Concern with uncertainty is a big part of the life of a project manager. Practicing project managers have long known that managing uncertainty is important to risk management. Uncertainty of a project reduces with time, as more knowledge in the hiding process is uncovered. The focus is on thinking about how the project might be performed by the competing tenderness, and the implications for tender evaluation and selection procedures (Dale F. Cooper, 2005). As part of the bidding stage of the procurement process, risk assessment can show how the semi quantitative priority setting approaches and indicators of the likelihoods and consequences can be extended in their application to tender evaluation.
Under the evaluation process there is a basic assessment structure. This structure has a phrase 1 and phrase 2. Both are closely related but phase 1 is concerned with establishing a baseline against which tenders can be assessed, prior to bids being received. Phrase 2 compares each submitted tender offer with the baseline, to develop a comparative risk assessment for each one (Dale F. Cooper, 2005). Neither phase can uncover all risk but what they try and do, is provide a comparison between the tender responses and proposed methods for fulfilling the contract.
The writer feels that phase two really offer a more detail and accurate assessment of identifying risk in more cases. The reason for this is that during the phase 1 process the output details in establishing the risk assessments are based on assumptions. In the phase 2 process, risk is assessed based on assumptions. In the phase 2 process, risk is assessed based on firm tender documents that helps produce a detail list of risk factors for each tender comparative risk assessment.
Since by definition risk is associated with uncertainly, we are generally unable to perfectly quantify risks. Nevertheless, in the best-case scenarios we are able to understand the behavior and manifestation patterns of risks and can take action appropriately, with a reasonable degree of certainty that our efforts will be effective (Yuval Bar Or, 2009-2010). This is why when it comes to quantifying risk, Phase 1 may produce the better risk assessment results. Reason being is because phase 1 does establish a detail risk baseline with WBS items that involves several stages that is examined by a project team to assess risk.
For the writer Phrase 2 offered an easier path to follow. It seems because the tender review process builds on the risk baseline established in Phase 1 and the documented assumptions associated with it (Dale F. Cooper, 2005). Meaning that during the tender evaluation, Phase 2 offers comparative guidance on risk factors to the project team. By effective communicating the risk to the project team and the stakeholders, ensure that those responsible for implementing risk management measures. In turn, everyone including the stakeholders understands why certain decisions are being made and why particular actions are required without having to say anything.
Phase 1 is a more compelling assessment of risk mainly because of all the moving parts as it relates to the risk baseline and its stages. The first three stages involve a detailed assessment of the project from a risk perspective by the project team, using the project documents and their own specialist knowledge (Dale F. Cooper, 2005). This assessment also determines what information should be sought from proposed contractor’s vendor’s stakeholders and establishes liability (Yuval Bar Or, 2009-2010).
These two causes are more similar than they are different. You need Phase 1 to get to Phase 2. Phase 2 process builds on the risk baseline established in Phase 1 and the documented assumptions associated with it. Individual risk likelihood indicators should be examining for both phases and revisions proposed and detail to ensure the reasons are understood and documented.
– Project Risk Management Guidelines Managing Risk in Large Projects and Complex Procurements. By Dale Cooper – Respect Risk. The Light Brigade,
LLC, Copyright 2009-2012. by Yuval Bar-Or, Ph.D – Liability Risk Management Process (www. Defence.gov.au), DMO-Office of Special Counsel