Guide to Using the Project Complexity and Risk Assessment Tool

The greater the complexity of a project, the greater the potential for risk and the greater the need for a high level of project management maturity or capacity.

This set of questions is designed to build a profile of the project, its level of complexity and potential for risk and areas of concern.

For example, a large project estimated to take 4 years to deliver a technology renewal that impacts multiple business operations will have a higher complexity rating than a project that spans 18 months and implements a well-understood COTS⁸ product.

Project management could provide insight into all project deliverables, attributes, characteristics and project risks.

Team leads may corroborate or provide additional insight to project management input.

The project sponsor or director could have insight into goals and objectives of the project, funding model, stakeholder complexity and potential external risks.

References include the project charter, a preliminary scope statement, a project management plan (or a draft, if one exists), estimates and an organizational chart.

The “Project Characteristics” section contains a mechanism to invoke a triple constraint (cost, time and scope) of a project to help identify the most significant projects. Projects deemed to be of a high cost (both in absolute dollars and in relative terms), where time delays are of critical importance, and where the overall scope is very large, will result in an automatic maximum tabulation for this section. The triple constraint feature looks to highlight the importance of the overall cost, time and scope of a project to reflect materiality. The tool will display the maximum score for this section; however, the other assessment questions remain relevant and are to be answered. The feature is triggered when three specific questions are answered with a score of 5.

The rationale for establishing this feature in the assessment is to identify those projects that are attributed maximum values on the three critical project dimensions of cost, scope and time, and to highlight the added risks and complexities that accompany such dimensions.

A high score in this category is an indication that the project has a high degree of complexity and risk and will require more extensive project management practices and discipline.

For a project to contribute to an organization’s strategic outcomes and government priorities there must be a clear commitment and understanding of its business value, level of priority and a point of accountability.

This category is intended to establish the project’s alignment with the objectives and/or priorities of the department and the organization’s commitment to the project. Alignment requires:

• Consistency with the organization’s investment plan
• A consistent and accurate understanding across project stakeholders of the project’s purpose and role in supporting the organization’s strategic objectives or priorities;
• Alignment with the department’s Project Activity Architecture at either an activity or program level to support an expected result or outcome;
• Strong senior management commitment across relevant areas; and
• A strong communication strategy.

The senior project executive could have insight to:

• How well the project is positioned to impact on the expected results or outcomes identified in the organization’s strategic plan, Program Alignment Architecture, or Report on Plans and Priorities;
• Level of commitment of senior management, stakeholders, project sponsor and partners; and
• Strategy for sustaining the level of commitment (through communication, engagement, oversight, governance, etc...).

The project manager, project sponsor, senior management and other key stakeholders would be in a position to provide their respective perspectives on the goal and objectives of the project, funding model, stakeholder complexity and potential external risks. How well do these perspectives align?

Reference materials could include the organization’s strategic plan, Program Alignment Architecture, Report on Plans and Priorities, business case, project charter, investment governance records of decision, investment portfolio progress reports and the results of independent reviews.

A high score for this category may be an indication that the project will be challenged with respect to communicating and maintaining alignment with the organization’s mandate, objectives or priorities as described in its strategic plan, Program Alignment Architecture or Report on Plans and Priorities, and remaining an investment priority over the project life-cycle. Thus, the project may be at risk of not delivering against the defined baseline and support the organization’s objectives.

Cost and scope management complexity and risk typically increase with the introduction of procurement activities.

A well-defined procurement strategy can help mitigate certain risks during vendor selection. Similarly, strong project management discipline should mitigate the risks in related scope and schedule management.

When a project includes significant procurement activities, the importance of clear scope, requirements, risks and cost constraints is only increased. A very sound understanding of the scope, requirements, risks and time and cost constraints for both the project and any and all related contracts is critical in order to support the selection of the best contractor (vendor) and the awarding of the applicable contract.

The project manager and the organization’s procurement sector or branch could provide insight into the procurement strategy, vendor selection and contract award processes and possible vendor management control mechanisms.

Consider strategies and processes used by the organization to mitigate risk in vendor selection and to optimize compatibility and their understanding of the organization’s business needs, operational requirements and the organization’s project management practices and standards.

Reference materials could include requests for information, requests for proposal, Government of Canada procurement contracts, contract management plans, change requests and related records of decision, and independent reviews.

