty of system requirements?

Requirements are stable and unlikely to change

Requirements are stable but likely to change

Requirements are unstable and open to further change X

[14] Status of cu rrent system docum entat ion?

Not applicable

Complete (may need rework) X

Acceptable but incomplete

None available

Risk Assessment Questionnaire - PO IG 8.2 B2B SystemThomsett R., Third Wave Project Management

USER ENVIRONMENT

Version Page 1/5


2/5

[15] What percentage of exist ing system funct ions are to be accepted on a o ne-to-one basis?

0

Less than 25%

25-50%

50-100% X

[16] Avai lable prototype o r mod el?

Similar system in existence

Subfunctions exist X

Subfunctions exist across branches

Nothing done like this before

[17] Project deadlines are?

Flexible may be established in conjunction with project team

Firm established internally but missed dates may impact user functions/operations

Fixed established by specific operations, legal requirements, direction beyond organizations control X

[18] User part icipat ion?

Fully committed expert user allocated to undertake significant project work

Significant responsibilities not full-time commitment X

Some responsibilities limited to review and approvals

[19] How k nowledgeable is user representat ive in proposed appl ication area?

Understands area and involved in previous implementation X

Some experience

Limited

[20] How know ledgeable is user in informat ion systems development?

High degree of capability

Previous exposure but limited knowledge X

First exposure

[21] What are commun ications betw een user area and IS like?

Good X

Fair

Poor

[22]

Is new user-con trolled technolog y/techniqu es (e.g., monito ring equipmen t, graphic s terminals,

cad/cam, etc.) required for th e system?

No X

Yes

[23] Is the project dependent on a single user expert?

No

Yes X

[24] Is there govern ment legislat ion that the project is dependent on to m eet deadlines?No

Yes X

[25] Is the project dependent on vendors and outside con sul tants/experts to meet deadl ines?

No

Outside experts

Vendors

Vendors and outside experts X

[1] Priority of pro ject within IS is?

High X

Medium

Low

[2] How commit ted is senior IS management to system?

Enthusiastic X

Supportive

Neutral

[3] Project team size (includin g full-t ime user profes sionals?

Less than 5

5-10

Over 10 X

[4] Total est imated development t ime in person months for system?

Less than 3 months

3-20 X

Over 20 months

[5] Estimated project development time?

Less than 3 months (elapsed)

3-6 (elapsed) X

Over 6 months (elapsed)

TEAM ENVRRONMENT

Version Page 2/5


3/5

[6] What is general at ti tude of user area towards c omput ing?

Good understands value of IS X

Fair some reluctance

Poor anti-information system solution

[7] How kn owledg eable is user in area of IS?

High degree of capability

Previous exposure but limited knowledge X

First exposure

[8] Project Manager (PM) availabil i ty, experience and training ?

PM with successful recent experience in managing a similar project (type and size) X

PM with successful recent experience in managing either part of a similar project or other projects

PM with knowledge but little project managerial experience

Inexperienced PM

[9] Key project ski l l and s taf f ing level requirements can be met by?

Team members full-time X

Mix of full-time team members and part-time outside specialists

Part-time team members and outside specialists

[10] What proport ion of project team wi l l be brought in f rom an outside comp any?

None X

Less than 25%

Over 25%

[11] Number of team members who have worked succ essful ly together on previous projects?

One person team

All

Some X

None

[12] How k nowledgeable is IS project team in proposed appl icat ion area?

Has been involved in prior implementation efforts X

Understands application area but no implementation experience

Limited

[13] What experience does the IS project team have with the prog ramming language/s to be used?

Significant within the organization X

Significant in other organization

Little experience

[14] What experience does the IS project team have with the database system to b e used?

No database to be used



Little experience

[15] What experience does the IS project team have with the data commu nicat ions?

Data communications not to be used



Little experience

[16] What experience does the IS project team have with the packages to be used?

Packages not to be used



Little experience

[17] New operat ions s ystem instal lat ion required?

No X

Yes

[18] Which of the hardware is new technology to the project team?

None or X

CPU and/or

Peripheral and/or

Telecom (e.g., remote lines)

Terminals and/or

Other (e.g., mini, micro, etc.)

[1] Proposal document f rom users/analyst?

Complete X


None

[2] Expected operation al li fe of sys tem?

One-off

Short life (< 1 year operation)

On-going function X

SYSTEM COMPLEXITY

Version Page 3/5


4/5

[3] System performance is?

Not critical or/

Critical due to throughput/volume and/or

Critical due to space/memory and/or

Critical due to response time X

[4] Current documentat ion for exist ing comp uter systems?

Complete (may need rework)


None available X

[5] What percentage of exist ing funct ions are to be replaced on a one-to-one basis?

0

Less than 25%

25-50%

50-100% X

[6] Avai lable prototype o r mod el?

Similar system in existence X

Subfunctions exist

Subfunctions exist across branches

Nothing done like this before

[7] The software wil l be?

Hardware independent

Dependent on parts of hardware X

Completely hardware dependent

[8] Addi t ional hardware resources of a type already used for project is?Not required

Required X

[9] Avai labil i ty of required addi t ional hardware resources?

Available X

Limited

None

[10]

Does the system h ave logical (user-dr iven) complexi ty as m easured by: Logical input typ es

(e.g., uniqu e input screens, record s, transaction?)

1-5

5-40

40+ X

[11]

Does the system h ave logical (user-dr iven) complexi ty as m easured by: Logical output types

(e.g., uniqu e output scr eens, report layouts?)

1-5

5-40

40+ X

[12]

Does the system h ave logical (user-dr iven) complexi ty as m easured by: Logical user v iews of

data (e.g., unique logic al f i les, DB2 tables?)

1-5

5-20

20+ X

[13]

Does the system h ave logical (user-dr iven) complexi ty as m easured by: Automated transfer of

input /output to other systems?

1-5

5-20

20+ X

[14] Does the system h ave logical (user-dr iven) complexi ty as m easured by: Logical enquiry typ es?

1-5

5-40 X40+

[15]

Amount and qual i ty of data to be transferred into the system on ini t ial load as measured by

logical user views?

1-5 X

5-20

20+

[16] Comp lexity of data element edit ing is?

Simple X

Complex

Highly complex

[17] Does data require viewing and/or update securi ty?

No X

Yes

[18] Complexi ty of algori thmic processing is?

Simple

Complex X

Highly complex

Version Page 4/5


5/5

[19] The sof tware developed must interface with?

Stand alone

Systems under teams control

Systems under others control

Complex systems under teams control X

Complex systems under others control

[20] The sof tware wi l l consist of?

Total outside package that meets all system requirements and/or

Precoded in-house modules written by project team members and/or

Precoded in-house modules written by other IS staff and/or X

Precoded/packaged modules written by outside vendors/sources and/or

Total outside package that meets 90% of system requirements and/or

Only modules written for this system

[21] What level language wi l l be used in the system?

Very high

High X

Medium

Low

A. User environment 232

B. Team environment60

C. System complexity 179

TOTAL PROJECT RISK 471

Notes

HIGH RISK

LOW RISK

MEDIUM RISK

MEDIUM RISK

Kowalski Consulting Sp. z o.o.

Low risk Medium risk High risk

User environment 32127 128223 224330

Team environment 32110 111190 191269

System complexity 33126 127218 219308

Total Project Risk 96363 366631 633907

Version Page 5/5

risk assessment questionnaire - po ig 8.2 b2b system

Documents