I would like to add a caveat to the matrix style of assessment.
The methodology fails with high consequence hazards in low likelihood occurrence areas
If a risk is seen as life threatening it should always be graded as high (16 in the example above) if it can happen, whatever the chance of occurrence.
I cannot countenance risk assessing something that can kill without putting into place any and all accommodations that will reduce that risk level.
The method also works in this case. This risk assessment method helps you to assign limited resources to address risks in the most efficient way or assess the impact of changes. The method requires boundary conditions and some experience. If you have high consequence hazards, you take measures to lower the odds of occurrence to an acceptable level.
The method also gets a little warped when defining the consequence levels. A loss rate that may be considered excellent in a military assault may not be suitable to make the parents of a boy scout group happy.
Previous Topic
Index
