Risk categories:
- Acceptance criteria not clearly defined
- Activities missing from scope
- Adding people to a late project, resulting in additional training and communications overhead
- Approvals get delayed
- Architecture is not fit for purpose
- Assumptions are inaccurate (events or circumstances that are expected to occur during the project life-cycle)
- Authority is unclear (unclear roles or responsibilities)
- Changes cause unexpected negative impacts on people, process or to the product itself, i.e. Change propagation
- Choise of technologies
- Communication between stakeholders is slower than expected, e.g. time to answer clarifying questions about the requirements
- Customer will not accept the finished software even though it meets specifications
- Conflict between stakeholders disrupts project
- Contractor doesn't deliver as promised, or the quality is unacceptably low
- Cost forecasts are inaccurate
- Customer requirements continue to change
- Delays to financial approvals impact the project
- Delays to recruiting processes impact the project
- Delays to stakeholder approvals impact the project
- Development tools do not work as expected
- End users ultimately find the product to be unsatisfactory, leading to redesign and rework
- Excessive multi-tasking
- Failure of suppliers to meet contractual commitments
- Failure to integrate
- Failure to meet projected revenue targets
- Failure to obtain appropriate approval
- Fraud or theft
- Friction between developers and customers
- Friction between the project team and the client
- Gold-plating (adding unnecessary, frivolous features or requirements)
- Handling multiple projects simultaneously
- High turnover on the project team
- High schedule pressure, resulting in reduced productivity
- Impacted individuals aren't kept informed
- Inability to secure sufficient resources for the project
- Inadequate or inaccurate information
- Indecision or inappropriate decision making
- Inefficient team structure
- Key manager leaving the company
- Lack of a change management process
- Lack of automation
- Lack of clarity over roles and responsibilities
- Lack of effective project sponsorship
- Lack of operational support
- Lack of risk management
- Lack of stakeholder buy-in
- Lack of testing
- Lack of transparency
- Lack of user input
- Layoffs and cutbacks
- Launch date is moved up with no adjustments to the project scope
- Language issues
- Legacy components, which are out of support
- Legacy components, which lack documentation
- Legal and regulatory issues. For example the product depends on regulations, which change unexpectedly
- Low team motivation, for example management makes decisions that the team disagrees with
- Market developments adversely affect plans
- Meetings are inefficient
- Merger or acquisition disrupts the project
- Micro-management, for example customer micro-manages the development process
- Multi-location issues
- New or changed legislation
- New technology
- Noisy, crowded offices
- Office is inadequate (for example poor internet connection, furniture, ergonomics, office supplies)
- Operation lifetime lower than expected
- Outsourcing to reduce cost
- Overestimated savings from new tools or methods
- Overly optimistic schedule
- Other tasks that cause delays, such as budget approvals, equipment purchase approvals, legal reviews, security clearances
- Partnerships failing to deliver the desired outcome
- Permits. For example, getting a work permit takes longer than expected
- Personality clashes
- Planning to catch up later
- Poor software quality, resulting in extra testing, design and integration work
- Poor team dynamics
- Poorly designed solution
- Project plans are abandoned under pressure
- Resistance to change
- Schedule was based on the use of specific team members, whom are not available to work on the project
- Schedule omits tasks
- Scope creep
- Scope not clearly defined
- Security vulnerabilities
- Status reports are inaccurate
- Team is inexperienced
- Team misunderstands requirements
- Team performance issues. For example, team members do not buy into the project
- Stakeholder conflict over proposed changes
- Stakeholders have inaccurate expectations, e.g. about development speed
- Steep learning curve, which leads to delays and increased costs
- Switching tools in the middle of a project
- Team members with negative attitudes
- Technical opinions
- Team member leaves before project is complete
- The project fails to match the company culture
- Unclear project vision
- Features take more time than expected to design and implement
- Uncontrolled problem employees
- Unexpected dependencies
- Unrealistic expectations
- User interface is low quality (poor UX)
- User interface isn't accessible
- Vendors start late
