项目风险管理外文文献
PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT : FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS
Dr David Hillson
Manager of Consultancy, PMP Services Limited
7 Amersham Hill, High Wycombe, Bucks HP13 6NS, UK ABSTRACT
Project risk management has been recognised for some time as a formal discipline in its own right, and there is growing consensus on the elements which comprise best practice. However the project risk management field has not fully matured and there are a number of areas requiring further development. This paper presents the author’s perceptions on the directions in which project risk management might develop in the short to medium term, comprising five key areas. These are : organisational bench-marking using maturity model concepts; integration of risk management with overall project management and corporate culture; increased depth of analysis and breadth of application; inclusion of behavioural aspects in the risk process; and development of a body of evidence to justify and support use of risk management. INTRODUCTION
Risk management within projects has developed in recent years into an accepted discipline, with its own language, techniques and tools. Most textbooks in project management now include sections on risk management, and there is a growing library of reference texts specifically devoted to the subject in its own right. The value of a proactive formal structured approach to managing uncertainty has been widely recognised, and many organisations are seeking to introduce risk processes in order to gain the promised benefits.
It appears that project risk management is a mature discipline, yet it is still developing. Many risk practitioners would agree that risk management has not yet peaked, and that there is some way to go before its full potential as a management support tool is realised. A number of initiatives are under way to extend the boundaries of the subject, and there is a danger that risk management could dissipate and lose coherence if some sense of overall direction is not maintained. This paper presents five areas where the author perceives a need for active development, and which are proposed as an agenda for change in the short to medium term, covering the next three to five years.
THE CURRENT SITUATION
Before detailing areas for possible development, it is helpful to survey the current position of project risk management. This draws on the author’s experience as Chairman of the Risk Specific Interest Group (SIG) for the UK Association for Project Management (APM), his involvement with the Risk SIG of the US Project Management Institute (PMI), his position as a risk practitioner in the UK and Europe, and his view of current developments in the field as Editor of this journal.
Use of formal risk management techniques to manage uncertainty in projects is widespread across many industries, and there are few sectors where it is completely absent. In many areas its use is mandatory or required by client organisations, including defence, construction, IT, offshore and nuclear industries. Other sectors are recognising the potential of risk management as a management support tool and are beginning to implement risk processes within their own projects. In the UK, various government departments are implementing risk management on projects, notably the Ministry of Defence (MoD)1, and departments with IT projects which use PRINCE2 or PRINCE2 3 guidelines developed by the CCTA.
Risk processes have been applied to all stages of the project lifecycle, from conception, feasibility and design, through development into implementation, operations and disposal. The contribution which risk management can make at each lifecycle stage is different, but is nevertheless recognised as important.
Despite this apparent widespread take up of project risk management across business at large, the extent to which risk processes are actually applied is somewhat variable. Many organisations adopt a minimalist approach, doing only what is necessary to meet mandatory requirements, or going through the motions of a risk process with no commitment to use the results to influence current or future strategy.
A significant aspect of the project risk management field is the extent of current infrastructure support available. There is a growing academic base for the subject, and risk management is included in a variety of undergraduate courses. In addition, several MSc degrees in risk management exist, and the body of research in the topic is growing. This has led to a broad risk literature, including both textbooks and journals.
A number of standards and guidelines have also been published which include aspects of project risk management to varying degrees4-12, although there is no internationally accepted risk standard at the time of writing. The discipline is supported by several professional bodies, including the UK Institute of Risk Management13 (whose remit is broader than just the project risk field), and project management bodies such as the UK APM14 and the US PMI15 (both with dedicated SIGs for project risk management). Software vendors have also provided a range of tools to support the risk process, and a growing number of consultancies offer project risk management support to clients.
One important feature is the consensus on current best practice within project risk management. The APM Risk SIG is recognised within the UK as representing the centre of excellence for the subject within the UK, and internationally the leading position of the UK in project risk management is also widely accepted. A recent publication from the APM (the “Project Risk Analysis & Management (PRAM) Guide”16) has captured the elements of current best practice as perceived by the Risk SIG, and this has been expanded and expounded elsewhere17. This covers high level principles in the form of a prototype standard for risk management, and presents a generic process. The PRAM Guide also deals with organisational issues (roles and responsibilities), psychological aspects (attitudes and behaviour), benefits and shortfalls, techniques, and implementation issues, presenting a comprehensive compilation of current practice. Other best practice documents also exist, although not with such broad coverage18,19.
AREAS FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
The current situation in project risk management outlined above represents a position where there is broad consensus on the fundamentals, with a mature and agreed process, supported by a comprehensive infrastructure. The core elements of project risk management are in place, and many organisations are reaping the benefits of implementing risk processes within their projects and wider business, despite the variable depth of application. There are however a number of areas where the discipline needs to develop in order to build on the foundation which currently exists. It is this author’s belief that development of the following five areas would greatly enhance the effectiveness of project risk management :
? organisational bench-marking using maturity model concepts
? integration of risk management with overall project management and corporate culture
? increased depth of analysis and breadth of application
? inclusion of behavioural aspects in the risk process
? development of a body of evidence to justify and support use of risk management Each of these areas is discussed in turn below, outlining how project risk management might benefit from their inclusion.
ORGANISATIONAL BENCHMARKING
An increasing number of organisations wish to reap the benefits of proactive management of uncertainty in their projects by developing or improving in-house project risk management processes. It is however important for the organisation to be able to determine whether its risk processes are adequate, using agreed measures to compare its management of risk with best practice or against its competitors. As with any change programme, benchmarks and maturity models can play an important part in the process by defining a structured route to improvement.
The Risk Maturity Model (RMM)20,21 was developed as a benchmark for organisational risk capability, describing four increasing levels, with recognisable stages along the way against which organisations can benchmark themselves. The various levels can be summarised as follows :
? The Na?ve risk organisation (RMM Level 1) is unaware of the need for management of risk, and has no structured approach to dealing with uncertainty.
Management processes are repetitive and reactive, with little or no attempt to learn from the past or to prepare for future threats or uncertainties.
? At RMM Level 2, the Novice risk organisation has begun to experiment with risk management, usually through a small number of nominated individuals, but has no formal or structured generic processes in place. Although aware of the potential benefits of managing risk, the Novice organisation has not effectively implemented risk processes and is not gaining the full benefits.
? The level to which most organisations aspire when setting targets for management of risk is captured in RMM Level 3, the Normalised risk organisation. At this level, management of risk is built into routine business processes and risk
management is implemented on most or all projects. Generic risk processes are formalised and widespread, and the benefits are understood at all levels of the organisation, although they may not be fully achieved in all cases.
? Many organisations would probably be happy to remain at Level 3, but the RMM defines a further level of maturity in risk processes, termed the Natural risk organisation (Level 4). Here the organisation has a risk-aware culture, with a proactive approach to risk management in all aspects of the business. Risk information is actively used to improve business processes and gain competitive advantage. Risk processes are used to manage opportunities as well as potential negative impacts.
Each RMM level is further defined in terms of four attributes, namely culture, process, experience and application. These allow an organisation to assess its current risk processes against agreed criteria, set realistic targets for improvement, and measure progress towards enhanced risk capability.
Since its original publication20, the RMM has been used by several major organisations to benchmark their risk processes, and there has been considerable interest in it as a means of assisting organisations to introduce effective project risk management. Other professional bodies are expressing interest in development of benchmarks for risk management based on the principles of maturity models22,23, and this seems likely to become an important area for future development.
INTEGRATION OF RISK MANAGEMENT
Project risk management is often perceived as a specialist activity undertaken by experts using dedicated tools and techniques. In order to allow project teams and the overall organisation to gain the full benefits from implementing the risk process, it is important that risk management should become fully integrated into both the management of projects and into the organisational culture. Without such integration, there is a danger that the results of risk management may not be used appropriately (or at all), and that project and business strategy may not take proper account of any risk assessment.
