Risk Management: A Case Study of Robert L. Frank Construction Company

This case study focuses on risk management strategies for Robert L. Frank Construction Company. It includes risk identification, impact assessment, risk probability and impact matrix, response strategies, and stakeholder management plan.

Running head: RISK MANAGEMENT
Risk Management: A Case Study of Robert L. Frank Construction Company
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:

1RISK MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
1. Risk identification and impact assessment..................................................................................2
1.1 Identify and analyze impact of possible risks for the case study...........................................2
1.2 Record the risks identified in risk register.............................................................................2
1.3 Use of risk probability and impact matrix.............................................................................4
2. Risk management and reporting..................................................................................................5
2.1 Develop of response strategies to manage identified risks in case study..............................5
2.2 Identify and describe stakeholders to assess risk management activities..............................7
References......................................................................................................................................10

2RISK MANAGEMENT
1. Risk identification and impact assessment
1.1 Identify and analyze impact of possible risks for the case study
Robert L. Frank Construction Company was engineering as well as Construction
Company serving petroleum, chemical, mining as well as food processing industries from its
headquarters. The services for the company are engineering, inspection, construction,
consultation as well as purchasing (Snyder, 2013). The identified risks for Lewis Project are that
the project is over budget as well as was not progressing to satisfy the customer. There are
various slippages while delivering of materials, unofficial indication from the project scheduler,
and delay in delivery of the project key items. Therefore, the completion time of the project was
not meet with scheduled time (Vanclay et al., 2015). Therefore, the three main constraints of this
project are time, budget and performance constraints.
1.2 Record the risks identified in risk register
Description of risk
and impact
Risk
owner
Impact Likelihood Risk
rating
Probability Mitigation
Budget risk:
The Lewis project
goes over budget, due
to unplanned direct
cost, delay in project
schedule and change
in the project scope.
Project
Manager
5 5 25 Moderate There should be
proper planning of the
budget with
consideration of extra
resources for the
project work
(Kendrick, 2015).

3RISK MANAGEMENT
Schedule risk:
Due to increase in
project cost and loss
of revenue, lack of
project planning leads
to affect the project
time (Rahman et al.,
2016). It causes delay
in the entire project
work.
Project
Manager
5 4 20 Likely There should be
proper planning of the
project schedule so
that proper time of the
project is meeting and
the Lewis project
should complete on
time.
Performance risk:
There is slippage in
delivering the
materials at right time
to project client
which provides a
huge effect on the
project performance.
Project
Manager
3 4 12 Unlikely There should be strict
set of the project
material delivery time
so that all the
materials are delivered
to the client on time
(Sinclair, Doelle, &
Duinker, 2017).

4RISK MANAGEMENT
Likelihood
5 Budget
risk
4 Performance
risk
Schedule
risk
3
2
1
1 2 3 4 5
Impact
Table 1: Impact and likelihood matrix
1.3 Use of risk probability and impact matrix
Based on the identified risks, following risk probability and impact matrix is prepared
such as:
Probability
Impact
Trivial Minor Moderate Major Extreme
Rare
Unlikely Performanc
e risk
Moderate Budget risk

5RISK MANAGEMENT
Likely Schedule
risk
Very
likely
Table 2: Risk probability and impact matrix
From the above table, it is analyzed that budget as well as schedule risk are higher risk
which affects the Lewis project a lot. Both the risks are major risk which affects the entire
completion date of the project work. When the project is not completed on provided time, then it
affects the brand reputation of organization (Project Management Institute, 2013). Other risk is
project performance risk which affects the internal business operations of Robert L. Frank
Construction Company.
2. Risk management and reporting
2.1 Develop of response strategies to manage identified risks in case study
In order to become competitive in the business environment, Robert L. Frank
Construction Company must implement of risk management strategies to manage identified risks
so that the construction company can achieve business as well as strategic objectives (Kerzner &
Kerzner, 2017). The organization is not able to understand the risks but it is assumed that the
risks are monitored, managed as well as aligned with risk tolerance. The construction company
can achieve as well as manage risks for mitigating the threats as well as taking advantage for the
project opportunities. Following table shows the response strategies for each identified risks such
as:

6RISK MANAGEMENT
Type of project
risk
Impact Likelihood Risk Rating Probability Risk
Owner
Response strategies
Budget risk 5 5 25 Moderate Project
Manager
The project manager should undergo a proper
budget plan to estimate the cost for each
selected resources required for the Lewis
Project (Wysocki, 2012).
Schedule risk 5 4 20 Likely Project
Manager
The project manager should perform a schedule
management plan to schedule the entire project
activities (Nicholas & Steyn, 2017). Each of the
activities of project is assigned with resources
based on their skills and expertise.
Performance risk 3 4 12 Unlikely Project
Manager
All the materials required to complete the
project should be deliver to the client on time so
that there is no possibility of any slippage of the
materials (Pritchard & PMP, 2014).

