Team:Groningen/Project Plan/Risk List
From 2009.igem.org
m |
|||
(10 intermediate revisions not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | {{Team:Groningen/Header}} | + | {{Team:Groningen/Project_Plan/Header}} |
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | <div style="float:left" >{{linkedImage|GroningenPrevious.png|Team:Groningen/Project_Plan#UPEDU}}</div> | ||
+ | <div title="Arsie Says UP TO ACCUMULATION" style="float:right" >{{linkedImage|Next.JPG|Team:Groningen/Brainstorm}}</div> | ||
+ | |||
[[Category:Team:Groningen/Disciplines/Project_Management|Project Plan/Risk List]] | [[Category:Team:Groningen/Disciplines/Project_Management|Project Plan/Risk List]] | ||
[[Category:Team:Groningen/Roles/Project_Manager|Project Plan/Risk List]] | [[Category:Team:Groningen/Roles/Project_Manager|Project Plan/Risk List]] | ||
Line 15: | Line 20: | ||
*Identifier: a descriptive (short) name | *Identifier: a descriptive (short) name | ||
- | *Magnitude: ranking from 1-10, 1 is low risk and 10 is a high risk. Taking in account: how probable | + | *Magnitude: ranking from 1-10, 1 is low risk and 10 is a high risk. Taking in account: how probable it is that the problem will happen during the project. |
- | *Description | + | *Description: a brief description of the risk. |
+ | *Impact: | ||
+ | **L= low impact, if this risk can not be avoided, probably the team will decide to live with it. | ||
+ | **M= medium impact, there is a real problem but when it is noticed in an early stage it can be solved, not all members are affected. | ||
+ | **C = critical, there is a real problem but when it is noticed in an early stage it can probably be solved, all the project members are affected. | ||
+ | **H = high impact, the probability of the projects success is seriously affected. There is an immediate need for a meeting with the stakeholders. | ||
*Indicators: when do we know this risk has materialized (or better yet, is about to materialize). | *Indicators: when do we know this risk has materialized (or better yet, is about to materialize). | ||
*Mitigation Strategy: how are we reducing the impact of this risk? | *Mitigation Strategy: how are we reducing the impact of this risk? | ||
*Contingency Plan: what can we do if this risk does materialize? | *Contingency Plan: what can we do if this risk does materialize? | ||
- | |||
{| border="1" | {| border="1" | ||
- | + | |+'''Risk 1: Finances''' | |
!Magnitude | !Magnitude | ||
- | !Description | + | !Description |
- | ! | + | !Impact |
- | !Mitigation | + | !Mitigation Plan |
!Contingency Plan | !Contingency Plan | ||
|- | |- | ||
- | | | + | |3 |
+ | |There is just not enough money for all the expenses | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Our budget should largely be covered before the summer.We already have some funds and are attempting to acquire more from (non)-governmental / university organisations and companies. | ||
+ | |Try to get more funding from the University of Groningen, Centre of Synthetic Biology. Try to enconomize (on?). | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |5 | ||
+ | |PR letters do not work out well | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Letters contain information about: Synthetic Biology, the iGEM competition, contact information. | ||
+ | |Try to find out what went wrong, call the organisations and companies. Ask a specialist to have a look at the sponsor letter. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |4 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:TU_Munchen| TU München]] Probably had too low budget because they started only in June with looking for sponsoring | ||
+ | |H | ||
+ | |A budget plan has been made. Roles are divided, two people are working on letters/flyers/poster for sponsoring. | ||
+ | |Ask instructors for help, start with fundraising already before a final project is chosen. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |1 | ||
+ | |Fraud | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Speak with the treasurers, meet with instructors to sort it out. | ||
+ | |} | ||
+ | : | ||
+ | {| border="1" | ||
+ | |+'''Risk 2: Time''' | ||
+ | !Magnitude | ||
+ | !Description | ||
+ | !Impact | ||
+ | !Mitigation Plan | ||
+ | !Contingency Plan | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |5/6 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]]Making constructs is consuming to much time | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Order synthesized plasmid, though this is pricy | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |1 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Istanbul Istanbul] / [https://2008.igem.org/Team:TU_Munchen TU München]] Started too late with brainstorm sessions | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Our project subject deadline is May 18 | ||
