| DESCRIPTION |
The potential-problem analysis method (PPA) is designed
to provide a challenging analysis of a developed idea or action in order
to pre-empt any potential for going wrong (part of Kepner-Tregoe’s
(1976 – qv),(see also
Bullet Proofing and Negative
Brainstorming).
The method is closely related to some of the methods
used in identifying potential faults in complex hardware systems, it
has a ‘rational’ rather than ‘creative’ approach,
but still provides and first-rate supply of creative triggers if approached
in an imaginative spirit.
A substantial amount of effort is required to carry
out the analysis thoroughly and therefore the method is usually set
aside for the more ultimate action plan (or perhaps the final handful
of options).
- Define the Key requirements, a ‘must’ – outputs,
actions or events that must take place if the implementation is
to be successful. Failure of any of these is likely to cause problems.
- Record and investigate all possible problems for each of the
key requirements that have now been identified, listing all ‘potential
problems’ – i.e. potential ways it could go wrong (a
technique such as Negative
Breainstorming could help) and look at each of them (a technique
such as Five Ws and H could
help). If you have come up with an excess of possible problems,
it is advisable to make a initial estimate of the by and large risk
(see below) that each problem creates, so that you can give attention
to the rest of the analysis on those that offer the greatest risk.
- List possible causes for each potential problem, and the risk
associated with it, the risk reflects both the likelihood of an
event, and the severity of the impact if it did, so that ‘high
likelihood / high impact’ causes present the highest risk.
- Develop preventative actions where possible rather than having
to muddle through a problem after it has happened. Where possible
try to develop ways of preventing potential problem causes or minimising
their effects and estimate the residual risk that might still remain
even if preventative action were taken.
- Develop contingency plans where necessary, i.e. where problems
would have serious effects, but you cant prevent them, or there
is a high residual risk even if you do.
- The table (step 7) below is a simple way of displaying the analysis,
which could contain a variety of quantitative estimates from crude
‘high, medium and low’ subjective judgements, to carefully,
researched measures depending on the demands of the situation.
|
Analysis for Key activity: ‘hand over
to publisher’ |
|
Potential problem |
Possible causes |
How likely? |
Ways to limit risk |
Residual risk |
Contingency plans |
|
A: Document not delivered
in time
|
Not prepared in time |
High |
Switch preparation to our ‘A’
team |
Low |
Allow generous margin in promised
delivery time |
|
Mailing delays |
Low |
Hand delivery instead of internal
mail |
Minimal |
Not needed – risk acceptable |
|
B: Etc. |
Etc |
|
|
|
|
[Source: www.mycoted.com] |