At the project level, integration of risk management is required at three points.
? The first and arguably most important is a cultural issue. The project culture must recognise the existence of uncertainty as an inherent part of undertaking projects.
The nature of projects is to introduce change in order to deliver business benefits.
Any endeavour involving change necessarily faces risk, as the future state to be delivered by the project differs from the status quo, and the route between the two is bound to be uncertain. Indeed there may be a direct relationship between the degree of risk taken during a project and the value of the benefits which it can deliver to the business (the “risk-reward” ratio). It is therefore important for the project culture to accept uncertainty and to take account of risk at every stage. The existence of risk and the need to manage it proactively within projects should not be a surprise.
? Secondly, risk management must become fully integrated into the processes of project management. Techniques for project definition, planning, resourcing, estimating, team-building, motivation, cost control, progress monitoring,
reporting, change management and close-out should all take explicit account of risk management. It is often the case that risk management is seen as an optional additional activity, to be fitted into the project process if possible. The future of effective risk management depends on developing project processes which naturally include dealing with risk.
? Thirdly, risk tools must integrate seamlessly with tools used to support project processes. Too often differing data formats result in a discontinuity between the two, leading to difficulty in using risk outputs directly within project tools. It should not be necessary to use a specialist toolset for risk management, with import/export routines required to translate risk data into project management tools. At the practical level this would go a long way towards improving the acceptability and usefulness of risk management to project teams.
In addition to these tactical-level integration issues, there is a broader need to develop strategic risk-based thinking within organisational culture. The denial of risk at senior management levels is a common experience for many project managers, and this can dilute or negate much of the value of implementing risk management in projects, if decision-makers at a higher level do not properly take account of risk. This author contends that there is a need for a cultural revolution similar to the Total Quality Management (TQM) phenomenon, if the required degree of organisational culture change is to be achieved. As with quality, risk management must be seen as an integral part of doing business, and must become “built-in not bolt-on”, a natural feature of all project and business processes, rather than being conducted as an optional additional activity.
Such a development might be termed Total Risk Management (TRM), requiring a change in attitudes to “think risk”, accepting the existence of uncertainty in all human endeavours, adopting a proactive approach to its management, using a structured process to deal with risk (for example identify, assess, plan, manage), with individuals taking responsibility for identifying and managing risks within their own areas of influence. Clearly the implications of a TRM movement could be far-reaching, and further work is required in this area to define and promulgate the principles and practice of TRM, drawing on the previous experiences of TQM practitioners.
INCREASED DEPTH AND BREADTH
There is general consensus about the risk management process as it is currently applied within projects, covering the techniques available for the various stages and the way in which risk data is used. Further development is however required to improve the effectiveness of risk techniques, both in their degree of operation and functionality, and in the scope of the situations where they are applied. These two dimensions of improvement are termed depth of analysis and breadth of application. The current level of risk analysis is often shallow, largely driven by the capabilities of the available tools and techniques. Qualitative assessments concentrate on probabilities and impacts, with descriptions of various parameters to allow risks to be understood in sufficient detail that they can be managed effectively. Quantitative analysis focuses on project time and cost, with a few techniques (such as Monte Carlo simulation or decision trees) being used almost exclusively. There are a number of
ways in which this situation could be improved, leading to an increased depth of analysis :
? Development of better tools and techniques, with improved functionality, better attention to the user interface, and addressing issues of integration with other parts of the project toolset.
? Use of advanced information technology capabilities to enable effective knowledge management and learning from experience. For example it may prove possible to utilise existing or imminent developments in artificial intelligence, expert systems or knowledge-based systems to permit new types of analysis of risk data, exposing hitherto unavailable information from the existing data set (see for example references 24 and 25).
? Development of existing techniques from other disciplines for application within the risk arena. Risk analysis for projects could be undertaken via methods currently used within such diverse areas as system dynamics, safety and hazard analysis, integrated logistic support (ILS), financial trading etc. Tailoring of such methods for risk analysis may be a cost-effective means of developing new approaches without the need for significant new work.
The scope of project risk management as currently practised is fairly limited, tending to concentrate on risks with potential impact on project timescales and cost targets. While time and cost within projects are undeniably important, there are a number of other areas of interest which should be covered by the risk process. The breadth of application could be enhanced in the following ways :
? Risk impacts should be considered using other measures than project time and cost, and should include all elements of project objectives such as performance, quality, compliance, environmental or regulatory etc. The inclusion of “soft”
objectives such as human factors issues might also be incorporated, as it is often the people aspects which are most important in determining project success or failure. In addition, the impact of risks should be assessed against the business benefits which the project is intended to deliver.
? The scope of risk processes should be expanded beyond projects into both programme risk management (addressing threats to portfolios of projects, considering inter-project issues) and business risk assessment (taking account of business drivers). While there are existing initiatives in both of these areas26,27, there is value in moving out from project risk assessment into these areas in a bottom-up manner, to ensure consistency and coherence.
BEHAVIOURAL ASPECTS
There is general agreement on the importance of human behaviour in determining project performance28. This however is not usually translated into any formal mechanism for addressing human factors in project processes, including risk management. Future developments of project risk management must take more account of these issues, both in generating input data for the risk process, and in interpreting outputs.
Considerable work has been done on the area of heuristics29, to identify the unconscious rules used when making judgements under conditions of uncertainty. There is however less insight into risk attitudes and their effect on the validity of the risk process. If risk management is to retain any credibility, this aspect must be addressed and made a routine part of the risk process. A reliable means of measuring risk attitudes needs to be developed, which can be administered routinely as part of a risk assessment in order to identify potential bias among participants. Accepted norms for risk attitudes could be defined, allowing individuals to be assessed and placed on a spectrum of risk attitude, perhaps ranging from risk-averse through risk-neutral to risk-tolerant and risk-seeking. Once potential systematic bias has been identified it can then be countered, leading to more reliable results and safe conclusions. The impact of risk attitude on perception of uncertainty should be explored to allow the effects to be eliminated.
A further result of the inclusion of a formal assessment of behavioural characteristics in the risk process would be the ability to build risk-balanced teams. This would permit intelligent inclusion of people with a range of risk attitudes in order to meet the varying demands of a project environment. For example, it is clearly important for a project team to include people who are comfortable with taking risks, since projects are inherently concerned with uncertainty. It is however also important that these people are recognised and that their risk-taking tendency should be balanced by others who are more conservative and safety-conscious, in order to ensure that risks are only taken where appropriate.
Work is in progress in this area30,31, but it is important that this should be fully integrated into mainstream project risk management, rather than remaining a specialist interest of psychologists and behavioural scientists. The standard risk process must take full account of all aspects of human behaviour if it is to command any respect and credibility.
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
A number of studies have been undertaken to identify the benefits that can be expected by those implementing a structured approach to risk management32. These include both “hard” and “soft” issues.
“Hard” measurable benefits include :
? Better informed and achievable project plans, schedules and budgets
? Increased likelihood of project meeting targets
? Proper allocation of risk through the contract
? Better allocation of contingency to reflect risk
? Ability to avoid taking on unsound projects
? Recording metrics to improve future projects
? Objective comparison of risk exposure of alternatives
? Identification of best risk owner
“Soft” intangible benefits from the risk process include :
? Improved communication
? Development of a common understanding of project objectives
? Enhancement of team spirit
? Focused management attention on genuine threats
? Facilitates appropriate risk-taking
? Demonstrates professional approach to customers
The widespread use of project risk management suggests that people are implicitly convinced that it must deliver benefits. It is however difficult to prove unambiguously that benefits are being achieved. There is therefore a genuine need for a body of evidence to demonstrate the expected benefits of the risk process. Problems currently arise from the fact that existing evidence is either anecdotal (instead of providing hard measurable data) and confidential (accessible data is required, including both good news and bad). Also projects are unique (data requires normalising), and different between industries (evidence should be both generic and specific).
