project-risk-register
Identifies, assesses, and prioritizes project risks using probability-times-impact scoring (risk matrix), then assigns owners, mitigation plans, contingencies, and triggers to track risk evolution over the project lifecycle. Use when managing project uncertainty, building a risk register, conducting risk assessments, defining risk mitigation plans, or when user mentions risk register, risk management, probability-impact matrix, or asks "what could go wrong with this project?".
What this skill does
# Project Risk Register
## Table of Contents
1. [Workflow](#workflow)
2. [Common Patterns](#common-patterns)
3. [Risk Scoring Framework](#risk-scoring-framework)
4. [Guardrails](#guardrails)
5. [Quick Reference](#quick-reference)
**Risk Matrix (5×5 Probability×Impact):**
```
Impact → 1 2 3 4 5
Prob ↓ Minimal Minor Moderate Major Severe
5 High │ Medium │ Medium │ High │ High │ Critical│
│ 5 │ 10 │ 15 │ 20 │ 25 │
4 │ Low │ Medium │ Medium │ High │ High │
│ 4 │ 8 │ 12 │ 16 │ 20 │
3 Medium │ Low │ Low │ Medium │ Medium │ High │
│ 3 │ 6 │ 9 │ 12 │ 15 │
2 │ Low │ Low │ Low │ Medium │ Medium │
│ 2 │ 4 │ 6 │ 8 │ 10 │
1 Low │ Low │ Low │ Low │ Low │ Medium │
│ 1 │ 2 │ 3 │ 4 │ 5 │
```
**Risk Thresholds:**
- **Critical (≥20)**: Escalate to exec, immediate mitigation required
- **High (12-19)**: Active management, weekly review, documented mitigation
- **Medium (6-11)**: Monitor closely, monthly review, contingency plan
- **Low (1-5)**: Accept or minimal mitigation, quarterly review
**Example: Software Migration Project**
| Risk ID | Risk | Prob | Impact | Score | Owner | Mitigation | Contingency |
|---------|------|------|--------|-------|-------|------------|-------------|
| R-001 | Third-party API deprecated mid-project | 3 | 4 | **12 (Medium)** | Eng Lead | Contact vendor for deprecation timeline | Build abstraction layer for quick swap |
| R-002 | Key engineer leaves during critical phase | 2 | 5 | **10 (Medium)** | EM | Knowledge sharing, pair programming | Contract backup engineer |
| R-003 | Data migration takes 3× longer than estimated | 4 | 4 | **16 (High)** | Data Lead | Pilot migration on 10% data first | Extend timeline, reduce scope |
## Workflow
Copy this checklist and track your progress:
```
Risk Register Progress:
- [ ] Step 1: Identify risks across categories
- [ ] Step 2: Assess probability and impact
- [ ] Step 3: Calculate risk scores and prioritize
- [ ] Step 4: Assign owners and define responses
- [ ] Step 5: Monitor and update regularly
```
**Step 1: Identify risks across categories**
Brainstorm what could go wrong using structured categories (technical, schedule, resource, external, scope). See [Common Patterns](#common-patterns) for category checklists. Use [resources/template.md](resources/template.md) for register structure.
**Step 2: Assess probability and impact**
Score each risk on probability (1-5: rare to almost certain) and impact (1-5: minimal to severe). Involve subject matter experts for accuracy. See [Risk Scoring Framework](#risk-scoring-framework) for definitions.
**Step 3: Calculate risk scores and prioritize**
Multiply Probability × Impact for each risk. Plot on risk matrix (5×5 grid) to visualize risk profile. Focus mitigation on Critical/High risks first. See [resources/methodology.md](resources/methodology.md) for advanced techniques like Monte Carlo simulation.
**Step 4: Assign owners and define responses**
For each High/Critical risk, assign named owner (not "team"), define mitigation (reduce probability), contingency (reduce impact), and triggers (when to activate contingency). See [resources/template.md](resources/template.md) for response planning structure.
