Improving the use of risk matrices at NASA

Dillon, Robin L.; Klein, Gerald A.; Rogers, Edward W.; Scolese, Christopher J.

doi:10.1109/aero.2018.8396382

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…); a significant aspect of this is that different project managers will approach risk management processes with different degrees of rigor and vigilance. For example, an interesting observation from Dillon, Klein, Rogers, and Scolese [3] is how widely projects vary in their risk management process execution. Variation in project size is a reasonable factor contributing to variation in risk management methodologies and processes; Table 1 illustrates this by showing the number of unique risks documented in the GSFC Flight Projects Directorate (FPD) Cross-Cutting Risk Framework database between July 2015 and July 2017.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Valuing Rigor in the Risk Management Process

Dillon

Klein

Rogers

et al. 2019

2019 IEEE Aerospace Conference

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

NASA, as an organization, takes risk management (RM) seriously, and for most projects, the risk management process is exemplar. There can be challenges, though, with defining RM processes. For example, many different risk analysis methodologies are available, they can be applied with varying degrees of rigor, and they can have different value depending on how projects use them. In particular, risk analysis methodologies vary considerably in the level of quantitative detail, with more probabilistic techniques encouraged in some situations. We discussed these processes and methodologies with ten project managers (PM) at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). Our intent was not to prove with some level of statistical significance that some are more helpful than others, but rather to obtain a general understanding of how projects are identifying, and thinking, about risks. This paper describes some of the available risk processes and methodologies, and provides some insights about the benefits that can gained from their use. We provide an in-depth discussion of one quantitative methodology, Probabilistic Risk Assessments (PRAs), and conclude with a few insights from observed best practices.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%