Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx

Risk Matrix Template
Risk Matrix:Project Name:
Risk
#
Risk
Probability
Importance
Response to Risk
Action Plan
Person Responsible
Status
01
Change in business requirements
02
Change in process flows
03
Incomplete prototype

04
Incomplete WBS
05
ERP interface
06
Physical infrastructure
07
Testing environment

08
Task estimates
09
Lack of resources
10
Scheduling conflict
11
Contracted with Geneva

2
KEL156
©2006 by the Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern
University. This case was prepared by Derek Yung ’03 and Alex
Gershbeyn ’03 under the supervision of Professor Mark Jeffery.
Cases are developed solely as the basis for class discussion.
Some
facts within the case have been altered for confidentiality
reasons. Cases are not intended to serve as endorsements,
sources of primary
data, or illustrations of effective or ineffective management. To
order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, call
800-
545-7685 (or 617-783-7600 outside the United States or
Canada) or e-mail [email protected] No part of this publication
may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a
spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means—
electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise—without the
permission of the Kellogg School of Management.
MARK JEFFERY
A&D High Tech (A):
Managing Projects for Success
In his twelve years as a technology project manager at A&D
High Tech, Chris Johnson had a

strong track record of delivering projects on time and on
budget. His techniques for project
planning, estimating, and scheduling had become best practices
at the St. Louis-based computer
products company. He had just led a project team that
successfully revamped the supply chain
systems in less than eighteen months. He was especially proud
since many observers had doubted
that the project could be completed on time. As part of the
strategic initiatives set forth by its
CEO and founder, Ted Walter, A&D was to be second to none
in utilizing technology to increase
operational efficiency and reduce costs. The supply chain
project therefore received notable
attention in the boardroom and with its competitors. Time and
again, Johnson was asked to tackle
difficult assignments that were critical to the company’s growth
and profits. He had already been
mentioned as the successor to the vice president of e-business,
Chuck Gagler, pending his
retirement. (See Exhibit 1 for the A&D High Tech
organizational chart.)
In early May 2003 Johnson received an urgent message from the
company’s CIO, Matt
Webb. Webb asked Johnson to join him for a meeting with
A&D’s senior managers to discuss
taking over the company’s online store project. Johnson realized
that up to that point the
company’s top brass had virtually ignored the Internet and its
sales potential. But that situation
was about to change. As Webb explained, A&D’s vice president
of sales, Jeff White, had advised
CEO Ted Walter that A&D was losing its competitive advantage
by not selling online. As a
result, Walter had made the online store project the company’s

highest priority. Walter wanted to
know whether the project could be completed in time for the
holiday shopping season, when
A&D’s cyclic business traditionally boomed. The current
project manager, Eric Robertson, was
taking a one-month leave of absence due to a family emergency,
just as he was about to begin
formulating the project plan and make staffing decisions.
Johnson immediately began thinking about the best way to
ensure the online store project’s
success. He was concerned that there was too little time to get
up to speed on this new project. It
was already May, and the holiday season would approach soon.
Given the urgency put forth by
Webb and Walter, Johnson was already feeling pressure to come
up with solid recommendations
in short order.
This document is authorized for use only by Regina Hardaway
([email protected]). Copying or posting is an infringement of
copyright. Please contact
[email protected] or 800-988-0886 for additional copies.
A&D HIGH TECH (A) KEL156
2 KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
Company History
A&D High Tech sold computer products, accessories, and
services to consumers and small
businesses. The company had its roots in Lincoln, Nebraska,
where Ted Walter started its first

store in 1988. A&D’s made-to-order products were very
innovative at the time, and were the first
to be introduced in the personal computer industry. Walter
emphasized friendly customer service,
a value that was deeply ingrained in the culture of the
Midwestern heartland where Walter had
lived his entire life. A&D’s revenues grew consistently for ten
years and approached $400 million
for fiscal year 2000. The company was primarily a regional
player, with more than 90 percent of
sales coming from customers in the Midwestern states.
However, Walter was strategically
seeking to increase its distribution nationally.
A&D sales had come predominantly through retail outlets in
shopping malls across the
Midwest and via phone orders handled by its fifty-person call
center in Lincoln. Before 1999,
sales orders at the call center were written on paper and then
passed to order-entry clerks. This
added time to order entry, delayed shipment, and resulted in
poor accuracy. Consequently, sales
representatives often had to contact customers to correct errors
or to suggest different options due
to inventory shortages. On average, 30 percent of the orders
required customer callbacks,
compared to only 5 percent at A&D’s primary competitor.
In 1999 A&D implemented its first enterprise resource planning
(ERP) system, using
software from J. D. Edwards. A&D opted to use J. D. Edwards
primarily because its software
could be customized to handle the thousands of parts that A&D
used for production. The
customization required many outside consultants to design and
build the system, and since they

left soon after the system was implemented there were some
concerns that the system might be
difficult to maintain. Even so, the project was deemed a
success: after ERP was up and running,
customer callbacks were reduced to less than 1 percent of
orders.
In 2001, given the successful implementation of ERP, A&D
decided to further invest to
improve its systems in handling the supply chain, payment
process, customer relationship
management (CRM), and order management. A series of
technology initiatives was launched.
A&D saw immediate benefits in reduced costs, as well as a
significant return on investment on its
supply chain and data warehousing projects.
Business Case
In 2002, faced with tough competition and decreasing margins,
A&D decided to explore new
segments of the market for growth. In particular, it focused on
sales via the Internet. Historically,
A&D was shy to adopt the Internet as a sales channel because it
did not seem to play to the
company’s sales strength of friendliness and customer service.
However, since A&D’s products
were approaching commodity status, the product cost was
largely the determining factor for a
customer. Furthermore, competitors had successfully increased
their revenues and recognized
cost savings in selling, general, and administrative expenses
(SG&A) per order after starting to
sell through the Internet.