In the absence of a coherent body of irrefutable evidence, the undoubted benefits that can accrue from effective management of risk must currently be taken on trust. Overcoming this will require generation of a body of evidence to support the use of formal project risk management, providing evidence that benefits can be expected and achieved, and convincing the sceptical or inexperienced that they should use project risk management.
The intended audience of such a body of evidence would fall into several groups, each of which might seek different evidence, depending on their perspective on project success. Possible groups include the client/sponsor, project manager, project team and end user. For each group, the body of evidence should first define a “successful project” from their perspective, then consider whether/how risk management might promote “success” in these terms, then present evidence demonstrating the effect of risk management on the chosen parameters.
CONCLUSION
The short history of project risk management has been a success story to date, with widespread application across many industries, and development of a core best practice with a strong supporting infrastructure. Although project risk management has matured into a recognised discipline, it has not yet reached its peak and could still develop further.
This paper has outlined several areas where the author believes that progress is required. In summary, adoption of the proposed agenda for development of project risk management will result in the following :
? An accepted framework within which each organisation understands its current risk management capability and which defines a structured path for progression towards enhanced maturity of risk processes (via organisational benchmarking). ? A set of risk management tools and techniques which are fully integrated with project and business processes, with the existence of uncertainty being recognised and accepted at all levels (via integration of risk management).
? Improved analysis of the effects of risk on project and business performance, addressing its impact on issues wider than project time and cost (via increased depth of analysis and breadth of application).
? Proper account being taken of human factors in the risk process, using assessment of risk attitudes to counter systematic bias and build risk-balanced teams (via behavioural aspects).
? Agreement on the benefits that can be expected from implementation of a formal approach to project risk management, based on an objective and accessible body of evidence which justifies those benefits (via supporting evidence).
It is argued that attention to these areas will ensure that project risk management continues to develop beyond the current situation. Project risk management must not remain static if it is to fulfil its potential as a significant contributor to project and business success. The areas outlined in this paper are therefore proposed as an agenda for development of project risk management in the short to medium term, producing an indispensable and effective management tool for the new millennium.
REFERENCES
1. UK MoD Risk Guidelines comprise the following :
MOD(PE) - DPP(PM) (October 1992) Statement by CDP & CSA on Risk
Management in Defence Procurement (Ref. D/DPP(PM)/2/1/12)
MOD(PE) - DPP(PM) (January 1992) Risk Management in Defence
Procurement (Ref. D/DPP(PM)/2/1/12)
MOD(PE) - DPP(PM) (October 1992) Risk Identification Prompt List for
Defence Procurement (Ref. D/DPP(PM)/2/1/12)
MOD(PE) - DPP(PM) (June 1993) Risk Questionnaires for Defence
Procurement (Ref. D/DPP(PM)/2/1/12)
Defence Committee Fifth Report (June 1988) The Procurement of Major
Defence Equipment (HMSO)
2. CCTA,“PRINCE Project Evaluation”, HMSO, London, 1994, ISBN 0-11-
330597-4.
3. CCTA, “PRINCE2 : Project Management for Business”, HMSO, London,
1996, ISBN 0-11-330685-7.
4. British Standard BS6079 : 1996 “Guide to project management”, British
Standards Institute, ISBN 0-580-25594-8, 1996
5. British Standard BS8444 : Part 3 : 1996 (IEC 300-3-9 : 1995) “Risk
Management : Part 3 – Guide to risk analysis of technological systems”,
British Standards Institute, ISBN 0-580-26110-7, 1996
6. Norsk Standard NS 5814 “Krav til risikoanalyser”, Norges
Standardiseringsforbund (NSF), 1991.
7. Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4360:1995 “Risk management”,
Standards Australia/Standards New Zealand, ISBN 0-7337-0147-7, 1995
8. National Standard of Canada CAN/CSA-Q850-97 “Risk management :
Guideline for decision-makers”, Canadian Standards Association, ISSN 0317-
5669, 1997
9. “Guidelines on risk issues”, The Engineering Council, London, ISBN 0-
9516611-7-5, 1995
10. HM Treasury “Risk Guidance Note”, HMSO, London, June 1994.
11. HM Treasury Central Unit on Procurement – CUP Guidance Number 41
“Managing risk and contingency for works projects”, HMSO, London, 1993 12. Godfrey P.S. “Control of risk – A guide to the systematic management of risk
from construction”, CIRIA, London, ISBN 0-86017-441-7, 1996
13. Institute of Risk Management, Lloyd’s Avenue House, 6 Lloyd’s Avenue,
London EC3N 3AX, UK, tel +44(0)171.709.9808
14. Association for Project Management, 150 West Wycombe Road, High
Wycombe, Bucks HP12 3AE, UK, tel +44(0)1494.440090
15. Project Management Institute, 130 South State Road, Upper Darby, PA 19082,
USA, tel +001.610.734.3330
16. Simon P.W., Hillson D.A. & Newland K.E. (eds.) “Project Risk Analysis &
Management Guide”, APM Group, High Wycombe, Bucks UK, ISBN 0-
9531590-0-0, 1997
17. Chapman C.B. & Ward S.C. “Project risk management : processes, techniques
and insights”, John Wiley, Chichester, Sussex UK, ISBN 0-471-95804-2,
1997
18. “A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge”, Project
Management Institute, Upper Darby USA, ISBN 1-880410-12-5, 1996
19. “Continuous Risk Management Guidebook”, Software Engineering Institute,
Carnegie Mellon University, USA, 1996
20. Hillson D.A. (1997) “Towards a Risk Maturity Model”, Int J Project &
Business Risk Mgt, 1 (1), 35-45
21. “The Risk Maturity Model was a concept of, and was originally developed by,
HVR Consulting Services Limited in 1997. All rights in the Risk Maturity
Model belong to HVR Consulting Services Limited.”
22. “Project Management Capability Maturity Model” project, PMI Standards
Committee, Project Management Institute, 130 South State Road, Upper
Darby, PA 19082, USA. Details from Marge Combe,
https://www.wendangku.net/doc/b116472428.html,be@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/b116472428.html,.
23. 11th Software Engineering Process Group Conference : SEPG99, Atlanta, 8-11
March 1999 (themes include risk capability maturity models)
24. Stader J. (1997) “An intelligent system for bid management”, Int J Project &
Business Risk Mgt, 1 (3), 299-314
25. Brander J. & Dawe M. (1997) “Use of constraint reasoning to integrate risk
analysis with project planning”, Int J Project & Business Risk Mgt, 1 (4),417-
432
26. CCTA, “Management of Programme Risk”, HMSO, London, ISBN 0-11-
330672-5, 1995
27. “Financial Reporting of Risk – Proposals for a statement of business risk”,
The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England & Wales, 1998
28. Oldfield A. & Ocock M. (1997) “Managing project risks : the relevance of
human factors”, Int J Project & Business Risk Mgt, 1 (2), 99-109
29. Kahneman D., Slovic P. & Tversky A. (eds.) “Judgement under uncertainty :
Heuristics and biases”, CUP, Cambridge, 1982
30. Research by M Greenwood (personal communication, 1997), Burroughs
House Associates, Middlezoy, Somerset, UK.
31. Research by L Millward and L Hopkins (personal communication, 1997),
Centre for Employee Research, Guildford, Surrey, UK.
32. Newland K.E. (1997) “Benefits of project risk management to an
organisation”, Int J Project & Business Risk Mgt, 1 (1), 1-14
AUTHOR’S BIOGRAPHY
Dr David Hillson is Manager of Consultancy with PMP, with responsibility for all aspects of consultancy work. He has a particular interest in risk management consultancy and training. His speciality is risk technology transfer, assisting organisations to develop in-house risk processes, and he is a regular conference speaker on risk. David is also Editor of the International Journal of Project & Business Risk Management.