7RISK MANAGEMENT
2.2 Identify and describe stakeholders to assess risk management activities
The project stakeholders help the project manager to perform ongoing risk management
activities for addressing interests in the project work. The Lewis Project was required for
purchase of orders meeting with the vendors. The project manager should conduct meetings with
the client weekly so that the issues related to the project are discussed and proper strategies are
taken to mitigate the risks (Rahman et al., 2016). The goal of this section is to provide risk
management framework for understanding as well as satisfying the project stakeholders. A
stakeholder management plan is prepared to identify the stakeholders and assess the risk
management strategies which are shown in below table such as:
Risk
factors
Board
of
direct
or
Senior
managem
ent level
Project
team
leader
Chief
project
engineer
Project
manager
Proje
ct
contr
ol
mana
ger
Inspe
ction
coord
inato
r
Financi
al
officer
Risk
concept
   
Risk
governanc
e
   
Controllin
g of
project
  

8RISK MANAGEMENT
risk
Risk
culture
 
Risk
related
project
activities
 
Risk
reporting
   
Limitation
of project
risks
 
Cyber
security
 
Privacy of
the data
 
Schedule
risk
 
Budget
risk
  
Performan
ce risk
  

9RISK MANAGEMENT
From the above table, the project stakeholders are identified those have assessed with the
project risk activities. The project plan is articulated the management strategies to engage them
in managing as well as handling the project activities. The stakeholder seems to have fully
engaged in preventing the project from the risks (Vanclay et al., 2015). The project manager is
continued with the problems which are cropped up with the vendor materials delay which are
occurred. The upper level management is aware that the issues related to this project work are
sensitive in nature. The senior level management is not provided proper support to Lewis project.
The upper level management is conducted of weekly meetings to pacify the project work
(Kerzner & Kerzner, 2017). The personnel of Lewis are integrated into the Frank organization to
point where it becomes part of the project organization.
From the perspective of the risk management, the stakeholders are benefited due to
higher level of trust with groups of stakeholders where they are contributed to decide and affect
in the future. There is higher quality of information to make proper decisions and wider range of
required services to the project clients (Nicholas & Steyn, 2017). Mitigation of schedule and
budget risk is when the stakeholders such as project manager should properly schedule entire
project based on project activities and business requirements. The performance risk is managed
by stakeholders by managing and building trust among the project team members. The
stakeholders should build trust with each other so that it can build strong relations with each
other (Sinclair, Doelle, & Duinker, 2017). Therefore, the company should remain a contextual
experience of the project risks as well as mitigate the issues which are relevant to the public
concern. The main purpose of risk management plan is to mitigate the risks so that the
management team can meet with client’s requirements. It helps to achieve profitability from the
business organization.

10RISK MANAGEMENT
References
Cleden, D. (2017). Managing project uncertainty. Routledge.
Kendrick, T. (2015). Identifying and managing project risk: essential tools for failure-proofing
your project. Amacom.
Kerzner, H., & Kerzner, H. R. (2017). Project management: a systems approach to planning,
scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Nicholas, J. M., & Steyn, H. (2017). Project management for engineering, business and
technology. Routledge.
Pritchard, C. L., & PMP, P. R. (2014). Risk management: concepts and guidance. Auerbach
Publications.
Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge
(PMBOK Guide®) (5th ed.). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management.
Rahman, A., Hasan, R. M., Agarwala, R., Martin, C., Day, A. G., & Heyland, D. K. (2016).
Identifying critically-ill patients who will benefit most from nutritional therapy: further
validation of the “modified NUTRIC” nutritional risk assessment tool. Clinical
nutrition, 35(1), 158-162.
Santen, C., & Oy, S. (2015). Risk Management Plan.
Sinclair, A. J., Doelle, M., & Duinker, P. N. (2017). Looking up, down, and sideways:
Reconceiving cumulative effects assessment as a mindset. Environmental Impact
Assessment Review, 62, 183-194.

11RISK MANAGEMENT
Snyder, C. S. (2013). A project manager’s book of forms: A companion to the PMBOK guide
(2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.
Vanclay, F., Esteves, A. M., Aucamp, I., & Franks, D. M. (2015). Social Impact Assessment:
Guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects.
Wysocki, R. K. (2012). Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme (6th ed.).
Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.