KEL156 A&D HIGH TECH (A)
KELLOGG SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT 3
So in early 2002, Ted Walter and vice president of sales Jeff
White gave the go-ahead to CIO
Webb to begin the project to create an online store.
One of the first decisions Webb faced was “build vs. buy.” A
custom-developed program
would allow A&D the opportunity to build exactly what it
needed, whereas a commercial
application might not meet all of the requirements. For example,
the commercial off-the-shelf
(COTS) software might not have the formats, input processes,
reporting capabilities, and other
elements needed to make the program work well for A&D.
Moreover, buying off the shelf might
require A&D to purchase functionality it did not need and
would not use.
On the other hand, Webb realized that a commercial application
could potentially cost much
less than a custom application. However, this was not always
the case, especially if the
commercial application required more than 10 percent custom
modifications to meet all the
requirements.
Webb knew that the key questions in the build vs. buy decision

were:
-house for project
management, software development,
hardware support, and long-term maintenance?
ew application
would automate?
functionality that it did not need
and would not use?
In his analysis, Webb listed some key determiners that pointed
toward the “build” decision:
nd costs of purchasing software increased as
the need to customize a
package increased.
weapon and a point of
differentiation, versus just trying to keep up.
ated but flexible system in
custom-built software (versus
simply integrating multiple vendors) could be significant.
from a custom-built system.
-the-shelf package’s elements only met 60 percent of
A&D’s functional
requirements.

market but no single vendor
was a clear market leader.
After deliberating for a month with his top managers, Webb was
set on the “build” option.
Project History
Webb created a cross-functional team of six people to plan the
project based on his “build”
decision (see Exhibit 1). Led by Eric Robertson, a young but
bright IT project manager, the
team’s planning components included:
Define the business requirements

he tasks in the WBS
resources to project tasks
allocation
After four weeks, the team presented its findings to the steering
committee. A summary
outcome for each of the planning tasks is listed below.
B U S I N E S S R E Q U I R E M E N T S
The scope and business requirements of the online store
included new orders, add-on orders,
order amends, order status, and lead capture with the following
capabilities:
-time payment processing
back-end (ERP) for manufacturing and order
management
Senior management was adamant that the system incorporate
this set of minimum
functionality, since customers must have the same experience

across all sales channels. As Jeff
White put it:
Once an order has been made and it gets into [J. D.] Edwards, I
don’t see why we need
to distinguish whether the customer shopped in our stores or
made the order on the
phone or the Internet. We should serve them with the exact care
and quality that one
comes to expect from A&D.
P R O C E S S F L O W
The introduction of Internet sales would have little impact on
the current process at A&D,
since it simply served as a new front to its existing activities. In
fact, all existing activities would
remain the same. New activities to support Internet sales, such
as exception handling due to
system errors, would be added to the IT support procedures.
T E C H N I C A L A R C H I T E C T U R E
Since A&D carried a range of products that ran the Windows
2000 operating system, A&D

had standardized all custom applications to run on this platform.
The online store’s architecture
was N-tiered for greater flexibility and future scalability (see
Exhibit 2).
The first tier was the Web server layer. The Web server was the
Microsoft Internet
Information Server (IIS). Server side scripts were to be coded in
MS Application Server Pages
(ASP). The second tier was the application server layer. The
application server was the Microsoft
Transaction Server (MTS). The application components would
leverage Microsoft Site Server
and the Microsoft Site Server Commerce Edition components.
Databases to support the application were to run on Microsoft
SQL Server. The
communication tier was the middleware Microsoft Messaging
Queue (MSMQ). Through MSMQ,
the application would access J. D. Edwards. Other back-end
applications and databases existed
but would not be interfaced by the online store. All software
licenses were already in-house, so
Robertson did not expect to incur any expenses from procuring
software.
P H Y S I C A L I N F R A S T R U C T U R E
A&D’s physical infrastructure was planned to be fairly typical
for a company that conducted
commerce over the Internet. For security, two firewalls were set
up with a demilitarized zone
(DMZ) in between (see Exhibit 3). Situated in the DMZ were
servers that were accessible by the
Internet and by A&D’s partners. Behind the second firewall was
A&D’s internal network, or

intranet. The servers behind this second firewall were only
accessible in the intranet. Robertson’s
team estimated that they would need twelve Windows 2000
workstations (at $3,000 each) and
five Windows 2000 servers (at $12,500 each) for the project.
P R O T O T Y P E
A prototype, consisting of static HTML pages, was built by
Robertson’s team to demonstrate
a user interface and general flow of the application. Exhibit 4
shows a screen print of the order
confirmation page. The prototype was approved by the vice
presidents of sales and marketing,
and would serve as a basis for the actual application’s
appearance and functionality.
P R O J E C T W B S
Robertson’s team created a complete WBS that detailed all the
tasks that needed to be
performed for the project as of May 26, 2003. See Exhibit 5 for
the complete WBS.
T A S K E S T I M A T E S
Estimates were created for each task as part of the planning
effort. Robertson’s team had
some experience in IT project estimating, so they were fairly
confident that the total project
estimate would be close to the actuals. See Exhibit 6 for listing
of the estimates for each task.
P R O J E C T R E S O U R C E S
All the resources for the project had been identified except for