David is a Fellow of the APM, and is co-editor of the recently-published “Project Risk Analysis & Management (PRAM) Guide”. He is current Chairman of the APM Risk Management SIG. He is also an active member of the Institute of Risk Management.
项目管理外文翻译----ERP项目实施成功因素和风险管理
ERP项目实施成功因素和风险管理 参考国外的一些文献资料，一个成功的ERP项目，往往要花费数年时间，数千万美元得以完成。再回头看国内，随着ERP怀疑论的抬头，价格战的兴起，ERP作为一种软件供应商的产品，却有走下神坛趋势。就连ERP界的首领SAP 也推出了Business One产品，价格低于十万。不过，即便ERP软件能做到免费，或如IBM推崇的按需收费的境界，从整个企业实施的角度，考虑到人员、培训、维护、业务重组、二次开发、三次、n次开发，其费用应该也在数百万乃至千万人民币的规模。这对于国内企业而言，已是不小的数目了。 但是，还是有不少企业怀着美丽的梦想，踏上ERP实施的艰辛之旅。其中又有不少项目以失败告终。而对于那些最后的幸存者，是否就可以还戟入仓，饮酒高歌呢？ 事实上，企业在成功实施ERP项目后，将面对较实施前更大的风险。在未来的五到十年中，是否有一个扎实的ERP风险管理机制将决定了企业是否能在最初的ERP投资中真正获益。 1998年Thomas H.Davenport在哈佛商务评论发表了名为《将企业放入企业系统》的文章(Putting the entERPrise into the entERPrise system)。该文系统地提出了企业系统，或称ERP系统给企业运作带来积极及消极的引响。同时也直接提出了未来企业必须面对的一个风险：将整个企业放入企业系统中的风险。 按照美国项目管理协会对风险的定义，“风险”是指对项目有利或不利的不确定因素。 项目是“为完成某一独特的产品或服务所做的一次性努力”，项目的“独特性”决定了项目不可能是以与以前完全相同的方式、由与以前完全相同的人来完成的，同时，项目所要创造的产品或服务，以及项目可能涉及的范围、时间及成本都不可能在项目开始时完全确定，因此，在项目进行过程中也相应会出现大量的不确定性，即项目风险。本文以下所提到的“风险”是指对项目“不利”的不确定因素。 对项目不利的风险存在于任何项目中，并往往会给项目的推进和项目的成功带来负面影响。风险一旦发生，它的影响是多方面的，如导致项目产品/服务的功能无法满足客户的需要、项目费用超出预算、项目计划拖延或被迫取消等，其最终体现为客户满意度的降低。因此，识别风险、评估风险并采取措施应对风险即风险管理对项目管理具有十分重要的意义。 风险管理的具体内容 项目风险管理主要分为以下几个步骤：风险识别、定性/定量风险分析、风险应对计划编制及风险监控。 1.风险识别 风险识别，是指识别并记录可能对项目造成不利影响的因素。由于项目处于不断发展变化的过程中，因此风险识别也贯穿于整个项目实施的全过程,而不仅仅是项目的开始阶段。风险识别不是一次性的工作，而需要更多系统的、横向的思维。几乎所有关于项目的计划与信息都可能作为风险识别的依据，如项目进度及成本计划、工作分解结构、项目组织结构、项目范围、类似项目的历史信息等。 需要注意的是，并非所有的风险都可以通过风险识别来进行管理。风险识别只能发现已知风险（如：已知项目组织中某一成员能力不能完全满足要求）或已知未知风险（known-unknown,即“事件名称已知”，如“客户方人员参与力度不足”）；而某些风险，由于项目的独特性，不可能在其发生前预知
财务风险管理外文翻译
本科毕业论文（设计） 外文翻译 Financial Risk Management Although financial risk has increased significantly in recent years, risk and risk management are not contemporary issues. The result of increasingly global markets is that risk may originate with events thousands of miles away that have nothing to do with the domestic market. Information is available instantaneously, which means that change, and subsequent market reactions, occur very quickly. The economic climate and markets can be affected very quickly by changes in exchange rates, interest rates, and commodity prices. Counterparties can rapidly become problematic. As a result, it is important to ensure financial risks are identified and managed appropriately. Preparation is a key component of risk management. What Is Risk? Risk provides the basis for opportunity. The terms risk and exposure have subtle differences in their meaning. Risk refers to the probability of loss, while exposure is the possibility of loss, although they are often used interchangeably. Risk arises as a result of exposure. Exposure to financial markets affects most organizations, either directly or indirectly. When an organization has financial market exposure, there is a possibility of loss but also an opportunity for gain or profit. Financial market exposure may provide strategic or competitive benefits. Risk is the likelihood of losses resulting from events such as changes in market prices. Events with a low probability of occurring, but that may result in a high loss, are particularly troublesome because they are often not anticipated. Put another way, risk is the probable variability of returns. Since it is not always possible or desirable to eliminate risk, understanding it is an important step in determining how to manage it.
【免费下载】关于项目风险识别方法的文献综述