**Step 5: Monitor and update regularly**
Review risk register weekly (active projects) or monthly (longer projects). Update probabilities/impacts as context changes, add new risks, retire closed risks, track mitigation progress. See [Guardrails](#guardrails) for monitoring cadence.
## Common Patterns
**Risk categories (use for brainstorming):**
- **Technical risks**: Technology failure, integration issues, performance problems, security vulnerabilities, technical debt, complexity underestimated
- **Schedule risks**: Dependencies delayed, estimation errors, scope creep, resource unavailability, critical path blocked
- **Resource risks**: Key person leaves, skill gaps, budget overrun, vendor/contractor issues, equipment unavailable
- **External risks**: Regulatory changes, market shifts, competitor actions, economic downturn, natural disasters, vendor bankruptcy
- **Scope risks**: Unclear requirements, changing priorities, stakeholder disagreement, gold-plating, mission creep
- **Organizational risks**: Lack of executive support, competing priorities, insufficient funding, organizational change, political conflicts
**By project type:**
- **Software projects**: Third-party API changes, dependency vulnerabilities, cloud provider outages, data migration issues, browser compatibility, scaling problems, security breaches
- **Construction projects**: Weather delays, material shortages, permit issues, labor strikes, soil conditions, cost overruns, safety incidents
- **Product launches**: Manufacturing delays, supply chain disruption, competitor launch, pricing miscalculation, market demand lower than expected, quality issues
- **Organizational change**: Employee resistance, communication breakdown, training inadequate, budget cuts, leadership turnover, cultural misalignment
**By risk response type:**
- **Mitigate (reduce probability)**: Training, prototyping, process improvements, redundancy, quality checks, early testing
- **Contingency (reduce impact if occurs)**: Backup plans, insurance, reserves (time/budget), alternative suppliers, rollback procedures
- **Accept (do nothing)**: Low-score risks not worth mitigation cost, residual risks after mitigation
- **Transfer (shift to others)**: Insurance, outsourcing, contracts (penalty clauses), warranties
**Typical risk profile evolution:**
- **Project start**: Many medium risks (uncertainty high), few critical (pre-mitigation)
- **Mid-project**: Critical risks mitigated to medium/low, new risks emerge (dependencies, integration)
- **Near completion**: Low risks dominate (most issues resolved), few high (last-minute surprises)
- **Red flag**: Risk score increasing over time (mitigation not working, new issues emerging faster than resolution)
## Risk Scoring Framework
**Probability Scale (1-5):**
- **5 - Almost Certain (>80%)**: Expected to occur, historical data confirms, no mitigation in place
- **4 - Likely (60-80%)**: Probably will occur, similar projects had this issue, weak mitigation
- **3 - Possible (40-60%)**: May or may not occur, depends on circumstances, some mitigation in place
- **2 - Unlikely (20-40%)**: Probably won't occur, mitigation in place, low historical precedent
- **1 - Rare (<20%)**: Very unlikely, strong mitigation, no historical precedent
**Impact Scale (1-5) - adjust dimensions for project context:**
**For Schedule Impact:**
- **5 - Severe**: >20% delay (e.g., 3-month project delayed 3+ weeks), miss critical deadline, cascading delays
- **4 - Major**: 10-20% delay, miss milestone, affects dependent projects
- **3 - Moderate**: 5-10% delay, timeline buffer consumed, no external impact
- **2 - Minor**: <5% delay, absorbed within sprint/phase, minor schedule pressure
- **1 - Minimal**: <1% delay or no delay, negligible schedule impact
**For Budget Impact:**
- **5 - Severe**: >20% budget overrun, requires new funding approval, project viability threatened
- **4 - Major**: 10-20% overrun, contingency exhausted, scope cuts required
- **3 - Moderate**: 5-10% overrun, contingency partially used, no scope cuts