the software developers. For
A&D in-house developers, a flat rate of $75/hour was
traditionally used for estimating purposes.
But since there were no developers available internally,
Robertson had solicited a contracting
company, Geneva, to staff these positions. For the contractors,
the rates varied depending on skill
level and their market value. Moreover, the overtime rates for
contractors were different from the
A&D standard rate. (Overtime was defined to be more than
eight hours of work in a day.)
By May, Geneva was still identifying the actual resources
needed, but had provided the
resources’ rates so that Robertson could prepare the estimates.
See Exhibit 7 for a list of the
resources and their appropriate rates. Robertson’s team also
examined the tasks and made
assignments accordingly. See Exhibit 8 for the resource
assignments.
P R O J E C T S C H E D U L I N G
As a final step in preparing for the project plan, Robertson

scheduled all the tasks by adding
dependencies (or predecessors) and calculating the leveling
delay required to properly allocate all
the resources. See Exhibit 9 for the schedule.1
Review Meeting
When Johnson walked into the conference room fifteen minutes
before the start of his
meeting with A&D’s senior managers to discuss the online store
project, he found Webb and
Robertson already there. As the other attendees filed into the
room, Robertson was sorting
through a stack of papers, giving a set to each of them. Jeff
White, the vice president of sales, and
Chuck Gagler, the vice president of e-commerce, arrived just as
Webb was ready to start the
meeting.
Webb outlined the purpose of the meeting, which was to
facilitate the effective transition
between Robertson and Johnson, as well as to update senior
managers on the project’s status. As
Robertson was going through the details of the work that had
been performed by his team,
Johnson began to feel more at ease. He recognized that
Robertson had done well in gathering all
the relevant data to create a good project plan. Despite the
challenge to quickly overcome the
learning curve of a new project, Johnson felt more comfortable
that he could come up with a
detailed recommendation along with strong facts and potential
issues.
As the meeting ended, Webb pulled Johnson aside and told him,
“I know I may be asking a

lot here, but I really need you to get the plan together in the
next week. Walter really wants to
know if we can get this thing done by Christmas.”
1 The predecessors were identified using a Task ID. This was
different from the WBS ID.
A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K

E
L
1
56
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A

G
E
M
E
N
T
7
E
x
h
ib
it
1
:
O
rg
a
n
iz
a
tio
n

C
h
a
rt
C
E
O
&
C
h
a
ir
m
a
n
T
e
d
W
a
lt
e

r
V
P
S
a
le
s
J
e
ff
W
h
it
e
C
IO
M
a
tt
W
e
b
S
a

le
s
M
a
n
a
g
e
r
T
o
d
d
F
re
d
s
o
n
V
P
e
C

o
m
m
e
rc
e
C
h
u
c
k
G
a
g
le
r
P
ro
je
c
t
M
a
n

a
g
e
r
E
ri
c
R
o
b
e
rt
s
o
n
P
ro
je
c
t
M
a
n
a

g
e
r
C
h
ri
s
J
o
h
n
s
o
n
T
e
s
t
L
e
a
d
K
a

ra
S
ip
o
s
k
i
T
e
s
te
r
T
o
d
d
E
lia
s
o
n
F
u
n

c
ti
o
n
a
l
L
e
a
d
R
y
a
n
N
e
ff
F
u
n
c
ti
o
n

a
l
A
n
a
ly
s
t
S
ta
c
y
L
y
le
D
e
v
e
lo
p
m
e
n

t
L
e
a
d
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
D
e
v
e
lo
p
e
r
1
T

B
D
D
e
v
e
lo
p
e
r
2
T
B
D
D
e
v
e
lo
p
e
r
3
T

B
D
In
fr
a
s
tr
u
c
tu
re
L
e
a
d
R
ic
k
B
u
rk
e
D
B

A
S
a
n
ja
y
V
o
h
ra
P
la
n
n
in
g
T
e
a
m
M
a
tt
W

e
b
b
A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K
E
L

1
56
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A
G
E
M

E
N
T
8
Te
ch
ni
ca
l A
rc
hi
te
ct
ur
e
Te
ch
ni
ca
l A
rc
hi

te
ct
ur
e
W
e
b
S
e
rv
e
r
L
a
y
e
r
II
S
A
S
P
II

S
A
S
P
II
S
A
S
P
. . .
A
p
p
li
c
a
ti
o
n
S
e
rv
e

r
L
a
y
e
r
M
T
S
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
(M
S
S
ite
S
e

rv
e
r)
M
T
S
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
(M
S
S
ite
S
e
rv
e
r
C

o
m
m
e
rc
e
E
d
it
io
n
)
M
T
S
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts

(C
u
st
o
m
)
. . .
A
p
p
li
c
a
ti
o
n
D
B
(M
S
S
Q
L
S
e

rv
e
r)
B
a
c
k
E
n
d
L
a
y
e
r
E
R
P
(
J
.
D
.
E

d
w
a
rd
s)
S
u
p
p
ly
C
h
a
in
(
I2
)
. .
Middleware (MS MQ)
J
D
E
D

B
(D
B
2
/4
0
0
)
I2
D
B
(S
o
la
ri
s
)
F
in
a
n
c
ia

ls
(
P
e
o
p
le
so
ft
)
D
a
ta
W
a
re
h
o
u
si
n
g
T
a

x
(V
e
rt
e
x)
H
R
(
P
e
o
p
le
so
ft
)
P
e
o
p
le
s
o

ft
D
B
(S
o
la
ri
s
)
E
x
h
ib
it
2
:
T
e
ch
n
ic
a
l A
rc

h
ite
ct
u
re
A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K

E
L
1
56
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A
G

E
M
E
N
T
9
V
e
rt
e
x
S
e
rv
e
r
In
te
rn
e
t
F
ir

e
w
a
ll
W
e
b
L
o
a
d
B
a
la
n
c
in
g
W
e
b
S
e
rv
e

r
F
a
rm
O
n
lin
e
S
to
re
A
p
p
lic
a
ti
o
n
S
e
rv
e
r
F
a

rm
D
a
ta
W
a
re
h
o
u
se
S
e
rv
e
r
I2
S
e
rv
e
rs
P
e

o
p
le
so
ft
S
e
rv
e
rs
J
.
D
.
E
d
w
a
rd
s
E
xt
e
rn

a
l
P
a
rt
n
e
rs
In
tr
a
n
e
t
F
ir
e
w
a
ll
D
M
Z
O
th

e
r
S
e
rv
e
rs
E
x
h
ib
it
3
:
P
h
ys
ic
a
l
In
fr
a
st

ru
ct
u
re
Exhibit 4: Prototype
Exhibit 5: Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
WBS ID Task Name

1 Overall Project
1.1 Project Management
1.1.1 Manage Project
1.2 System Requirements
1.2.1 Gather Business Requirements
1.2.2 Design Business Process Flows
1.2.3 Finalize Technical Requirements
1.2.4 Create Operational Requirements
1.2.5 Identify Technical Infrastructure Needs
1.3 Software Requirements
1.3.1 Create Functional Requirements
1.3.1.1 Capture Customer Profile
1.3.1.2 View and Search Product Catalog
1.3.1.3 Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart
1.3.1.4 Taking Payments
1.3.1.5 Submit Order
1.3.1.6 Check Order History & Order Status
1.3.2 Create Data Requirements

1.3.3 Create ERP Interface Requirements
1.3.4 Create User Interface Requirements
1.4 Detailed Design
1.4.1 Design Capture Customer Profile Pages & Components
1.4.2 Design View and Search Product Catalog Pages &
Components
1.4.3 Design Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart
1.4.4 Design Taking Payments Pages & Components
1.4.5 Design Submit Order Pages & Components
1.4.6 Design Check Order History & Order Status Pages &
Components
1.4.7 Design Logical & Physical Data Model
1.4.8 Design ERP Interface
1.5 Test Planning
1.5.1 Gather Testing Requirements
1.5.2 Create System Test Plan & Test Cases
1.5.3 Write System Test Scripts
1.6 Technical Infrastructure
1.6.1 Create Development Environment

1.6.2 Create Testing Environment
1.6.3 Support Development Environment
1.6.4 Support Testing Environment & Deployment
1.6.5 Support Database
. . . . . .
Exhibit 5 (continued)
WBS ID Task Name
1.7 Development & Unit Test
1.7.1 Build Capture Customer Profile Pages & Components
1.7.2 Build View and Search Product Catalog Pages &
Components
1.7.3 Build Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart

1.7.4 Build Taking Payments Pages & Components
1.7.5 Build Submit Order Pages & Components
1.7.6 Build Check Order History & Order Status Pages &
Components
1.7.7 Build Logical & Physical Data Model
1.7.8 Build ERP Interface
1.7.9 Support Development & Assembly Test
1.8 Testing
1.8.1 Perform Assembly Testing
1.8.1.1 Perform Phase 1 Testing
1.8.1.2 Perform Phase 2 Testing
1.8.2 Perform System Testing
1.8.3 Perform Validation Testing
1.9 Deployment
1.9.1 Implement System
1.9.2 Deploy To Production
1.9.3 Project Wrap-Up
Exhibit 6: Task Estimates

WBS ID Task Name Work Estimate (days)
1 Overall Project
1.1.1 Manage Project 127
1.2.1 Gather Business Requirements 8
1.2.2 Design Business Process Flows 4
1.2.3 Finalize Technical Requirements 6
1.2.4 Create Operational Requirements 15
1.2.5 Identify Technical Infrastructure Needs 2
1.3.1.1 Capture Customer Profile 4
1.3.1.2 View and Search Product Catalog 6
1.3.1.3 Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart 3
1.3.1.4 Taking Payments 6
1.3.1.5 Submit Order 4
1.3.1.6 Check Order History & Order Status 3

. . . . . .
WBS ID Task Name Work Estimate (days)
1.3.2 Create Data Requirements 3
1.3.3 Create ERP Interface Requirements 7
1.3.4 Create User Interface Requirements 4
1.4 Detailed Design
1.4.1 Design Capture Customer Profile Pages & Components
13.5
1.4.2 Design View and Search Product Catalog Pages &
Components 13.5
1.4.3 Design Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart 6
1.4.4 Design Taking Payments Pages & Components 6
1.4.5 Design Submit Order Pages & Components 16

1.4.6 Design Check Order History & Order Status Pages &
Components 4
1.4.7 Design Logical & Physical Data Model 18
1.4.8 Design ERP Interface 20
1.5 Test Planning
1.5.1 Gather Testing Requirements 14
1.5.2 Create System Test Plan & Test Cases 20
1.5.3 Write System Test Scripts 22
1.6.1 Create Development Environment 20
1.6.2 Create Testing Environment 34.2
1.6.3 Support Development Environment 3.8
1.6.4 Support Testing Environment & Deployment 46
1.6.5 Support Database 4.6
1.7.1 Build Capture Customer Profile Pages & Components 13
1.7.2 Build View and Search Product Catalog Pages &
Components 12
1.7.3 Build Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart 7