《关于项目风险识别方法的文献综述》 一般而言，项目风险管理包含风险管理规划，风险识别，风险定量定性分析，风险应对和风险监控。做好风险管理的首要条件就是要能够很好的做好风险识别，只有识别出了项目本身存在的所有重要风险，才能确保后续的风险定量定性分析，风险应对和风险监控能够顺利实施。如果某些重要的风险没有被识别出来，发生了遗漏，那后果可能会非常严重。对于项目本身，项目参与者，项目投资人都将会遭受重大损失。所以风险识别是风险管理中的基础，没有好的风险识别就不会有好的风险管理，同时一个好的风险识别方法还可以兼顾到风险管理后续的风险定量定性分析过程，即在风险识别阶段就包含了识别和评估两项工作，从而大大节省项目资源，提高项目成功的几率。 笔者认为好的风险识别方法可以大大提升风险管理的实施质量，俗话说得好“良好的开始时成功的一半”，作为风险管理的前期过程，风险识别是风险管理的基础，通过对于现有的风险识别方法的研究和比较，可以寻找出一种对于全面识别项目风险和机遇的方法，为提升项目成功的几率创造良好的条件。 风险识别中最常用的方法有德尔菲法，头脑风暴法，风险核对表，SWOT 分析法，项目工作分解结构，敏感性分析和故障树分析等。风险的范围、种类和严重程度经常容易被主观夸大或缩小，使项目的风险评估分析和处置发生差错，造成不必要的损失。项目风险识别的方法有很多，任何有助于发现风险信息的方法都可以作为、管路敷设技术通过管线敷设技术，不仅可以解决吊顶层配置不规范问题，而且可保障各类管路习题到位。在管路敷设过程中，要加强看护关于管路高中资料试卷连接管口处理高中资料试卷弯扁度固定盒位置保护层防腐跨接地线弯曲半径标高等，要求技术交底。管线敷设技术中包含线槽、管架等多项方式，为解决高中语文电气课件中管壁薄、接口不严等问题，合理利用管线敷设技术。线缆敷设原则：在分线盒处，当不同电压回路交叉时，应采用金属隔板进行隔开处理；同一线槽内，强电回路须同时切断习题电源，线缆敷设完毕，要进行检查和检测处理。、电气课件中调试对全部高中资料试卷电气设备，在安装过程中以及安装结束后进行高中资料试卷调整试验；通电检查所有设备高中资料试卷相互作用与相互关系，根据生产工艺高中资料试卷要求，对电气设备进行空载与带负荷下高中资料试卷调控试验；对设备进行调整使其在正常工况下与过度工作下都可以正常工作；对于继电保护进行整核对定值，审核与校对图纸，编写复杂设备与装置高中资料试卷调试方案，编写重要设备高中资料试卷试验方案以及系统启动方案；对整套启动过程中高中资料试卷电气设备进行调试工作并且进行过关运行高中资料试卷技术指导。对于调试过程中高中资料试卷技术问题，作为调试人员，需要在事前掌握图纸资料、设备制造厂家出具高中资料试卷试验报告与相关技术资料，并且了解现场设备高中资料试卷布置情况与有关高中资料试卷电气系统接线等情况，然后根据规范与规程规定，制定设备调试高中资料试卷方案。、电气设备调试高中资料试卷技术电力保护装置调试技术，电力保护高中资料试卷配置技术是指机组在进行继电保护高中资料试卷总体配置时，需要在最大限度内来确保机组高中资料试卷安全，并且尽可能地缩小故障高中资料试卷破坏范围，或者对某些异常高中资料试卷工况进行自动处理，尤其要避免错误高中资料试卷保护装置动作，并且拒绝动作，来避免不必要高中资料试卷突然停机。因此，电力高中资料试卷保护装置调试技术，要求电力保护装置做到准确灵活。对于差动保护装置高中资料试卷调试技术是指发电机一变压器组在发生内部故障时，需要进行外部电源高中资料试卷切除从而采用高中资料试卷主要保护装置。
工程项目风险案例分析
工程项目风险管理案例分析 风险管理的重点是成本、进度、质量、健康/安全/环 境（HSE）和资源供应等风险。 一、工程概况：指在施工程项目的基本情况,其主要内容包括:建设单位、单位、单位、施工单位、工 程地点、工程总、施工条件、开竣工日期、面积、 形式等。（自己写写就OK） 二、不确定分析（看着加吧） （1）费用不确定：在工程还未完工之前，该工程所花费的具体数额是不能确定的。 （2）进度不确定：工程完工之前，需要多长的工期因为众多因素的不确定而无法确定。 （3）质量不确定：我们只能尽量保证工程质量符号标准，而无法确定工程在未完工之前的质量。 （4）水文地质不确定：在勘察和实际所面临的水文地质等可能因为时间的改变而改变，无法准确定位。 （5）工程收益不确定：收益总是改变的，且具体数额不可能提前预知。 （6）移民拆迁等不确定 三、风险清单（看着加吧） （1）不可抗力：不能预见、不能避免和不能克服的
客观情况 （2）资源供应：包括人力资源、财力资源、物质资源和技术信息资源。 （3）法规变更：新的规范、规定。 （4）行政风险：新的行政命令。 （5）利率风险：利率变化使工程的实际收益与预期收益或实际成本与预期成本发生背离，使其实际收益低于预期收益，或实际成本高于预期成本，从而使工程遭受损失的可能性。 （6）通胀风险：投资行为所面临的系统风险，指因通货膨胀引起货币贬值造成资产价值和劳动收益缩水的风险。 （7）技术风险：是指伴随着科学技术的发展、生产方式的改变而产生的威胁人们生产与生活的风险。技术风险可依据工程项目风险定义进行等级区分。通常分为低、中、高风险三个等级。 低风险是指可辨识且可监控其对项目目标影响的风险；中等风险是指可辨识的，对工程系统的技术性能、费用或进度将产生较大影响的风险，这类风险发生的可能性相当高，是有条件接受的事件，需要对其进行严密监控。高风险是指发生的可能性很高，不可接受的事件，其
工程项目风险及其管理研究文献综述
工程项目风险及其管理研究 文献综述 风险管理已在工程项目管理方面得到了一定范围的运用。工程项目风险管理是风险管理和项目管理相结合的一门学科。一般工程项目风险起源入手，探讨降低工程项目风险、为工程项目提供安全保障、促使工程项目顺利进行的方法，其目的是寻找对工程项目风险进行有效管理的途径。而工程项目风险管理对工程的顺利进行具有很大的意义，对此国内外众多学者都进行了相关的研究。国外的研究有：1984年，美国项目管理学会PMI制定的PMBOK将项目风险管理作为一个重要组成部分，并与2000年对其进行了修正，足以可见PMI对项目风险的重视。另外 C.B.Chapman教授在《Risk Analysis for Large Projects：Models，Methods and Cases》一书中提出了“风险工程”的概念，改框架的构建弥补了单一过程的风险分析技术的不足。除此之外，国外的众多学者也从工程项目风险管理的各方面进行了详细的研究。而在此基础上，我国的学者对工程项目风险管理也进行了大量的研究，其研究现状如下：王蔚初（2010）中《现代工程项目风险分析和管理》中主要对工程项目风险的全面风险管理进行了综述，着手于项目风险的预测与识别，项目风险的评估与分析，项目风险的应对策略以及项目风险的监控和防范，阐述了有关项目风险管理的各个方面。 张根合，李渊（2010）在《工程项目风险管理初探》中指出，工程项目的启动需要经过立项、可行性研究、设计、项目计划等步骤，所有这些工作都需要面对一些变化。因此，如何识别、分析、应对工程项目风险成为需要工程项目参与各方妥善解决的问题。 张晓晨（2010）在《项目风险管理研究浅析》中指出，风险管理一直是项目管理中的重点和难点问题。所以他结合自己多年来从事项目管理的经验，对项目风险概念、研究现状、及项目风险管理系统模型进行了深入的研究，对项目管理过程中的风险问题做了进一步的阐述，希望能对广大项目管理人员起到抛砖引玉的作用。
工程项目风险管理论文 项目风险管理论文
工程项目风险管理论文项目风险管理论文 基于伙伴关系的工程项目风险管理 摘要：当前，中国现代化建设中各类风险事件时有发生，提升项目风险管理水平已成为中国工程建设行业面临的重要课题，并且需要项目参与各合作管理共同风险。鉴于伙伴关系模式能最大程度地整合资源，有助于相关组织的革新、学习和提高效率，创建了基于伙伴关系模式的项目风险管理模型。该模型系统地描述了伙伴关系应如何组织风险管理体系以及项目风险管理和评价与激励之间的紧密结合，使项目参与各组织通过资源最优化配置提升项目风险管理水平。 关键词：伙伴关系；工程项目；风险管理 引言 风险在项目中是普遍存在的，项目管理在一定程度上可以说就是风险管理。由于内、外部环境的快速变化，项目以及项目群所涉及的不确定因素日益增多，面临的风险种类也越来越多，导致的损失规模更是越来越大，这些都促使科研人员和实际管理人员从理论上和实践上重视工程项目的风险管理。工程项目实施过程中的风险与所有参与者（业主、承包商、设计、监理、供应商等）有关，涉及众多组织，如何使这些组织间资源最优化配置是合作管理风险机制所要解决的基本问题。国资委也指出，具有上下游产业关系或具有优势互补关系的企业间，要加强产品供应、技术开发、市场开拓等方面的合作，形
成战略联盟，实现资源、信息共享。鉴于伙伴关系模式能最大程度地整合建设业资源，有助于相关组织的革新、学习和提高效率[1]，有必要建立基于伙伴关系的项目风险管理机制，充分整合项目开发相关各方的资源，以有效提升中国建设业风险管理水平。 一、伙伴关系管理模式 1.伙伴关系的概念。伙伴关系应用于项目实施源自美国，目前主要应用于北美、欧洲、澳洲等地，已有十余年历史。伙伴关系模式是：“两个或多个组织间的一种长期合作关系，旨在为实现特定目标尽可能有效利用所有参与方的资源；这要求参与方改变传统关系，打破组织间壁垒，发展共同文化；参与方之间的合作关系应基于信任，致力于共同目标和理解尊重各自的意愿”[2]。从建筑业市场的自身特点来看，引入伙伴关系模式也有其必要性。建筑业产品的品质是由不同的组织决定的，这些组织包括业主、承包商、设计、监理、供应商和运行单位等。如果各组织间缺乏合作，将导致决定项目品质的各个组织的资源难以充分整合。伙伴关系管理模式则可以通过不同层面的措施实现组织间资源的最优化配置，从而提高项目的实施结果，最终为所有组织带来利益。相对于传统方式，伙伴关系方式可以降低项目造价1.76%，缩短工期约8.99%；在伙伴关系的基础上，美国、英国和澳洲的一些工程加入了激励机制，即风险共担、利益共享，这些项目实施的结果显示，相对于目标，实际成本降低了8.1%，工期缩短6.94%[3]。
项目风险管理案例分析