- **2 - Minor**: <5% overrun, absorbed within budget flexibility
- **1 - Minimal**: <1% overrun or no budget impact
**For Scope/Quality Impact:**
- **5 - Severe**: Core functionality lost, customer-facing quality issue, regulatory violation
- **4 - Major**: Important feature cut, significant quality degradation, customer complaints
- **3 - Moderate**: Nice-to-have feature cut, minor quality issue, internal workarounds needed
- **2 - Minor**: Edge case feature cut, cosmetic quality issue
- **1Related in General
modeling-omnistudio-epc-catalog
IncludedSalesforce Industries CME EPC product-modeling skill for Product2-based catalog creation. Use when creating EPC products, configuring product attributes, building offer bundles with Product Child Items, or reviewing EPC DataPack JSON metadata for product catalog changes. TRIGGER when: user creates or updates Product2 EPC records, AttributeAssignment payloads, AttributeMetadata/AttributeDefaultValues, Offer bundles, or ProductChildItem relationships. DO NOT TRIGGER when: designing OmniScripts/FlexCards/Integration Procedures (use building-omnistudio-omniscript, building-omnistudio-flexcard, or building-omnistudio-integration-procedure), implementing Apex business logic (use generating-apex), or troubleshooting deployment pipelines (use deploying-metadata).
relationship-science-coach
IncludedUse this skill for direct, practical adult relationship coaching: couples conflict, repair, trust, marriage, dating, flirting, attachment patterns, emotional connection, sex, desire differences, eroticism, kink negotiation, affection, love languages, breakups, and long-term passion. Draw on Gottman, EFT and Hold Me Tight, attachment science, modern sex research, Perel, Nagoski, Kerner, Schnarch, Love and Stosny, and flexible love-language tools. Be concrete and low-hedge. Redirect only for imminent danger, abuse, coercive control, minors, non-consent, self-harm, stalking, or medical/legal/psychiatric decisions.
building-sf-integrations
IncludedSalesforce integration architecture and runtime plumbing with 120-point scoring. Use this skill to set up Named Credentials, External Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callout patterns, Platform Events, and Change Data Capture. TRIGGER when: user sets up Named Credentials, External Services, REST/SOAP callouts, Platform Events, CDC, or touches .namedCredential-meta.xml files. DO NOT TRIGGER when: Connected App/OAuth config (use configuring-connected-apps), Apex-only logic (use generating-apex), or data import/export (use handling-sf-data).
venue-templates
IncludedAccess comprehensive LaTeX templates, formatting requirements, and submission guidelines for major scientific publication venues (Nature, Science, PLOS, IEEE, ACM), academic conferences (NeurIPS, ICML, CVPR, CHI), research posters, and grant proposals (NSF, NIH, DOE, DARPA). This skill should be used when preparing manuscripts for journal submission, conference papers, research posters, or grant proposals and need venue-specific formatting requirements and templates.
let-fate-decide
IncludedDraws the 12 Houses of the Zodiac Tarot spread to inject entropy into planning when prompts are vague, ambiguous, or casually delegated. Interprets the spread to guide next steps. Use when the user says 'let fate decide', 'YOLO', 'whatever', 'idk', or other nonchalant phrases, makes Yu-Gi-Oh references, or when you are about to arbitrarily pick between multiple reasonable approaches. Prefer over ask-questions-if-underspecified when the user's tone is casual or playful rather than precision-seeking.
net-ops
IncludedCross-platform network troubleshooting (Windows, macOS, Linux) via local or remote shell. Use for: DNS broken, can't resolve hostnames, nslookup/dig works but apps fail, NRPT, WFP, scutil, /etc/resolver, systemd-resolved, /etc/resolv.conf, NetworkManager, VPN DNS leak residue (ProtonVPN/Mullvad/WireGuard/AnyConnect), AV/firewall blocking DNS or DoH, Tailscale DNS interaction, intermittent connectivity, remote diagnostics over SSH.