View source for Talk:Risk management strategy

== Review from Username111 ==

First of all, it doesn't look like the article is complete yet. Therefore, I will only give a review based on the abstract, structure and the risk processing chapter (doesn't seem complete either but I'll use what is produced so far)  which is currently produced (November 25th 15:00). However, the topic seems interesting and very relevant for any project manager (or student within project management). It seems clear that the article is under in-depth method description category, due to each of the proposed chapters will have method descriptions.  

I like the proposed structure of the article. I believe that it will create a good flow with a clear red thread. 

These are my specific questions and suggestions: 

* Maybe you could add a general example to each of the chapters. This could further strengthen the arguments of using the methods. E.g. you could give an example of an identified risk in "risk identification", analyze this specific risk in "risk analysis", assess the risk in "risk assessment", and finally propose mitigation action for the risk in "risk processing". This would give the reader a clear understanding of how to use the proposed methods in each of the chapters.
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' GREAT IDEA! I have included that in the article.  
* There seems to be a lack of proper referencing. 
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Should be fixed now.
** In the first sentence you reference to (Machiavelli, 1514), but there is no bibliography were I can find the actual article/journal/book.
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Added
** In the second paragraph in the abstract there is a lot of interesting statements of risk management.  I guess most of them are not something you have created out of your own thoughts, and therefore they need referencing to the correct sources. E.g. the definition of risk: "''A risk can be defined as the product of the probability of the risk and the impact of the risk''" needs referencing. Maybe some of the statements are common sense for a project manager, but I would still suggest using some references to academic resources in order to improve the quality of the article. 
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Saying a risk is a product of probability and impact is just the short(and more accurate) way of saying: "A risk is when something might go wrong". However finding were this was first used is too time consuming and of little consequence for the credibility of the article. I will therefor not try to find a reference, but thank you for the tip.
** Your dice example needs need a reference as well, unless you came up with it yourself of course. 
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' I am actually a habitual wargamer (warhammer 40000) where determining probability related to dice rolls is a major advantage. This is of my own creation.
* In the second paragraph you give two examples; when a problem is likely to happen but no impact, and when a problem is unlikely to happen and high impact. Maybe you could add a few more examples, in order to introduce scenarios were risk mitigation action is required.
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Example added.
* You talk about "injuries" in relation to the impact of a given risk. I consider an injury something that can occur to an person. E.g. Bendtner sustained an injury after scoring his 6th goal. I would propose to use: consequence, damage, etc., since it often will be the impact in the project/company, not the person.
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' injuries replaced with impacts
* This sentence is very hard to read: "''If there is no certain way to determine a risk’s impact or probability or multiple risks are compared without having similar impact type (e.g. comparing human casualties against monetary loss) a qualitative approach can be used, where the risk is rated from e.g. 1-5.''". Please consider revising, in order to make it more understandable. 
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Sentence removed.   
* Since you already mention there are several other apppm wikis about risk management, you could use these as potential references, instead of just saying they might be similar.
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' Sentence removed.
* The risk processing chapter:  It seems like the chapter is not completely done. I would suggest to begin this chapter with describing the different methods/strategies (accept, mitigate, transfer, avoid, improve), and then follow by when you would use these different methods/strategies. Ideally you could give an example in the end of a risk that has been mitigated using one of the methods/strategies. Remember proper referencing for this chapter as well.  
'''(MartinKruck reply)''' The current layout was kept, but your idea was considered and actually implemented at first. However due to the flow of the article, I reverted back to the first layout, since I felt it gave a better flow.

Other than these few comments, good job. Just fill in the chapters and make sure to use proper referencing, and the article will be great :)

Good luck!