1.7.4 Build Taking Payments Pages & Components 6
1.7.5 Build Submit Order Pages & Components 24
1.7.6 Build Check Order History & Order Status Pages &
Components 6
1.7.7 Build Logical & Physical Data Model 15.5
1.7.8 Build ERP Interface 18
1.7.9 Support Development & Assembly Test 46
1.8 Testing
1.8.1.1 Perform Phase 1 Testing 12
1.8.1.2 Perform Phase 2 Testing 20
1.8.2 Perform System Testing 160
1.8.3 Perform Validation Testing 80
1.9 Deployment
1.9.1 Implement System 80
1.9.2 Deploy To Production 8
1.9.3 Project Wrap-Up 90

Exhibit 7: Resources
Resource Name Standard Rate Overtime Rate
Chris Johnson (Project Manager) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Ryan Neff (Functional Lead) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Stacy Lyle (Functional Analyst) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Rick Burke (Infrastructure Lead) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Marc Sanders (Development Lead) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Developer 1 (TBD) $165.00/hr $230.00/hr
Sanjay Vohra (DBA) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Kara Siposki (Test Lead) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Todd Eliason (Tester) $75.00/hr $75.00/hr
Exhibit 8: Resource Assignments

WBS
ID
Task Name
Work
Estimate
(days)
Resource Name
1 Overall Project
1.1.1 Manage Project 127 Chris Johnson (Project Manager)
1.2.1 Gather Business Requirements 8 Ryan Neff (Functional
Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional
Analyst)
1.2.2 Design Business Process Flows 4 Ryan Neff (Functional
Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional
Analyst)
1.2.3 Finalize Technical Requirements 6 Rick Burke
(Infrastructure Lead)
1.2.4 Create Operational Requirements 15 Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional
Analyst), Rick Burke (Infrastructure Lead)
1.2.5 Identify Technical Infrastructure Needs 2 Rick Burke

1.3.1.1 Capture Customer Profile 4 Ryan Neff (Functional Lead)
1.3.1.2 View and Search Product Catalog 6 Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead)
1.3.1.3 Updating and Calculating Shopping Cart 3 Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead)
1.3.1.4 Taking Payments 6 Stacy Lyle (Functional Analyst)
1.3.1.5 Submit Order 4 Ryan Neff (Functional Lead)
1.3.1.6 Check Order History & Order Status 3 Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead)
1.3.2 Create Data Requirements 3 Stacy Lyle (Functional
Analyst)
1.3.3 Create ERP Interface Requirements 7 Stacy Lyle
(Functional Analyst)
1.3.4 Create User Interface Requirements 4 Stacy Lyle
. . . . . .

WBS
ID
Task Name
Work
Estimate
(days)
Resource Name
1.4 Detailed Design
1.4.1 Design Capture Customer Profile Pages &
Components
13.5 Marc Sanders (Development Lead), Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead) [50%]
1.4.2 Design View and Search Product Catalog
Pages & Components
13.5 Developer 1 (TBD), Ryan Neff (Functional Lead)
[50%]
1.4.3 Design Updating and Calculating Shopping
Cart

6 Developer 1 (TBD), Ryan Neff (Functional Lead)
1.4.4 Design Taking Payments Pages &
Components
6 Marc Sanders (Development Lead), Stacy Lyle
1.4.5 Design Submit Order Pages &
Components
16 Marc Sanders (Development Lead), Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead)
1.4.6 Design Check Order History & Order
Status Pages & Components
4 Marc Sanders (Development Lead), Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead)
1.4.7 Design Logical & Physical Data Model 18 Sanjay Vohra
(DBA), Stacy Lyle (Functional Analyst)
1.4.8 Design ERP Interface 20 Developer 1 (TBD), Stacy Lyle
1.5 Test Planning
1.5.1 Gather Testing Requirements 14 Kara Siposki (Test Lead),
Todd Eliason (Tester)
1.5.2 Create System Test Plan & Test Cases 20 Kara Siposki
(Test Lead), Todd Eliason (Tester)
1.5.3 Write System Test Scripts 22 Kara Siposki (Test Lead),

Todd Eliason (Tester)
1.6.1 Create Development Environment 20 Rick Burke
1.6.2 Create Testing Environment 34.2 Rick Burke
(Infrastructure Lead) [90%]
1.6.3 Support Development Environment 3.8 Rick Burke
(Infrastructure Lead) [10%]
1.6.4 Support Testing Environment &
Deployment
46 Rick Burke (Infrastructure Lead)
1.6.5 Support Database 4.6 Sanjay Vohra (DBA) [10%]
1.7.1 Build Capture Customer Profile Pages &
Components
13 Developer 2 (TBD)
1.7.2 Build View and Search Product Catalog
Pages & Components
12 Developer 3 (TBD)
1.7.3 Build Updating and Calculating Shopping
Cart
7 Developer 3 (TBD)

1.7.4 Build Taking Payments Pages &
Components
6 Developer 2 (TBD)
1.7.5 Build Submit Order Pages & Components 24 Developer 2
(TBD), Developer 3 (TBD)
1.7.6 Build Check Order History & Order Status
Pages & Components
6 Marc Sanders (Development Lead)
1.7.7 Build Logical & Physical Data Model 15.5 Sanjay Vohra
(DBA) [50%]
1.7.8 Build ERP Interface 18 Developer 1 (TBD)
1.7.9 Support Development & Assembly Test 46 Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional
Analyst)
. . . . . .

