
Delacroix
Any reasonable attempt for measuring risks is based on history. The project is made by people. This requires dealing with each person history, both technical and personal.
Choosing the methodology, tools and then setting up procedures are tasks that must be matched with the “available” people. The first and most important homework for management (sponsors and project managers) is focused on creating a “system” for building the project history. It is about the logic to be applied for understanding the background and then choose where and how set the foundations.
The research can be limited to few areas, for example:
- Producers craftsmanship
- Stakeholders’ openness about both domain and their organizational structure
- Firms’ financial solidity
- Management skills
- Market knowledge
Since its invention from Thucydides, history has become an efficient and strong tool for governing. Having the correct information can help in the process of making the right (suitable) decisions.
“Every saint has a past. Every sinner has a future”
This aphorism from O. Wilde is presented just for defining the concept of truth, when it is related to the judgment to be adopted during staffing.
Any reference shall be encased on the circumstances that produced it. Good or bad (related to references) shall be understood in relation of the person that made the statement.
The sum of the factors (e.g. technical and cultural environment) can describe the person to be examined. If the similarities collaborated by robust and unbiased tests, match with the current situation, the choice can be accepted. Again the correct dosage of a “scientific” approach mixed with the social and personal wisdom help to create the system for building the project.
Echo and Narcissus
Not all organizations are plagued by Macbeth obsession for secrecy. Companies and organizations that need security for their data (from bank to military), if well managed, are extremely conscious of the importance of making available the correct information to the right person.
In my experience, the bias toward secluding information could be easily found in the middle management. Without making a sociological analysis (there is a nice post about this from JD), there are some reasons for this behavior is related to the necessity for hiding (to the upper echelons) how the beautiful guidelines were corrupted in their daily application. More problems could be exacerbated by penury of resources; this creates a war of turf.
Moneys command
Ignoring (or being kept at bay) about financial matters strictly related to the project is a big source of risks from any project manager. There are some topics that can trigger a crisis in a project. Either (temporary) lack of money – perhaps due to a poor cash flow management – or a miscalculated one of the financial KPIs (e.g. ROI, TCO etc.)
Leadership and craftsmanship
Management is about the successful usage of leadership within the boundaries set by the “contracting” organization. Leadership in project management demands a lot of craftsmanship both on managerial chores (from understanding estimations, risks to negotiation) and technical savvy (it would be a professional suicide to be fooled by enthusiastic developers or naïve SMEs).
Project management shall not be limited to the Project Manager. The involvement of the Sponsor is fundamental for the success. There is a good post about it.
Understanding the market
Here, market has a very broad definition. Not all projects are set for setting up products to be sold to anonymous users. To be more efficient, this title should be dedicated to stakeholders’ management, especially the product manager. Some good hints could come from “Product Owner” used in Agile.
Conclusion
Perhaps this post suffers from a light heart approach. Any single point needs to be analyzed properly. However, the importance of historical information is essential for the success of the project. Any technique destined to improve the quality of judgment is fundamental.


Eugenio,
“Any reasonable attempt for measuring risks is based on history,” is not exactly the case.
Take a look at http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/codeq/doctree/praguide.pdf to see how risk models are built in the absence of past performance.