To help you understand the utility of project risk assessment, we have put together a short interview that you can use to assess risks to your project.

1. How strong was the planning mandate from external power brokers when this project began? 
   A group with substantial influence gave this project a high priority A group with substantial influence did not carefully study or approve the goals of this project The planning was carried out even though the board was clearly opposed to addressing this goal
    
2. How thoroughly did the planners explore the problem before beginning to develop the proposed design?
   Planners made a concerted effort to involve the target group, to observe the system and to use data in problem exploration. Planners relied on their first hand experience with the system and feel they know its problems. Emperical data were used to establish priorities. No attempt was made to draw on the opinions of the target group or to observe the system.
    
3. Were outside experts and literature reviews used in designing the solution to the problems?
   People who have studied or dealth with the problem strongly influenced the design team. There is evidence that latest advances in the field were considered. Action was patterned after successful application elsewhere. Almost no attempt was made to draw on the experience of people who have studied or dealt with this problem before.
    
4. To what extent were significantly different alternatives to the recommended action developed during the planning process?
   Several different alternatives were developed, advantages and disadvantages documented and used to select the best alternative. Several different alternatives were developed but no formal documentation of advantages and disadvantages was done. No serious attempt was made to explore the alternatives that were really different from the one chosen.
    
5. Are funds available to support implementation of this project?
   Funds needed to implement have been committed. No money is needed. A funding source has been identified who appears sincerely interested in the project. Money is needed. Initial contact suggest that poential funders have many other options and have expressed pessimism about funding for this project.
    
6. How complex is the process for implementing this recommended action?
   The implementation process should be very easy to accomplish. Little system reorganization, red tape, or target group reorientation is involved. The change will involve some reorganization, red tape and reorientation but this should not be drastic Extensive reorganization, red tape, and target group reorientation is involved.
    
7. Is staff provided with sufficient background information and training to carry out proposed change?
   People who have studied or dealth with problem strongly influenced the design team. There is evidence that latest advances in the field were considered. Action was patterned after successful application elsewhere. Almost no attempt was made to draw on the experience of people who have studied or dealt with this problem before.
    
8. How will the change agent obtain feedback from the target group during the implementation?
   A system has been developed to obtain and respond to feedback. Communications are open and frequent. No system has been designed to obtain and respond to feedback but information communications are fairly good. No system has been developed to obtain and respond to feedback and communication with the target group is strained.
    
9. To what extent do written materials exist to explain the new project and guide implementation?
   Education materials and guidelines have been developed to help this implementation. Parties affected have no written materials describing how the new system should work.
    
10. How strongly were the endorsements of key power brokers regarding the proposal before implementation began?
    Key influentials not only endorse the proposal but committed some resources (time, money, etc.) to supports its implementation The key influentials have all endorsed this proposal. This is a controversial issue. Key influentials are about evenly split about this proposal. Key influentials have expressed uniform opposition to this proposal.
     
11. To what extent will implementation (or failure to implement) affect those who support or oppose the proposal.
    The outcome is much more important to supporters of the proposal than to opponents. Outcome is equally important to both sides The outcome is much more important to opponents than to supporters of the proposal.
     
12. How dissatisfied are those people most directly affected (e.g. rank and file), with the current situation that initiated this proposal?
    The people affected are very dissatisfied with their current situation. They beleive change is essential. While most of the parties affected are satisfied with their current situation, a small number of key influentials feel change is essential in this area. The people affected feel they can live with the existing system. They see no need for recommended action.
     
13. Were the key groups (who are important to successful implementation) actively involved in problem exploration and program design?
    An intensive effort was mde to involve all affected parties. Most of the groups were involved in planning. The most important groups were not involved in planning.
     
14. What are the perception of the parties affected about chance of successful implementation?
    Parties affected beleive they are capable of implementing the change Parties affected generally feel that there are several obstacles to overcome but they feel they may be able to do so. Parties affected generally feel that it is unlikely they will be capable of implementing the change.
     
15. To what extent has the target group resisted attempts to implement projects of the same general character as this recommended action?
    Similar projects have been successfully implemented There has been a mixed record of success and failure Implementation of similar projects have failed in the past.
     
16. How strong were the endorsements of middle level internal managers regarding the proposed design before the implementation phase began?
    Key middle managers not only endorse but committed their support to implementation. Key middle managers are keeping a hands off attitude regarding the project Key middle managers have expressed opposition to this action.
     
17. What is the change agent's reputation?
    Change agent is trusted and respected by the parties involved. Change agent has not established a reputation. Change agent is distrusted and not respected by the parties involved in the change.
     
18. How committed is the change agent to this project?
    The change agent beleives in and is excited about the project. He is committed to make it work. The principal change agent considers this project just part of the job. He is not particularly excited about it.
     
19. What power to force implementation does the change agent have?
    The planning group has power to force implementation. The planning group is supporting another party with enforcement power who has assumed principal responsibility for implementation. The planning group has no enforcement power and is the change agent.
     
20. To what extent do the change agent and target group share similar values?
    The change agent and the target group share the same values. The change agnet and the target group have quite different values.
     
21. How radical is the proposed design?
    The proposed design is consistent with the prevailing philosophy of the community or organization. The proposed change is a signifcant departure for this organization. The concept is new to most of the people affected.
     
22. What kind of concrete evidence exists to suggest this proposed design will work?
    Concrete evidence exists that documents the success of this change in similar settings Concrete evidence exists that documents that this program has almost always failed when tried elsewhere.
     
23. How do parties involved perceive the advantages of the recommended action?
    Parties involved feel that the proposed design has many more advantages than disadvantages. Parties involved do not have a clear perception of advantages and disadvantages. Parties involved feel the proposed design has many more disadvantages than advantages.
     
24. How hard is it to modify (without changing the critical elements) the proposed design?
    The proposed design easily incorporates many of the suggestions made for its modification. The proposed design would be very difficult to modify. Parties affected gernally feel that it is unlikely they will be capable of implementing the change.