项目风险管理案例分析 1公司背景简介 河北H-A会计师事务所是河北省财政厅对国有大中型企业进行社会审计的试点所，承担省直大中型企业的审计工作。具有丰富工作经验，拥有一批具有丰富实践经验的注册会计师。 河北省某研究所是省直科研单位，现有50多位员工。在基于WINDOWS平台开发软件方面，具备较丰富的实战技能。河北H-A会计师事务所在审计工作中发现，很多企业都采用了会计电算化软件，对审计工作提出新的要求。社会审计工作的需要，对开发计算机辅助审计软件的愿望越来越强烈。所以就联合河北省某研究所进行联合开发 2实际项目分析 2.1项目介绍 该系统基于windows和sql server进行开发，开发工具是powerbulider。项目开发过程中，共生成程序源代码约数万行，项目开发的难度和源代码行数都比预计的要多。 计算机辅助审计软件具有工作底稿制作能力和查证功能；数据可传递，能自动生成和人工输入相结合，产生合并抵销分录；能自动产生勾稽无误的审计报告和会计报表附注；有灵活开放的系统，方便用户进行二次开发等特点。 2.2开发队伍的风险 开发团队维持在10人上下，事务所提供3人，开发单位6-7人，有一些人员只能部分时间工作，开发人员能够自始至终地参加整个项目的工作。开发人员的流动基本能保证工作的连续性。 2.3技术风险 数据结构复杂，关联比较多。需要创建新的算法或输入,输出技术；软件需要与其他软件产品的数据库系统接口；客户能确定所要求的功能是可行的。同时，由于当时审计软件在国内的应用尚处于起步阶段，开发人员普遍对该系统比较陌生，这也带来了相当的技术风险。 2.4客户相关风险 用户对自己真正的需求并不是十分明确，他们认为计算机是万能的，只要简单的说说自己想干什么就是把需求说明白了，而对业务的规则、工作流程却不愿多谈，也讲不清楚。有的用户日常工作繁忙，他们不愿意付出更多的时间和精力向分析人员讲解业务，这样加大分析人员的工作难度和工作量，也可能导致因业务需求不足而使系统风险加大。 2.5项目按时完成的风险 另外，这个项目也像许多其它软件项目一样，面临着竣工日期带来的巨大压力。 3实际的风险管理状况 凭借公司在以往的经验，在此软件项目的整个生命周期中，任何阶段都有可能有风险存在，WBS是完整表示项目，且伴随整个项目生命周期的项目要素，所以以WBS为基础进行风险管理，既可以方便地识别，标识相应的风险来源，又方便和项日其他工作一起，统一管理。 在软件项目中，各阶段主要工作简述如下：
项目管理文献综述
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------- 关于项目风险管理的文献综述 一、引言 项目风险管理是为了最好地达到项目的目标，识别、分配、应对项目生命周期内风险的科学与艺术，是一种综合性的管理活动，其理论和实践涉及到自然科学、社会科学、工程技术、系统科学、管理科学等多种学科。项目风险管理的目标可以被认为是使潜在机会或回报最大化、使潜在风险最小化。 二、风险管理理论国内外研究 1.风险管理理论的发展 风险管理作为系统科学产生于本世纪初的西方工业化国家。比较系统的风险管理理论源于美国。1931年美国管理协会首先倡导风险管理，其后以学术会议及研究班等多种形式集中探讨和研究风险管理问题，但在这段时间内，风险管理的内容和范围都是十分狭窄的。1955至1964年，诞生了现代学术性和职业化的风险管理，此后，对风险管理的研究逐步趋向系统化、专业化、风险管理己逐渐成为一门独立的学科。 20世纪70年代中期风险管理方面的课程及论著数量大增，全美大多数大学工商管理学院普遍开设风险管理课程，RIMS开始建立欧洲及亚洲风险管理团体之间的联系，这导致全球性的风险管理专业联合体的形成，风险管理开始进入全球化阶段。在西方发达国家，各企业中都相继建立了风险管理机构，专门负责风险的分析和处理方面的工作。美国还成立了全美范围的风险研究所和RIMS等专门研究工商企业风险管理的学术团体。1983年在RIMS 年会上，各国专家学者经过广泛深入的讨论，通过了“危险性风险管理101准则”，作为各国风险管理的一般原则。1986年10月在新加坡召开的风险管理国际学术讨论会表明:风险管理已经走向全球，成为全球范围的国际性运动。 ---------------------------------------------------------精品文档---------------------------------------------------------
项目风险管理分析中英文对照外文翻译文献
中英文对照外文翻译文献 (文档含英文原文和中文翻译) 原文： Project Risk Analysis Chapter 1 Introduction 1.1 About this compendium This course compendium is to be used in the course “Risikostyring is projector”. The focus will be on the following topics: ? R isk identification ? Risk structuring ? Risk modeling in the light of a time schedule and a cost model
? Risk follows up We will also discuss elements related to decision analysis where risk is involved, and use of life cycle cost and life cycle profit models. The course compendium comprises a large number of exercises, and it is recommended to do most of the exercises in order to get a good understanding of the topics and methods described. A separate MS Excel program, pRisk.xls has been developed in order to assist numerical calculations and to conduct Monte Carlo simulation. 1.2 Definitions Aleatory uncertainty Variation of quantities in a population. We sometimes use the word variability rather than aleatory uncertainty. Epistemic uncertainty Lack of knowledge about the “world”, and observable quantities in particular. Dependency The relation between the sequences of the activities in a project. Observable quantity A quantity expressing a state of the “world”, i.e. a quantity of the p hysical reality or nature, that is unknown at the time of the analysis but will, if the system being analyzed is actually implemented, take some value in the future, and possibly become known. Parameter We use the term parameter in two ways in this report. The main use of a parameter is that it is a quantity that is a part of the risk analysis models, and for which we assign numerical values. The more academic definition of a parameter used in a probability
第-8-章--项目风险管理案例