+ | |Start immediately with fulltime working on the project when time becomes a real problem | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |4 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:WEGO_Taipei Taipei]] Project plan without clear deadlines. People do not work according to the project plan. | ||
+ | |H | ||
+ | |UPEDO is used, we try to specify the project plan. | ||
+ | |Make a sharp plan and keep everyone motivated to work according this plan. | ||
+ | |- | ||
|2 | |2 | ||
- | | | + | |People are taking holidays at the same time |
- | | | + | |M |
- | | | + | |A time schedule of 2009 is made, people are not allowed to take more than 1-2wk off |
- | | | + | |Try to get people to take holidays more spread over the summer time |
+ | |- | ||
+ | |7/8 | ||
+ | |Tasks are not accomplished before the deadlines | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |UPEDO is used, but the project plan has to be confined. | ||
+ | |Keep everyone motivated to work accoring plan. | ||
|} | |} | ||
- | + | : | |
{| border="1" | {| border="1" | ||
- | |+ | + | |+'''Risk 3: Lab work''' |
!Magnitude | !Magnitude | ||
!Description | !Description | ||
Line 47: | Line 112: | ||
!Contingency Plan | !Contingency Plan | ||
|- | |- | ||
- | | | + | |7 |
+ | |Not enough results | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Defined deadlines for evaluations are planned in the project plan, weekly labmeetings should be done. | ||
+ | |Try to find the bottleneck in an early stage of the project, talk with experts regulary, start over again (use another method, try an easier project) | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |7 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]] Getting DNA from paper (of the iGEM catalog) was problematic | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Check DNA catalog / well-plates. Order stab cultures from HQ (try to be early). | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |8 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]] Promotor is leaky | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Measure background signal (neg. control). For the HSL promotor use EZ medium as described by Groningen team, iGEM 2008 | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |4 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]] Ligation of BioBricks in plasmid is problematic | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Dephosphorylize plasmid first | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |5 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]] Low transformation efficiency of BioBricks to E. coli | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Use E. coli TOP10. Make new competent cells. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |8 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Groningen Groningen]] BioBricks behave different than expected. | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Check whether there are multiple BioBrick possibilities for the gene you want to use. | ||
+ | |Sequence the generated plasmid to be sure that you are working on the right gene. Try to use another BioBrick. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |2 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Montreal Motreal]] False positives upon transformation, low yield for DNA isolation | ||
+ | |H | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Order a synthetic construct in an early stage, use DNA isolation kits. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |1 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Peru Peru]] To less biological knowledge | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Try to get more biology students, ask people to give lectures. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |5 | ||
+ | |Ordering DNA takes too much time | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | |Order in time, try to think ahead | ||
+ | |Try to find a simillar gene / construct at the University of Groningen. | ||
+ | |} | ||
+ | : | ||
+ | {| border="1" | ||
+ | |+'''Risk 4: Modeling''' | ||
+ | !Magnitude | ||
+ | !Description | ||
+ | !Impact | ||
+ | !Mitigation Plan | ||
+ | !Contingency Plan | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |7 | ||
+ | |There are few results from modeling, the results are not compatible with the results from the lab. | ||
+ | |H | ||
+ | |Ask experts in an early stage for help. Try to get feedback in an early stage from the lab, on sub-problems. | ||
