Milestone map
Milestone map
3 milestones
Identify Hazards and Define the Risk Assessment Scope
1–2 weeks (3–4 hrs/week)
Select a real or realistic engineering system or project for technical risk assessment: a manufacturing facility, a construction project, an infrastructure asset, a chemical process, a software system, or an engineering design. Define the scope: what is being assessed, the system boundary, the hazard categories in scope (safety, environmental, financial, schedule, reputational, or combination), and the risk assessment method to be used (FMEA, HAZOP, Bow-Tie, quantitative risk assessment, project risk register, or equivalent). Identify ≥10 hazards using structured elicitation — brainstorming, checklist, SWIFT (Structured What-If Technique), or equivalent — and document each hazard with its source, potential consequence category, and the element of the system it affects.
Proof required
Submit your hazard identification record (≥10 hazards identified using a named structured method, each with source, consequence category, and system element affected) and scope document (system boundary, hazard categories in scope, and risk assessment method selected).
What gets checked
- Hazard identification uses a named structured method — FMEA, SWIFT, HAZOP, or brainstorming checklist — not an unstructured list
- ≥10 hazards are identified across ≥3 different consequence categories — not all the same type of hazard
- System boundary is defined — what elements are included and excluded from the assessment
Common mistakes
- Hazard identification that lists causes rather than hazards — a hazard is a potential source of harm; a cause is what activates it; confusing the two produces a list of control measures instead of risks
- All hazards in the same consequence category — a risk assessment that only identifies one type of risk misses the cross-category hazards that often cause the most damage
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm hazard identification uses a named structured method — flag unstructured lists.
- Confirm ≥10 hazards span ≥3 consequence categories — flag single-category hazard lists.
- Confirm system boundary is defined with inclusions and exclusions stated.
Assess Likelihood and Consequence, Build Risk Register
2–3 weeks (3–4 hrs/week)
For each hazard from M1, assess likelihood and consequence severity using a defined scale (e.g. 1–5 probability × 1–5 severity, or the system-specific scale from the chosen assessment method). Calculate the risk rating (likelihood × severity) and plot the risks on a risk matrix. Identify the top 5 highest-rated risks and for each: describe the existing controls in place, assess the residual risk after controls, and determine whether the residual risk is tolerable (ALARP principle for safety risks, or equivalent). A risk register without existing controls is an incomplete assessment — it shows the inherent risk but not the managed risk.
Proof required
Submit your risk register (all ≥10 hazards with likelihood, severity, risk rating, existing controls, and residual risk rating) and a risk matrix showing all risks plotted, with the top 5 highest risks highlighted and their residual risk after controls assessed.
What gets checked
- Risk register includes both inherent risk rating AND residual risk rating after existing controls — not just one of the two
- Likelihood and severity scales are defined and applied consistently — not applied differently to different hazards
- Top 5 highest risks are specifically identified with their existing controls documented
Common mistakes
- Risk register without residual risk — documenting the inherent risk without assessing existing controls is a hazard list, not a risk assessment; controls must be identified and their effect on risk rating must be assessed
- Inconsistent scale application — applying 'likelihood = 3 (likely)' differently to two similar hazards undermines the comparative validity of the risk matrix
Resources
Foundationstart here
Depthgo deeper
What a verifier looks for
- Confirm risk register includes both inherent and residual risk ratings — flag any register missing controls or residual assessment.
- Confirm likelihood and severity scale is defined and applied consistently across all hazards.
- Confirm top 5 highest-rated risks are identified with their existing controls documented.
Write the Risk Assessment Report and Propose Treatment Actions
2–3 weeks (2–3 hrs/week)
Write a complete technical risk assessment report (2,000–3,000 words plus risk register appendix) covering: scope and method, hazard identification process, risk rating results, risk matrix, residual risk assessment, and treatment recommendations for the top 5 unacceptable or amber/red risks. Each treatment recommendation names a specific action, the responsible party, a target completion date, and the expected residual risk after treatment. Have the report reviewed by an engineer with risk assessment experience and respond to Q&A on the hazard identification completeness and treatment recommendations.
Proof required
Submit your risk assessment report (2,000–3,000 words plus risk register) and review record: reviewer name, role, ≥3 challenge questions about hazard completeness or treatment recommendations, and your responses.
What gets checked
- Treatment recommendations name a specific action, responsible party, and target date — not just 'reduce risk'
- Expected residual risk after treatment is estimated for each top-5 risk — not assumed to become acceptable without evidence
- Reviewer has risk assessment, health and safety, or project management experience and challenged the hazard completeness or treatment specificity
Common mistakes
- Treatment recommendations that list 'monitor the risk' without a specific action — monitoring is not a risk treatment; it is a risk escalation mechanism; each unacceptable risk must have a concrete action to reduce likelihood or consequence
- Expected residual risk estimated without a rationale — 'after treatment, this risk becomes low' requires an explanation of which control reduces likelihood or consequence and by how much
Resources
Foundationstart here
What a verifier looks for
- Engineering Design Triad check: M1–M3 together produce a design artifact (risk treatment recommendations with owners and dates), an analysis artifact (risk register with inherent and residual ratings + risk matrix), and a documentation artifact (risk assessment report + review record) — confirm all three types are present.
- Confirm treatment recommendations name a specific action, responsible party, and target date — flag vague 'monitor' recommendations.
- Confirm expected residual risk after treatment has a rationale for each top-5 risk.
- Confirm reviewer has risk assessment or engineering experience and challenged hazard completeness or treatment specificity.
- The Proof Accessibility Rule applies — ISO 31000 free overview, HSE free guidance, APM free resources, IRM free materials, and draw.io (free) are all accessible without commercial licence.
Part of