第8 章项目风险管理案例 项目需要以有限的成本在有限的时间内达到项目目标，而风险会影响这一点。风险管理的目的就是最小化风险对项目目标的负面影响，抓住风险带来的机会，增加项目干系人的收益。作为项目管理人员，必须评估项目中的风险，制定风险应对策略，有针对性地分配资源、制定计划，保证项目顺利的进行。 8．1 案例一：风险分类 阅读以下关于信息系统项目管理过程中人群风险分类方面问题的叙述，回答问题1至问题3。 8.1.1 案例场景 某公司召开会议，商量是否实施ERP项目，三个部门主要负责人就此问题发表自己的看法。 甲：我们公司不应该实施这个项目。现在我们刚把办公自动化系统搞好，还没有适应，工作效率也没提高多少，再上ERP 有些不适应，而且这个ERP项目花费太大。ERP在国内很多企业都搞失败了，成功的几率不会多大。如果我们也失败了，会给公司带来灾难性的后果。利用搞ERP的这些钱我们可以做一些短、平、快的项目，多招一些开发高手，提高公司的收益，而不是搞这些无端的风险投资。 乙：不应该一棒子打死ERP，ERP是一种新兴事务，ERP不是万能的，但是不上ERP 又是万万不行的。企业规模到了一定程度，管理和决策就是一个重要的问题。ERP是知识经济时代的管理方案，是面向供应链和“流程制”的智能决策支持系统，其先进的管理思想可以帮助企业最大限度地利用已有资源，解决管理和决策问题。但是实施ERP 风险很大，很多企业都失败了，主要原因在于项目实施的管理问题，没有及时识别项目中的风险并及时处理，项目监控机制不好，高层支持不够，老员工的适应性差等，最终导致“ERP天折”。我们公司以后想获得更大发展，应该实施ERP ，现在有些条件不够，整体上ERP不太可行，我们可以分步实施。我们可以借鉴其他企业实施ERP 的经验，先进行小范围ERP试验、积累经验，等以后时机成熟了，我们就整体实施ERP 。 丙：ERP 应该上，而且要迅速上，不应该等。如果其他企业都上了ERP，那么我们公司再依靠ERP获得收益就没有什么希望了。ERP本身就是一把双刃剑，虽然有风险，但是收益也大，现在我们的目标是收益，对于风险要想法化解。项目实施中要注意借鉴其他企业的经验，摸着石头过河，形成自己的特色，提高自己公司的管理和决策水平，争取把公司做大做强。小的、可以自己解决的风险自己处理；难以处理的、不确定的风险进行外包，实施风险转移；如果管理有问题的话，可以从专业咨询公司招聘顾问来担当项目经理的职务。总之，尽一切可能实施ERP，实现收益最大化。 【问题1】如图8-1所示，横轴表示项目投资的大小，纵轴表示项目成功的概率，A、B, C代表三种不同应对风险的人。请写出A,B,C的名字和特征，并且指出上述案例中甲、乙、丙分别属于哪一种对象(250字左右)。
项目-风险管理过程
风险管理
修订历史记录 A - 增加M - 修订D - 删除
目录 1. 目的 (4) 2. 适用范围 (4) 3. 名词术语 (4) 4. 概述 (4) 5. 过程定义 (4) 5.1 风险管理过程 (7) 5.1.1 角色和职责 (8) 5.1.2 入口准则 (8) 5.1.3 输入 (9) 5.1.4 过程活动 (9) 5.1.5 输出 (11) 5.1.6 出口准则 (11) 5.1.7 度量 (11) 5.1.8 确认与验证 (12) 6. 规程 (12) 7. 标准与规范 (12) 8. 裁剪指南 (12) 9. 模板与表格 (12) 10. 实施指导 (12)
1.目的 1.1 规范公司风险管理过程。 1.2 提供项目经理进行风险管理过程的说明和行动指南。 2.适用范围 2.1 机构 研发中心。 2.2 业务 项目实施过程中的风险管理，贯穿整个项目生命周期。 3.名词术语 3.1 RSKM( Risk Management):风险管理。 3.2 项目干系人（Stakeholder）：在一定程度上，对项目的实施和成果负责，或受其影响的群组或个人。项目干系人可能包括项目团队成员、提供商、客户、最终用户等。 4.概述 风险管理是贯穿项目整个生命周期的一系列持续性活动，分别为风险识别、风险分析、风险减缓、风险跟踪、风险控制以及风险状态通报。 项目风险控制小组有必要在项目组例会或其它场合，与项目组骨干或项目组全体成员一起对项目风险管理进行交流，收集项目组成员对项目风险的意见和建议。对于不便公开的风险，项目经理需要控制项目组内部了解的范围。对各个项目形成的风险统计数据一并贡献到组织级资产库。 5.过程定义 5.1 组织级风险管理过程 考虑到项目级风险管理的有效性，组织层面需要建立相应的活动来提供项目风险管理一定的指导，活动频率定义为不低于1季度1次。具体活动如下所示：
项目风险管理论文范本
天津大学 （高等教育自学考试） 本科生毕业设计（论文）任务书 天津大学继续教育学院办学点项目管理专业（可不填）班设计（论文）题目：建设工程项目管理中的风险管理研究 完成期限： 自2011年7 月 3 日至2011 年9月30 日止 指导教师高喜峰 办学点负责人陆培毅 批准日期2011.7.3 学生张三 接受任务日期2011.7.3 注：1. 本任务书一式两份，一份院或系留存，一份发给学生，任务完成后附在说明书内。 2.“检查人签名”一栏和“指导教师批准日期”由教师用笔填写，其余各项均要求打印。
一、设计（论文）原始依据（资料） 在当今信息社会和知识经济之中，人们创造财富和社会福利的途径与方式已经由过去重复进行的生产活动为主，逐步转向了以项目开发和项目实施活动为主的模式。而项目的开发与实施过程是一个复杂的、创新的、一次性的并涉及到许多关系与变数的过程，是一个存在着很大不确定性的过程，从而使得这个过程中会出现各种各样的风险。如果不能有效地管理、控制这些风险，就会给项目带来各种不同程度的损失。可以说，项目管理中最重要的任务就是对不确定性和风险性事件和问题的处理。 就建设工程项目来说，与其它行业相比，建设工程项目由于投资大，工期长，在建设过程中不可预见的因素较多。工程建设投资方会不可避免的面临着各种风险，从最初的项目投资评价到项目建成并投入使用，通常是一个复杂的过程，其中包括耗时较长的设计和建造过程。这一过程涉及到大量不同专业人员的参与，并涉及对一系列既相互独立又相互联系的活动的协调。此外，这一复杂过程还受到大量外界及不可控制因素的影响。如果不加防范，就会影响工程建设的顺利进行。建设企业在进行工程项目风险管理时采取何种形式的组织结构，采取何种风险管理模式，在风险管理的过程中如何识别风险、分析风险、应对风险、控制风险和监督风险才能使投资企业更好的管理风险、驾驭风险，对于建设工程项目风险管理的研究显得尤为重要。 当前，我国风险管理（包括建设工程项目风险管理）研究还处于初级阶段。这也导致对于建设工程项目的风险分析与管理还很不完善。这也说明建设工程项目风险管理研究需要进一步加强。 研究目的在于进一步强化我国建设工程项目风险管理，进而推动我国建设工程的更快发展。同时也为其他相关企业的风险管理通过借鉴。
项目风险管理文献综述
项目风险管理文献综述 项目的实现过程是一个存在着很多不确定性的过程，因为这一过程是一个复杂的、一次性的、创新性的并且涉及许多关系与变数的过程。 项目风险管理是为了最好地达到项目的目标，识别、分配、应对项目生命周期内风险的科学与艺术，是一种综合性的管理活动，其理论和实践涉及到自然科学、社会科学、工程技术、系统科学、管理科学等多种学科。项目风险管理的目标可以被认为是使潜在机会或回报最大化、使潜在风险最小化。 针对当前我国工程建设中，对风险认识和估计不足，在建设过程中又没有有效的风险防范措施等情况。本文着重从风险的认识、特点、产生原因进行分析，介绍了它的基本概念及其常用的几种风险识别、风险评价和风险应对和监控的方法，提出控制风险的对策措施。 项目风险管理 项目风险是指由于项目所处的环境和条件本身的不确定性，和项目业主、客户、项目组织或项目的某个当事人主观上不能准确预见或控制因数影响，使项目的最终结果与当事人的期望产生悖离，并存在给当事人带来损失的可能性。 工程项目风险的产生 1.政策风险 政策风险是项目实施过程中，由于国家、行业的主管部门对所实施的项目相关的政策、法律法规、规划或标准的更新、更改给项目所带来的风险。对这类风险的管理和控制，首先要保证所实施的项目符合国家的产业政策，还应密切注意与项目相关的法律法规及标准可能发生的变化。如调整国民经济计划、产业政策，强行下令已开工的项目下马，或对一些企业实行关停并转等，许多工程业主不得不因此而改变其投资计划，因此，不可避免要遭受重大损失。再者由于政府角色与地位的特殊性，一旦政府换届就有可能导致工程项目发生变更，由此造成工程项目独特的“政治风险”。 2.市场风险 由于产品和原材料的市场价格及供需变化，产品的市场竞争能力等因素给项目造成的风险。该风险是竞争性项目最常遇到的风险，对项目的收益影响至关重要。避免或减少该风险必须采取综合性措施。一是前期做好市场调研，把握项目的产品市场和原材料市场的变化趋势;在选择时，注重项目产品的生命周期，避开进入衰退期的项目，选择具有市场生命力和发展前景的项目，避免市场风险。二是结合企业发展战略，做好产品市场定位，运用营销策略来降低或化解不利因素的影响，从而减少、降低市场风险。 3.管理风险 指项目管理过程中，由于管理层决策失误、战略调整等管理方面的因素造成的风险，是一种人为的风险，具有主观性、可控性，与项目的组织、管理实施有直接联系。 4.财务风险 项目在实施过程中由于资金融通、资金周转、利率汇率变化使项目可能发生超投资或资金短
建设项目风险管理论文