+ | |Contact the iGEM 2008 team, try to find the bottlenecks | ||
+ | |- | ||
|6 | |6 | ||
- | | | + | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Istanbul Istanbul]] Slow to decide which software would be used |
- | | | + | |M |
- | | | + | |The programs used by iGEM 2008 teams are searched and analysed |
- | | | + | |Start early (before the project is chosen) and make clear deadlines |
+ | |- | ||
+ | |7 | ||
+ | |Not enough knowledge in the team. | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |A Bio-informatics student is joining the team, since May 11 | ||
+ | |Try to get more computer-engineering students, ask people to give lectures. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |6 | ||
+ | |It is to late known which part of the project is used for modelling | ||
+ | |H | ||
+ | |The deadline for choosing a project is May 18. The modelling team will talk individually with the people working on the different possible projects. | ||
+ | | | ||
|} | |} | ||
+ | : | ||
+ | {| border="1" | ||
+ | |+'''Risk 5: Team members / Instructors''' | ||
+ | !Magnitude | ||
+ | !Description | ||
+ | !Impact | ||
+ | !Mitigation Plan | ||
+ | !Contingency Plan | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |0 | ||
+ | |[[https://2008.igem.org/Team:Toronto_Bluegenes Toronto BlueGenes]] Different instructor relative to previous years | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | |Involve instructors & advisors monthly in meetings | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |1 | ||
+ | |An instructor leaves the team. | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | |Involve instructors & advisors monthly in meetings | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |8 | ||
+ | |A undergraduate teammember leaves the team. | ||
+ | |M | ||
+ | |Keep people motivated for iGEM. | ||
+ | |Start working in teams of (at least) 2 teammembers, to prevent a great loss of knowledge. | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |5 | ||
+ | |Teammembers loose motivation | ||
+ | |C | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Start with social events next to the normal (and somewhat boring ;) meetings | ||
+ | |- | ||
+ | |8/9 | ||
+ | |There arises a conflict / disagreement in the group | ||
+ | |L | ||
+ | | | ||
+ | |Try to get a mediator. Depends on the problem. | ||
+ | |} | ||
+ | |||
+ | |||
+ | [TODO: Review risk list at least after every iteration] | ||
+ | {{Team:Groningen/Footer}} |
Latest revision as of 20:27, 21 October 2009
[http://2009.igem.org/Team:Groningen http://2009.igem.org/wiki/images/f/f1/Igemhomelogo.png]
|
---|
Risk List | Tools and Documentation | Inception | Elaboration | Construction | Transition | |||||||||||||||||
1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 2 | ||||||||||||||
apr. 20 | may 18 | jun. 01 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | okt. 15 |
Introduction
Every project has to deal with risks. To ensure a smoothly running project without too many large hiccups it is important to identify these risks and develop strategies to avoid them (and/or reduce their impact).
The table below, shows the possible risks that may influence the success of the iGEM project. It gives an outline of 5 main risks, namely problems which emerge from finances, time span, lab work, modeling and members / instructors. Possible risks were traced from the problems of iGEM Groningen 2008 and of the iGEM 2008 teams which were withdrawn from the competition.
Also see [http://www.upedu.org/upedu/process/artifact/ar_rskls.htm UPEDU's description of the Risk List] artifact and the enclosing artifact, our project plan.
Risks
For each risk the following is documented:
- Identifier: a descriptive (short) name
- Magnitude: ranking from 1-10, 1 is low risk and 10 is a high risk. Taking in account: how probable it is that the problem will happen during the project.
- Description: a brief description of the risk.
- Impact:
- L= low impact, if this risk can not be avoided, probably the team will decide to live with it.
- M= medium impact, there is a real problem but when it is noticed in an early stage it can be solved, not all members are affected.
- C = critical, there is a real problem but when it is noticed in an early stage it can probably be solved, all the project members are affected.
- H = high impact, the probability of the projects success is seriously affected. There is an immediate need for a meeting with the stakeholders.
- Indicators: when do we know this risk has materialized (or better yet, is about to materialize).
- Mitigation Strategy: how are we reducing the impact of this risk?
- Contingency Plan: what can we do if this risk does materialize?