WBS
ID
Task Name
Work
Estimate
(days)
Resource Name
1.8 Testing
1.8.1.1 Perform Phase 1 Testing 12 Marc Sanders (Development
Lead)
1.8.1.2 Perform Phase 2 Testing 20 Marc Sanders (Development
Lead), Developer 1
(TBD), Developer 2 (TBD), Developer 3 (TBD)
1.8.2 Perform System Testing 160 Kara Siposki (Test Lead),
Todd Eliason (Tester), Marc
Sanders (Development Lead), Developer 1 (TBD),
Developer 2 (TBD), Developer 3 (TBD), Ryan Neff
(Functional Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional Analyst)
1.8.3 Perform Validation Testing 80 Kara Siposki (Test Lead),
Todd Eliason (Tester), Marc

1.9 Deployment
1.9.1 Implement System 80 Kara Siposki (Test Lead), Todd
Eliason (Tester), Marc
1.9.2 Deploy To Production 8 Kara Siposki (Test Lead), Todd
1.9.3 Project Wrap-Up 90 Kara Siposki (Test Lead), Todd
(Functional Lead), Stacy Lyle (Functional Analyst),
Rick Burke (Infrastructure Lead)
A
&
D
H
IG

H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K
E
L
1
56
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H

O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
1
7
E
x
h
ib
it
9

:
S
ch
e
d
u
lin
g
T
a
s
k
ID
W
B
S
ID
T
a

s
k
N
a
m
e
W
o
rk
E
st
im
a
te
(d
a
ys
)
L
e
ve
lin

g
D
e
la
y
(e
d
a
ys
)
P
re
d
e
ce
ss
o
rs
R
e
so
u

rc
e
N
a
m
e
1
1
O
ve
ra
ll
P
ro
je
ct
0
2

1
.1
P
ro
je
ct
M
a
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
0
3
1

.1
.1
M
a
n
a
g
e
P
ro
je
ct
1
2
7
0
5
9
F
F

C
h
ri
s
Jo
h
n
so
n
(
P
ro
je
ct
M
a
n
a
g
e
r)
4

1
.2
S
ys
te
m
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts
0
5
1

.2
.1
G
a
th
e
r
B
u
si
n
e
ss
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts

8
0
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d

),
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l
A
n
a
ly
s
t)
6

1
.2
.2
D
e
si
g
n
B
u
si
n
e
ss
P
ro
ce
ss
F
lo
w
s

4
0
5
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d

),
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l
A
n
a
ly
s
t)
7

1
.2
.3
F
in
a
liz
e
T
e
ch
n
ic
a
l R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e

n
ts
6
0
R
ic
k
B
u
rk
e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re

L
e
a
d
)
8
1
.2
.4
C
re
a
te
O
p
e
ra
tio
n
a
l R
e

q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts
1
5
0
5
,
6
R
ya
n
N
e
ff

(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
),
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct

io
n
a
l
A
n
a
ly
s
t)
,
R
ic
k
B
u
rk
e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru

ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
9
1
.2
.5
Id
e
n
tif
y
T
e
ch
n
ic

a
l I
n
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
N
e
e
d
s
2
0
7
,
8
R

ic
k
B
u
rk
e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
1
0
1

.3
S
o
ft
w
a
re
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts
0
1
1

1
.3
.1
C
re
a
te
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n

ts
0
5
,
6
,
8
1
2
1
.3
.1
.1
C
a
p
tu
re
C

u
st
o
m
e
r
P
ro
fil
e
4
0
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u

n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
1
3
1
.3
.1
.2
V
ie
w
a
n
d

S
e
a
rc
h
P
ro
d
u
ct
C
a
ta
lo
g
6
5
R
ya
n

N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
1
4
1
.3
.1
.3

U
p
d
a
tin
g
a
n
d
C
a
lc
u
la
tin
g
S
h
o
p
p
in
g
C

a
rt
3
0
1
3
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a

l L
e
a
d
)
1
5
1
.3
.1
.4
T
a
ki
n
g
P
a
ym
e
n

ts
6
6
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
c
tio
n
a
l A
n
a
ly

s
t)
1
6
1
.3
.1
.5
S
u
b
m
it
O
rd
e
r
4
0

1
2
,
1
3
,
1
4
,
1
5
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io

n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
1
7
1
.3
.1
.6
C
h
e
ck
O
rd
e
r
H

is
to
ry
&
O
rd
e
r
S
ta
tu
s
3
0
1
6
R
ya
n
N
e

ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
1
8
1
.3
.2
C
re
a

te
D
a
ta
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts
3
0
1
2
,
1
3

S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
c
tio
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
1
9

1
.3
.3
C
re
a
te
E
R
P
I
n
te
rf
a
ce
R
e
q
u
ir
e

m
e
n
ts
7
0
1
6
S
S
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n

c
tio
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
2
0
1
.3
.4
C
re
a
te
U
se
r

In
te
rf
a
ce
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n
ts
4
0
1
1
S
S

S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
c
tio
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(

