This chapter is from the book
This chapter is from the book
This chapter is from the book
Risk Communication Documentation
Risk management is effective only when the information derived from it is shared liberally across an enterprise. The documentation that supports risk management is extensive, including charts already shared in this text, such as the responsibility assignment matrix, the RACI chart, the risk breakdown structure, and the organizational risk lexicon. Each of these documents provides a layer of depth that others do not. Each document highlights a different aspect of the risk process, encouraging a deeper understanding of the risks, their sources, and their nature.
The single most significant document related to identifying and managing individual risks is the risk register, discussed in depth in Chapter 7, “Practical, Team-Based Risk Identification.” Although the approach to completing a risk register is discussed there, the framework for what it should include is incorporated in the risk management plan. As a component of the risk archive, the framework was examined in some depth in Chapter 1, “The Risk Structure.”
The key to any communication is clarity. The risk manager is responsible for clarifying terms, phrases, and frameworks that are intended to convey the risk message.
For every piece of risk communication, there are critical elements. They include
The author
The timing for the original communication and any reviews/updates
The recipients
The communications modes
There are also distinctions in the nature of the content of the communication. PMI® makes that distinction in the forms of data, information, and reports.
Data are raw facts, with no processing whatsoever. As such, it is the least biased of the content areas. When the term is used, it suggests that no analysis has taken place and no interpretation has transpired.
Information is data that has been processed in some way, shape, or form. Categories might have been created or data affinities (natural groupings) might be applied. Although the bias in information is limited, the simple act of sorting can be done under the umbrella of a particular perspective. As such, information is more interpretive and can afford greater depth.
Reports represent information in a formalized package. Reports create a frame around the information and can readily be skewed to afford the information a specific perspective. This is where bias is most significant in communications.
The Author
All communications have a degree of bias. As soon as data are processed into information, the processor’s bias comes into play. If that author catalogs all information according to risk sources (as in the risk breakdown structure), then there’s a bias to examine risk sources. If the author catalogs all information according to geographical region, a geographical bias can exist. The author thus becomes the arbiter of bias, even when such bias is unintended.
The author is important to the process because this individual also serves as a kind of personal archive. Many are the instances where risk information seekers will turn to the original authors of the risks or the responses to determine assumptions and intent.
For many aspects of the risk process, a single bit of data could have multiple authors. When that’s the case, all authors should be given credit for their role in the process. The varied assumptions and intent may reflect that a single risk is actually multiple risks drawn from a single data point.
The Timing
Communications timing can refer to when the information was originally documented or when the information needs to be refreshed or reviewed. By way of example, the book Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations was originally published in 1855. Since then, there have been 17 subsequent editions. The 14th edition, published in 1968, has eight quotes from the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. In the next edition, the count goes to 12 quotes. The quotes were not newer. They reflect the timing of the information capture and Dr. King’s perceived importance. Timing matters. Post-9/11 risk lists will not look the same as any captured in the twentieth century. Post-COVID risk lists will incorporate risks not seriously considered in the 2010s. The timing of risk information becomes very important.
By acknowledging the shifting tides of information, and documenting when those tides might shift again, the risk manager has a much richer data set with which to work.
The Recipients
In a sender–receiver communications model, there are filters on both ends of the model. The sender filters information through language, gesture, and tone. The receiver does likewise. If the recipients and their filters are not considered during information gathering or information dissemination, the true intent of the messaging could be lost. If one identifies a driving risk as “The bonnet might come loose, flying off at high speeds,” a failure to acknowledge the recipients and their culture can lead to broad miscommunication. In the States, for example, that risk might be seen as the loss of a woman’s hat. In the UK, it would be a reference to the hood over an engine. The recipients are a vital element of the communication, and their geography, social status, and culture will all play into an understanding of the message at hand.
Communications Modes
The clearest communications occur face to face. Per communications theorist Albert Mehrabian, that’s the setting where it’s possible to get 100% of the communication across. Take away any aspect of the communication, and some of the messaging will be lost. Mehrabian argues that only 7% of the likeability of any communication is conveyed by the words alone. A phrase such as, “Sure, I believe that,” can be said in serious or sarcastic tone. But as written, it’s impossible to discern intent. Thus, risk information sharing is most clear when we have the opportunity to go beyond the simple written word.
Mehrabian continues that another 38% of the likeability of messaging is conveyed through vocal inflection and tone. A telephone call may not be the ideal means of sharing risk information, but it’s definitely a major improvement over an email.
As for face to face? That’s the remaining 55%. This is a major consideration associated directly with those in the Agile environment (which PMI is heavily invested in). A cornerstone of Agile management practices is an event called a daily Scrum. The daily Scrum is a brief, heavily structured meeting held each morning with all team members physically present. The meeting is short. Each team member is asked the same three questions at every meeting:
What did you do yesterday?
What will you be doing today?
What’s standing in your way?
This structured data-gathering is crucial not only to Agile management but to risk management within Agile. The third question regarding potential impediments is a clear risk question. In many cases, this is a future-looking question, rather than a question about present states. As such, that means the question will often capture risks identified since the previous day.
Although PMI does not expect you to be able to identify Mehrabian or his theories, they do anticipate you will embrace the thinking behind his theories. You are also expected to know the three questions of Agile management Scrum meetings and which of the three most closely aligns with risk management practice.
For any questions in this area, understanding Mehrabian’s theories should suffice in coming up with answers. Recognizing that pure words are limited in their ability to share insights is important. Seeing body language and other paralinguals provides the richest communications experience.
One other aspect of communications matters here. Because of the fluid nature of risk management, consistency in documentation practice is vital. The forms and formats discussed earlier in this chapter grant the project manager latitude to focus on the risk practice rather than the library sciences.