U.S. Transportation Command News Service (Oct. 6, 2006): quantifying risk across the Department of Defense.

Every mission in the DoD involves some kind of risk--from developing aircraft maintenance schedules to managing research and development programs in the laboratory. In their efforts to execute sound risk management, Department of Defense workers frequently confront daunting amounts of data that contribute to a decision, but mean nothing individually. Many times these data represent inexplicit averages, approximations, and expert opinion. The challenge is fusing all this risk management information and displaying it for effective and efficient decision making.

The preemptive managing of these risks just became easier. Scientists and engineers at the Air Force Research Laboratory have developed RiskAoA, an Excel-based tool for the quantitative comparison/analysis of alternatives, which transforms daunting amounts of data into concise information. RiskAoA, which combines textual, quantitative, and qualitative inputs to generate an ordered comparison of the risks for any alternatives, is now available to provide decision quality information for anyone.

RiskAoA

Current risk tools fill an important gap in risk analysis; they display the risk of a program under current conditions. RiskAoA fulfills another niche--that of comparing and contrasting alternatives for planning and instant review. This is an immense aid to future planning and the comparison of a portfolio of current programs. Risk evaluations from current tools map directly into RiskAoA for other quantitative comparisons.

Not only is RiskAoA a program manager's tool, it also is easily adapted to quantify any alternative, comparison, or set of choices. Any type of risk comparison--ranging from contract proposals to stock portfolios, or even different routes to work--can be processed by RiskAoA. Simply stated: it analyzes choices.

RiskAoA uses statistics to generate its outputs. Along with a quantitative comparison of the risks of alternatives, it also generates a forecast--an estimation of how accurate the evaluation will be. This is similar in concept to a weather forecast: given the last 100 days of 80 percent humidity and the sun shining, it has rained 40 percent of the time. The RiskAoA, concept is more simple: the more numerous risk categories available, the more likely the result will be accurate. In other words, RiskAoA can be likened to a shotgun approach--the more shots fired, the more likely a hit will find its mark.

The "shotgun" approach is a risk mitigating step in itself. Just as an individual shotgun pellet is not important enough to disrupt a single shot, spot inaccuracies in a robust data set of partial information are not important enough to skew the resultant analysis of alternatives.

RiskAoA has four primary uses: 1) long-term project analysis (analysis of alternatives, risk assessment teams, etc.) or situations having/requiring many details, but large uncertainties; 2) demonstrating risk for the phases of a project (6.1, 6.2, 6.3); 3) to demonstrate a project's risk progression (history); and 4) to contrast multiple programs' risk and to compare components of a project's risk (e.g., plane: avionics, weapons, engines, landing gear, etc.).

The tool is simple to use relying on only four key inputs from the user. As depicted in the following chart, the dependent risk column allows the user to parameterize parallel and series risks. For example, if 10 people need to receive a phone call in order for the mission to be successful, then enter the number 10 into this column. Alternatively, if of those 10 people only one needs to receive the call, the number is 1/10. This can reflect the number of systems impacted, changes on configuration control, or other "domino" effects. The cornerstone of the tool is the qualitative assessments of risk; High, Medium, Low, or Negligible inputs are entered into the Catastrophic, Critical, Moderate, and Negligible columns. Note that quantitative assessments can also be entered.

The final input--Universal Risk--is the ability of the risk to impact the entire program. Pieces of a program on a critical path are the best example of this phenomenon. Universal Risk is also a useful tool for comparison analysis. If a project's funding risk changes, it can be compared and contrasted with other programs' sensitivity to change. The fourth input is the number of distinct systems impacted by the analysis.

The results are generated and display in raw and normalized numbers. They have three easy-to-understand display types. They represent 1) raw or "floating" results, 2) results divided by the worst result so that the worst is displayed as 100 percent, and 3), an advanced display for instances where a known risk result--for example, a result from historical, parametric, or engineering data--can be compared to the generated display. If known risk data are available, what is generated and displayed represents real values of probability.

RiskAoA, known previously as RiskHammer, has been referenced by the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), ESC/AE (and MITRE-Risk Specialists), and by the AFRL Systems Engineering Initiative.

Tyler and Masquelier are with the Air Force Research Laboratory's Plans and Programs office. For more information or questions about RiskAoA, contact AFRL/XPC at [phone] or place a request at [e-mail]. Please include your contact information and a brief description of the program or application. The distribution of the technology is encouraged to all government employees; however, most analysis will be distribution-limited.

Capt. Gregory Tyler, USAF * Barbra Masquelier

Technologies for Net Centric T & E

Number of Distinct Interacting Components (RADAR and Plane w/RADAR
etc.=2, for example)

                                                          Risk/Impact
                    Alternative1   Mitigation  Dependent  87%
Risk Categories     Description    Actions     Risk       Catastrophic

Definition of                                  1          L
Net Centric (NC)
Identify NC                                    1          H
shortfalls
Sufficient                                     1          H
Solution
Operational T & E:                             1          H
T & E methods                                  1          H
compatible with
existing systems
Uses minimum        High capacity              1          ?
system resources    computing
                    ameliorates
                    risk
Coherence of                                   1          L
Information
Infrastructure                                 1          3%
Taxing
Live fire testing                              1          H

                    87%                                Universal
                    (H,M,L,N,#)  87%       87%         Risks
Risk Categories     Critical     Moderate  Negligible  (N/A,H,M,L,#)

Definition of       L            M         M           N/A
Net Centric (NC)
Identify NC         H            H         H           H
shortfalls
Sufficient          H            L         L           L
Solution
Operational T & E:  H            L         L           N/A
T & E methods
compatible with
existing systems    H            H         H           N/A
Uses minimum        14%          ?         N           N/A
system resources
Coherence of        L            N         N           N/A
Information
Infrastructure      M            9%        N           N/A
Taxing
Live fire testing   H            H         H           N/A