A
)
K
E
L
1
56
K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M

A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
1
8
E
x
h
ib
it
9
(
co
n
tin
u
e

d
)
T
a
s
k
ID
W
B
S
ID
T
a
s
k
N
a
m
e
W

o
rk
E
st
im
a
te
(d
a
ys
)
L
e
ve
lin
g
D
e
la
y
(e

d
a
ys
)
P
re
d
e
ce
ss
o
rs
R
e
so
u
rc
e
N
a
m
e

2
1
1
.4
D
e
ta
ile
d
D
e
si
g
n
0
1
0
2
2

1
.4
.1
D
e
si
g
n
C
a
p
tu
re
C
u
st
o
m
e
r
P
ro
fil

e
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
1
3
.5
0

M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),

R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
[5
0
%
]
2

3
1
.4
.2
D
e
si
g
n
V
ie
w
a
n
d
S
e
a
rc
h
P
ro

d
u
ct
C
a
ta
lo
g
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts

1
3
.5
0
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
1
(
T
B
D
),
R
ya
n

N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
[5
0
%
]
2
4
1

.4
.3
D
e
si
g
n
U
p
d
a
tin
g
a
n
d
C
a
lc
u
la
tin
g

S
h
o
p
p
in
g
C
a
rt
6
0
2
3
D
e
ve
lo
p
e

r
1
(
T
B
D
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a

d
)
2
5
1
.4
.4
D
e
si
g
n
T
a
ki
n
g
P
a
ym
e
n

ts
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
6
1
1
M

a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),
S

ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
2
6
1

.4
.5
D
e
si
g
n
S
u
b
m
it
O
rd
e
r
P
a
g
e
s
&
C

o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
1
6
0
2
2
,
2
3
,
2
4
,
2

5
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a

d
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
)
2
7

1
.4
.6
D
e
si
g
n
C
h
e
ck
O
rd
e
r
H
is
to
ry
&
O

rd
e
r
S
ta
tu
s
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
4

0
2
6
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n

t
L
e
a
d
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d

)
2
8
1
.4
.7
D
e
si
g
n
L
o
g
ic
a
l &
P
h
ys
ic

a
l D
a
ta
M
o
d
e
l
1
8
0
S
a
n
ja
y
V
o
h
ra

(
D
B
A
),
S
ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
st

)
2
9
1
.4
.8
D
e
si
g
n
E
R
P
I
n
te
rf
a
ce

2
0
0
2
2
,
2
3
,
2
4
,
2
5
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r

1
(
T
B
D
),
S
ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a

ly
s
t)
3
0
1
.5
T
e
st
P
la
n
n
in
g
0
3
1

1
.5
.1
G
a
th
e
r
T
e
st
in
g
R
e
q
u
ir
e
m
e
n

ts
1
4
2
3
1
1
K
a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i (
T
e
st
L
e

a
d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(
T
e
st
e
r)
3
2
1
.5
.2

C
re
a
te
S
ys
te
m
T
e
st
P
la
n
&
T
e
st
C
a
se
s
2

0
0
3
1
,
2
1
K
a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i (
T
e
st
L
e
a

d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(
T
e
st
e
r)
3
3
1
.5
.3
W

ri
te
S
ys
te
m
T
e
st
S
cr
ip
ts
2
2
0
3
2
K
a

ra
S
ip
o
sk
i (
T
e
st
L
e
a
d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(
T

e
st
e
r)
3
4
1
.6
T
e
ch
n
ic
a
l I
n
fr
a
st
ru
ct

u
re
0
3
5
1
.6
.1
C
re
a
te
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e

n
t
E
n
vi
ro
n
m
e
n
t
2
0
0
9
R
ic
k
B
u
rk

e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
3
6
1
.6
.2
C

re
a
te
T
e
st
in
g
E
n
vi
ro
n
m
e
n
t
3
4
.2
0
3

5
R
ic
k
B
u
rk
e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
[9

0
%
]
3
7
1
.6
.3
S
u
p
p
o
rt
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n

t
E
n
vi
ro
n
m
e
n
t
3
.8
0
3
5
R
ic
k
B
u
rk

e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
[1
0
%
]
3
8
1
.6

.4
S
u
p
p
o
rt
T
e
st
in
g
E
n
vi
ro
n
m
e
n
t
&
D

e
p
lo
ym
e
n
t
4
6
0
3
6
R
ic
k
B
u
rk
e
(
In

fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)
3
9
1
.6
.5
S
u
p
p
o

rt
D
a
ta
b
a
se
4
.6
0
4
7
S
a
n
ja
y
V
o
h

ra
(
D
B
A
)
[1
0
%
]
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K
E
L
1
56
K
E
L
L

O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E
N
T
1
9

E
x
h
ib
it
9
(
co
n
tin
u
e
d
)
T
a
s
k
ID
W
B
S

ID
T
a
s
k
N
a
m
e
W
o
rk
E
st
im
a
te
(d
a

ys
)
L
e
ve
lin
g
D
e
la
y
(e
d
a
ys
)
P
re
d
e
ce
ss
o
rs

R
e
so
u
rc
e
N
a
m
e
4
0
1
.7
D
e
ve
lo
p
m

e
n
t
&
U
n
it
T
e
st
0
3
5
4
1
1
.7
.1
B

u
ild
C
a
p
tu
re
C
u
st
o
m
e
r
P
ro
fil
e
P
a
g
e
s
&

C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
1
3
0
2
2
D
e
ve
lo
p
e

r
2
(
T
B
D
)
4
2
1
.7
.2
B
u
ild
V
ie
w
a
n
d
S

e
a
rc
h
P
ro
d
u
ct
C
a
ta
lo
g
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m