A high score in this category may indicate that there could be an absence of procurement management activities or processes that seek to ensure the appropriate selection and management of vendors. It may further indicate :

• Potential issues regarding the quality or compatibility of procured goods and/or services; and
• Potential risk of vendor dependency, scope and requirements management, cost and schedule control of the contract(s).

This category assesses the extent to which the project has the right skill sets in place to deliver the approved project scope.

How a project is staffed will greatly influence a team’s ability to support the established complexity and risk.

Selecting the right skills and experiences should mitigate risk associated with technology, vendor management and stakeholder management. For example, does the project manager have experience with the area(s) of greatest project risk, such as large scale vendor management or multi-departmental, multi-stakeholder management?

The project sponsor and/or project manager would be best positioned to provide insight into the team selection requirements and strategy, in addition to any mitigation strategies.

Team leads could share confidence in, and concerns with, the composition of their team and any mitigation strategies.

References include a (preliminary) project organization chart, a roles and responsibility matrix or equivalent, job or task description, CVs for key team members, and the results of independent reviews.

A high score in this category is an indicator that the project’s scope and schedule may be at risk due to potential human resourcing issues such as:

• Inadequate subject matter expertise, in particular, with respect to relevant and available technology, industry best practices or project management skills;
• Understaffing; and
• High degree of staff turnover.

This category is designed to determine the state of readiness of the business for adopting the product and or services being provided by the project.

For example, do project stakeholders have a consistent view of the operational impact to the business?

The project manager could provide insight into possible change management tactics and other client engagement strategies and the level of risk being faced as a result of possible operational, legislative or policy changes.

The client or project sponsor could be well positioned to provide a perspective on their state of readiness to adopt or implement the solution and whether the introduction of the new or enhanced product or services will be met with any resistance or reluctance.

Reference materials could include the project management plan, project charter and the results of any independent reviews.

A high score in this area is an indication that the project may experience challenges in transitioning the project deliverables or solutions (goods or services) to the client or user. Challenges may include issues with client or user acceptance of the product, extending the project's normalization or transition period, or a change in scope with respect to training or change management.

This set of questions is designed to assess whether the right strategies, controls, and project management skills and supporting activities are in place to:

• Plan a project effectively through integrating the planning elements of scope, schedule, cost and risk; and
• Keep the project on track through aggregating scope, schedule, cost and risk progress information, taking corrective action where needed to remain in alignment with the plan.

Project integration maturity speaks to the ability of the project sponsor (or director) and manager to analyze project information and make the best decisions to keep projects on track or to deal effectively with changes.

A project management office or the project manager could be well positioned to provide insight to existing processes and structures that enable project integration such as governance structures (especially related to decision making) and terms of reference, documented and approved team roles and responsibilities, project management plans, project management information systems, change control mechanisms for monitoring and controlling project work and progress reporting.

Reference materials could include the project charter or project management plan, project progress or status reports, change requests, governance records of decision and the findings of independent reviews.

A high score in this area is an indication that the project management framework of the department may not be sufficient or that the project team may not have the skills or experience to establish or employ well integrated control mechanisms, and, as a result, may be challenged with respect to control, prioritization, informed decision making, and effective and timely communication.

This category of questions is designed to assess various aspects of the requirements of the project. This includes the actual nature of the requirements as well as some related issues such as how difficult requirements are to gather and how well they are documented. To what extent do the specific requirements of the project add risk and complexity?

Even if the project is well managed, challenges or unknown aspects of the requirements are often difficult to predict, and, as a result projects may not adequately plan for required resource skills and experience, subject matter expertise, or budget, schedule, or risk mitigation strategies such as additional design walk-throughs, prototyping or proof of concept.

The project manager and the technical lead or equivalent, would be best positioned to provide insight to the scope, assumptions, constraints and risks associated with the project’s requirements or the requirements-gathering process.

Reference materials could include feasibility studies, business cases, business requirements, requests for information, requests for proposals, Government of Canada procurement contracts and the findings of independent reviews,

A high score may indicate that the project is not prepared to manage potential impacts on schedule, cost and scope as a result of poorly defined requirements. Even if the project is well defined, the requirements may be very complex in nature and the project will require a high degree of capacity in this area in order to be effectively managed.