Common Program Risks

Risks fall along a multi-facted spectrum of likelihood and degree of harm. Relatedly, our individual personalities and styles are differently attuned to assessing and responding to risks. If some of us never tried the berry, then others may have starved. Conversely, some of us who didn't try the berry carried on to try something else. In the context of human services programs the stakes aren't usually so extreme, and there are processes available to provide a balanced approach. Sometimes the approach will work out well, and other times it will be a lesson learned for a future program (if the latter, the ideal is that the lesson learned has a life beyond being a bullet point in a report). 

Human services programs share similarities and have unique qualities, much like the people they are designed to serve. A powerful program is one that efficiently builds from the shared similarities, while focusing resources on the unique qualities. Program risks often occur with resources (i.e., staff, time, and budget) or with the outputs being produced by the program.

Common staff risks include over reliance on a single team member without redundancy, missing opportunities to mentor/mentee staff within the program team, and failing to resolve inter-team work flow pain points. Common time risks include the obvious lament of not having enough time to properly execute the activities of the program, unexpected time pressures from program stakeholders, and limited time to realize enough impact to ensure the continuation of the program. Common budget risks beyond limited funding, include over using funds during periods of confusion on next steps and improper tracking. Common output risks include low quality, miscommunication over client expectations, and failure to make decisions. 

Effectively monitoring where risks often occur allows the program team to protect the program in the near- and long-term. While program leadership is accountable to the overall success of the project, and it is their responsibility to establish risk-management practices as a critical component of program execution, it is the responsibility of the entire team to identify risks and feel empowered to elevate them until they receive necessary mitigation. 

Monitoring risks is also built on evidence and story. There needs to be evidence that a risk exists to avoid ruminating on unfounded possibilities. For example, if a team member is concerned about staff redundancy for certifying accessibility, then the evidence to provide is the number of staff on the team with the expertise and the impacted outputs. Adding the story element to the evidence underpinning the risk, will help people less involved with the risk immediately understand why it needs mitigation. For example, Team member X has a month long vacation in four months, with no additional team member able to complete the accessibility certification of the final report, which is a contractual requirement. The additional detail and specificity beyond the bare evidence creates context and grabs attention to the risk.

Bottom line: An empowered team that readily monitors common risks associated with program resources and outputs prevents them from becoming issues.