p
o
n
e
n
ts
1
2
0
2
3
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(

T
B
D
)
4
3
1
.7
.3
B
u
ild
U
p
d
a
tin
g
a
n
d
C

a
lc
u
la
tin
g
S
h
o
p
p
in
g
C
a
rt
7
0
2
4
,

4
2
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
)
4
4
1
.7
.4
B

u
ild
T
a
ki
n
g
P
a
ym
e
n
ts
P
a
g
e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o

n
e
n
ts
6
1
4
2
5
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B

D
)
4
5
1
.7
.5
B
u
ild
S
u
b
m
it
O
rd
e
r
P
a
g

e
s
&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
2
4
0
2
6
,
4
1
,

4
2
,
4
3
,
4
4
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B
D
),
D
e

ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
)
4
6
1
.7
.6
B
u
ild
C
h

e
ck
O
rd
e
r
H
is
to
ry
&
O
rd
e
r
S
ta
tu
s
P
a
g
e
s

&
C
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
ts
6
0
2
7
M
a
rc
S
a

n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
)
4
7
1
.7

.7
B
u
ild
L
o
g
ic
a
l &
P
h
ys
ic
a
l D
a
ta
M
o
d
e
l

1
5
.5
0
2
8
S
a
n
ja
y
V
o
h
ra
(
D
B
A
)
[5

0
%
]
4
8
1
.7
.8
B
u
ild
E
R
P
I
n
te
rf
a
c
e

1
8
0
2
9
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
1
(
T
B
D
)
4
9

1
.7
.9
S
u
p
p
o
rt
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
&
A
ss
e
m

b
ly
T
e
st
4
6
0
2
1
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(
F
u
n

ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
),
S
ta
cy
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l

A
n
a
ly
s
t)
5
0
1
.8
T
e
st
in
g
0
5
1

1
.8
.1
P
e
rf
o
rm
A
ss
e
m
b
ly
T
e
st
in
g
0

3
1
5
2
1
.8
.1
.1
P
e
rf
o
rm
P
h
a
se
1
T
e

st
in
g
1
2
0
4
1
,
4
2
,
4
3
M
a
rc
S
a
n

d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
)
5
3
1
.8
.1

.2
P
e
rf
o
rm
P
h
a
se
2
T
e
st
in
g
2
0
0
4

4
,
4
5
,
4
6
,
5
2
,
4
7
,
4
8
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d

e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r

1
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo

p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
)
5
4
1
.8
.2
P
e
rf
o
rm
S
ys

te
m
T
e
st
in
g
1
6
0
0
5
1
,
3
2
,
3
3
K

a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i (
T
e
st
L
e
a
d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(

T
e
st
e
r)
,
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e

n
t
L
e
a
d
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
1
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve

lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
),
R

ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
),
S
ta
c
y
L
yl

e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
5
5
1
.8
.3
P
e

rf
o
rm
V
a
lid
a
tio
n
T
e
st
in
g
8
0
0
5
4
K

e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
A
&
D
H
IG
H
T
E
C
H
(
A
)
K
E
L
1
56

K
E
L
L
O
G
G
S
C
H
O
O
L
O
F
M
A
N
A
G
E
M
E

N
T
2
0
E
x
h
ib
it
9
(
co
n
tin
u
e
d
)
T
a
s
k

ID
W
B
S
ID
T
a
s
k
N
a
m
e
W
o
rk
E
st
im
a

te
(d
a
ys
)
L
e
ve
lin
g
D
e
la
y
(e
d
a
ys
)
P
re
d

e
ce
ss
o
rs
R
e
so
u
rc
e
N
a
m
e
5
6
1
.9
D

e
p
lo
ym
e
n
t
0
5
0
5
7
1
.9
.1
Im
p
le

m
e
n
t
S
ys
te
m
8
0
0
K
a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i
(T

e
st
L
e
a
d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(
T
e
st
e
r)
,
M
a

rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),
D

e
ve
lo
p
e
r
1
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B

D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u

n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
),
S
ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n

a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
5
8
1
.9
.2
D
e
p
lo
y
T
o
P
ro
d

u
ct
io
n
8
0
5
7
K
a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i (
T
e
st
L

e
a
d
),
T
o
d
d
E
lia
so
n
(
T
e
st
e
r)
,
M
a
rc
S

a
n
d
e
rs
(
D
e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),
D
e
ve
lo

p
e
r
1
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B
D
),
D

e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3
(
T
B
D
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io

n
a
l L
e
a
d
),
S
ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n

a
ly
s
t)
5
9
1
.9
.3
P
ro
je
ct
W
ra
p
-U
p
9
0

0
5
8
K
a
ra
S
ip
o
sk
i
(T
e
st
L
e
a
d
),
T
o
d

d
E
lia
so
n
(
T
e
st
e
r)
,
M
a
rc
S
a
n
d
e
rs
(
D

e
ve
lo
p
m
e
n
t
L
e
a
d
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
1
(
T
B

D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
2
(
T
B
D
),
D
e
ve
lo
p
e
r
3

(
T
B
D
),
R
ya
n
N
e
ff
(F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l L
e
a
d
),

S
ta
c
y
L
yl
e
(
F
u
n
ct
io
n
a
l A
n
a
ly
s
t)
,
R
ic

k
B
u
rk
e
(
In
fr
a
st
ru
ct
u
re
L
e
a
d
)

Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx

Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx

Similar to Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx (20)

More from SUBHI7

More from SUBHI7 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Risk Matrix TemplateRisk MatrixProject Name Risk#.docx