关于建设项目风险管理的相关文献综述 东南大学土木工程学院，郁锋君（05107327） 摘要：现代工程项目往往具有规模大、技术新颖、结构复杂、持续时间长、参与单位多等特点，这些特点导致了建设工程项目风险的多样性和普遍性。在这种情况下，建设项目风险管理就显的十分重要，如何分析风险、提出对策、提出管理制度，本文将总结性地进行叙述。 关键字：风险识别风险评价风险控制 正文： 第一部分文献摘要 ①郑文选在《谈工程项目风险管理》里指出：“风险管理属于一种高层次的综合性管理工作，它是分析和处理由不确定性产生的各种问题的一整套方法，包括风险的辩识、风险的估计及风险的控制。”“风险分析的大部分内容是关于技术风险、设备质量风险和可靠性工程问题，而关于风险评价的量度及定量分析的技术方法很少，因此，风险管理仍是一门不完善和不成熟的学科。” ②王玉娥、黄泽鹏在《工程项目管理的风险分析与防范》中指出：“风险有以下两种定义：①风险就是与出现损失有关的不确定性；②风险就是在给定的情况下和特定时间内，可能发生的结果之间的差异。” ③杨存义在《建设工程风险管理现状及防范措施》中指出“我国的工程风险管理水平低下，相关法规措施相对滞后，其主要表现为：一是建设各方对建立工程风险意识淡薄。工程担保和工程保险在建筑企业和金融业中缺乏其重要性和必要性的认识。商业银行对政策性贷款投资的工程项目没有必须进行投保的要求，投资主体虽然从所有制结构上发生了变化，但提高工程风险意识依然不强，未能从工程风险管理人手，降低和转移风险条件。二是担保市场尚未建立。银行虽然开展了一些保函业务，但在建筑业中的各类保险业务开展较欠缺，险种、保单形式单一，缺乏建筑业特点，不能适应工程担保需要，难以提供工程风险管理的必备条件。三是缺乏中介代理机构。” ④赵根山在《浅议我国建筑工程风险管理制度体系的建立、推行和完善》中指出：“风险是指对未来收益和损失的不确定性。它是客观存在的，是不以人们意志为转移的。大的风险事件一旦发生就会给国家、地方和企业带来巨大损失。工程建设属于复杂的系统工程，由于其自身具有的特征决定了它比一般项目具有更大的风险性。随着市场经济的发展，建立适合我国国情的工程风险管理制度体系，树立诚信守法的社会风气，对维护和推进建筑业和相关产业可持续、健康发展，保护经营者的合法权益等具有十分重大的意义。” ⑤J.H.M.T ah and V.Carr在《KNOWLEDGE-BASED APPROACH TO CONSTRUCTION PROJECT RISK MANAGEMENT》中指出：“Many
企业风险管理中英文对照外文翻译文献
企业风险管理中英文对照外文翻译文献 (文档含英文原文和中文翻译) 原文： Risk Management This chapter reviews and discusses the basic issues and principles of risk management, including: risk acceptability (tolerability); risk reduction and the ALARP principle; cautionary and precautionary principles. And presents a case study showing the importance of these issues and principles in a practical management context. Before we take a closer look, let us briefly address some basic features of risk management. The purpose of risk management is to ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect people, the environment, and assets from possible harmful consequences of the activities being undertaken, as well as to balance different concerns, in particular risks and costs. Risk management includes measures both to avoid the hazards and to
全过程咨询风险管理
4全过程工程咨询风险管理 4.1全过程工程咨询项目各阶段的主要风险 4.1.1项目决策阶段的主要风险 市场风险：由于对宏观经济形势（包括国民经济发展状况，经济政策及经济状况）的分析和对市场供需情况（包括主要产品的市场供需状况，价格走势及对竞争力的判断）和预测与实际情况不符;市场调研报告(包括市场调查、预测、市场竞争策略、营销策略等内容)及其论证或者评估不正确或不可靠所引起的风险。 4.1.2技术风险 1工艺技术选用，在先进适用性，安全可靠性，经济合理性，耐久性等方面，存在问题所引起的风险。 2由于对产品品种、建设规模、建设方案和建设地址的选择报告(包括建设条件、资源状况、材料来源与供应、总平面布置、环保、安全、技术经济分析等内容）。可行性研究及其论证或评估不正确或不可靠引起的风险。 4.1.3筹、融资风险 由于投资估算和资金筹措渠道与筹措方式不合理或不可靠引起风险。
4.1.4环境风险 由于建设地区的社会、法律、经济、文化、自然地理、基础设施、社会服务等环境因素对项目目标产生不利影响所引起的风险。 4.1.5项目招、投标阶段的主要风险 项目成立后到承包合同签订之前，招、投标阶段的主要风险 1招标风险：风险承担人是项目主办人(单位）。 2投标（报价）风险：风险承担人是承包商。 3合同风险：风险承担人为双方，但主要是承包商。 4.1.6项目实施阶段的主要风险 承包合同签订后，项目实施阶段的主要风险： 1勘察设计风险 1设计风险 2采购风险 3项目管理风险（质量、安全、费用、进度等风险） 4.1.7项目收尾阶段的主要风险 1合同收尾 2管理收尾 此阶段的风险承担人主要是项目业主。
财务风险管理外文翻译英文文献
财务风险管理 中英文资料翻译 Financial Risk Management Although financial risk has increased significantly in recent years, risk and risk management are not contemporary issues. The result of increasingly global markets is that risk may originate with events thousands of miles away that have nothing to do with the domestic market. Information is available instantaneously, which means that change, and subsequent market reactions, occur very quickly. The economic climate and markets can be affected very quickly by changes in exchange rates, interest rates, and commodity prices. Counterparties can rapidly become problematic. As a result, it is important to ensure financial risks are identified and managed appropriately. Preparation is a key component of risk management. What Is Risk? Risk provides the basis for opportunity. The terms risk and exposure have subtle differences in their meaning. Risk refers to the probability of loss, while exposure is the possibility of loss, although they are often used interchangeably. Risk arises as a result of exposure. Exposure to financial markets affects most organizations, either directly or indirectly. When an organization has financial market exposure, there is a possibility of loss but also an opportunity for gain or profit. Financial market exposure may provide strategic or competitive benefits. Risk is the likelihood of losses resulting from events such as changes in market prices. Events with a low probability of occurring, but that may result in a high loss, are particularly troublesome because they are often not anticipated. Put another way, risk is the probable variability of returns. Since it is not always possible or desirable to eliminate risk, understanding it is an important step in determining how to manage it. Identifying exposures and risks forms the basis for an appropriate financial risk management strategy.