TWST3 – Pierre Garigue and Tommas Marchese
Another TWST3 write-up on another presentation that I didn’t write down the title of (and yes, I know this was 6 weeks ago). From my spotty memory and notes however, it was a general talk on doing risk analysis for software projects. The hand-wavey nature of the description might make this less useful for anyone other than me, but hey, it’s my blog. 🙂
- Probability and Impact are opinions, and are therefore influenced by the opinion holder’s biases
- Probability and Impact numbers might also reflect a person’s negotiating skill
- Know your own personal strengths and weaknesses around your risk analysis
- The part of their presentation that got the most discussion was their use of affinity analysis which I don’t have a handy link to a nice describing page
- This talk was also the catalyst for the Magic numbers discussion that was almost guaranteed to happen. I have a bunch of chicken scratch with no context written down, but the most clear point is ‘How much bigger is a medium than a high?’
- Instead of using buckets based upon some number system, use labels such as intolerable
- Challenge the value of a number
- Challenge the source of the number
- A system that was attributed to Tom Gibb was mentioned for visually clarifying the quality of a number
- Bold has high credibility
- Italics has low credibility
- Regular has neutral credibiltiy
- Statistics categorize things the way they were organized
- How good / complete is the dataset you are going to use to generate the risk numbers?
- What is Risk?
- A Bad Thing could happen
- Question asked in Parliament (a knock-on effect of the first)
- A willing gamble
- The person who takes the meeting minutes makes the history
- Bad risk analysis is a self-correcting problem – James Bach
- Send a confirmation email about your understanding of the events of a meeting — or better yet, use RSS or similar asynchronous channel