Magnitude | Description | Impact | Mitigation Plan | Contingency Plan |
---|---|---|---|---|
3 | There is just not enough money for all the expenses | C | Our budget should largely be covered before the summer.We already have some funds and are attempting to acquire more from (non)-governmental / university organisations and companies. | Try to get more funding from the University of Groningen, Centre of Synthetic Biology. Try to enconomize (on?). |
5 | PR letters do not work out well | C | Letters contain information about: Synthetic Biology, the iGEM competition, contact information. | Try to find out what went wrong, call the organisations and companies. Ask a specialist to have a look at the sponsor letter. |
4 | [TU München] Probably had too low budget because they started only in June with looking for sponsoring | H | A budget plan has been made. Roles are divided, two people are working on letters/flyers/poster for sponsoring. | Ask instructors for help, start with fundraising already before a final project is chosen. |
1 | Fraud | C | Speak with the treasurers, meet with instructors to sort it out. |
Magnitude | Description | Impact | Mitigation Plan | Contingency Plan |
---|---|---|---|---|
5/6 | [Groningen]Making constructs is consuming to much time | C | Order synthesized plasmid, though this is pricy | |
1 | [Istanbul / TU München] Started too late with brainstorm sessions | C | Our project subject deadline is May 18 | Start immediately with fulltime working on the project when time becomes a real problem |
4 | [Taipei] Project plan without clear deadlines. People do not work according to the project plan. | H | UPEDO is used, we try to specify the project plan. | Make a sharp plan and keep everyone motivated to work according this plan. |
2 | People are taking holidays at the same time | M | A time schedule of 2009 is made, people are not allowed to take more than 1-2wk off | Try to get people to take holidays more spread over the summer time |
7/8 | Tasks are not accomplished before the deadlines | C | UPEDO is used, but the project plan has to be confined. | Keep everyone motivated to work accoring plan. |
Magnitude | Description | Impact | Mitigation Plan | Contingency Plan |
---|---|---|---|---|
7 | Not enough results | C | Defined deadlines for evaluations are planned in the project plan, weekly labmeetings should be done. | Try to find the bottleneck in an early stage of the project, talk with experts regulary, start over again (use another method, try an easier project) |
7 | [Groningen] Getting DNA from paper (of the iGEM catalog) was problematic | M | Check DNA catalog / well-plates. Order stab cultures from HQ (try to be early). | |
8 | [Groningen] Promotor is leaky | M | Measure background signal (neg. control). For the HSL promotor use EZ medium as described by Groningen team, iGEM 2008 | |
4 | [Groningen] Ligation of BioBricks in plasmid is problematic | C | Dephosphorylize plasmid first | |
5 | [Groningen] Low transformation efficiency of BioBricks to E. coli | C | Use E. coli TOP10. Make new competent cells. | |
8 | [Groningen] BioBricks behave different than expected. | C | Check whether there are multiple BioBrick possibilities for the gene you want to use. | Sequence the generated plasmid to be sure that you are working on the right gene. Try to use another BioBrick. |
2 | [Motreal] False positives upon transformation, low yield for DNA isolation | H | Order a synthetic construct in an early stage, use DNA isolation kits. | |
1 | [Peru] To less biological knowledge | M | Try to get more biology students, ask people to give lectures. | |
5 | Ordering DNA takes too much time | M | Order in time, try to think ahead | Try to find a simillar gene / construct at the University of Groningen. |
Magnitude | Description | Impact | Mitigation Plan | Contingency Plan |
---|---|---|---|---|
7 | There are few results from modeling, the results are not compatible with the results from the lab. | H | Ask experts in an early stage for help. Try to get feedback in an early stage from the lab, on sub-problems. | Contact the iGEM 2008 team, try to find the bottlenecks |
6 | [Istanbul] Slow to decide which software would be used | M | The programs used by iGEM 2008 teams are searched and analysed | Start early (before the project is chosen) and make clear deadlines |
7 | Not enough knowledge in the team. | C | A Bio-informatics student is joining the team, since May 11 | Try to get more computer-engineering students, ask people to give lectures. |
6 | It is to late known which part of the project is used for modelling | H | The deadline for choosing a project is May 18. The modelling team will talk individually with the people working on the different possible projects. |
Magnitude | Description | Impact | Mitigation Plan | Contingency Plan |
---|---|---|---|---|
0 | [Toronto BlueGenes] Different instructor relative to previous years | M | Involve instructors & advisors monthly in meetings | |
1 | An instructor leaves the team. | C | Involve instructors & advisors monthly in meetings | |
8 | A undergraduate teammember leaves the team. | M | Keep people motivated for iGEM. | Start working in teams of (at least) 2 teammembers, to prevent a great loss of knowledge. |
5 | Teammembers loose motivation | C | Start with social events next to the normal (and somewhat boring ;) meetings | |
8/9 | There arises a conflict / disagreement in the group | L | Try to get a mediator. Depends on the problem. |
[TODO: Review risk list at least after every iteration]