By: Professor Wilmer Arellano

 "Prevention is better than cure"
 is hardly practiced and
 it is only when a surprise boils into a crisis that managers react.
 Hariharan
 Controller
 Perstorp Aegis Chemicals Pvt Ltd.

 Feasibility Definitions
 Goals
 Types of Feasibility
 Feasibility Assessment
• 1 to 5 Score
• Weighted Score
• Pugh’s Method
 Risk

 The quality of being doable

WordNet® 2.1, © 2005 Princeton University
 A feasibility study is:
 a detailed analysis of a company and
 its operations that is conducted in order to
 predict the results of a specific future course of action.
 http://www.answers.com/topic/feasibilitystudy-2

 Will the project be a success?
 The objective of a feasibility study is:
 To find out if a project can be done:

 Technical
 Resource
 Economic
 Schedule
 Operational
 Cultural
 Legal
 Marketing

 Is the project possible with current technology?
 Does the technology exist at all?
 Is it available locally?
 Can it be obtained?
 Are fundamentally new inventions required?
 How much Technical Risk is there?

 Do we have sufficient skills?
 Do we have sufficient equipment?
 Do we have sufficient number of people?
 How much Resource Risk is there?

 Is the project possible, given resource constraints?
 What benefits will result from the system?
 Both tangible and intangible benefits
 Quantify them!
 What are the development and operational costs?
 Are the benefits worth the costs?
 How much Economic Risk is there?





Tangible Benefits
Readily quantified as $ values, examples:



 increased sales cost/error reductions increased throughput/efficiency increased margin on sales
 more effective use of staff time
Intangible benefits
Difficult to quantify, but maybe more important, examples:
 increased flexibility of operation


 higher quality products/services better customer relations improved staff morale

 What are the chances of meeting the intermediate mileposts?
 What are the chances of meeting the
PDR (Preliminary Design Review) requirements?
 What are the chances of meeting the
CDR (Critical Design Review) requirements?




The PDR is a multi-disciplined technical review to ensure that the system under review can proceed into detailed design, and can meet the stated performance requirements within cost (program budget), schedule
(program schedule), risk, and other system constraints.
The CDR is a multi-disciplined technical review to ensure that the system under review can proceed into system fabrication, demonstration, and test; and can meet the stated performance requirements within cost
(program budget), schedule (program schedule), risk, and other system constraints. http://akss.dau.mil/dag/TOC_GuideBook.asp?sNode=
R4-3-3-4-4&Exp=Y

 Urgency of the problem and the acceptability of any solution:
 If the system is developed, will it be used?

 Social acceptability?
 Will there be a positive impact on the local culture.
 Will there be a positive impact on general culture.
 Potential labor objections?
 Manager resistance?

 Organizational conflicts and policies?
 Laws or regulations impeding the
Project?
 Laws of regulation limiting the project

 Will the general public accept the product?





Feasibility is Measured Against Attributes
1 to 5 Scale. By using a scale we can obtain information of the possible causes for failure
Weighted Scale. Same as 1 to 5 scale the different attributes contribute to the total in different proportion.
Pugh’s Method. All attributes has the same weight. Count + vs. –
Attribute
Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
Do we have sufficient equipment?
Do we have sufficient a number of people?
X
X
Why?
Solution
We don't know how to program microcontrollers
The Lab Does not have a Program
Station
Take a Crash Course
Buy One
X Three people in the team Enough

This is not a template, use your own attributes
Attribute
Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
Do we have sufficient equipment?
Do we have sufficient a number of people?
Schedule feasibility
What are the chances of meeting the intermediate mileposts?
Economic feasibility
Why?
Solution
2
3
We don't know how to program microcontrollers
The Lab Does not have a
Program Station
Take a Crash Course
Buy One
5 Three people in the team Enough
5
We have carefully analyzed the schedule and we are convinced that it is OK
Not Required
Is the project possible, given resource constraints?
TOTAL
AVERAGE
2
17
3.4
We have only 25% of the required funds
Find a sponsor

This is not a template, use your own attributes
Attribute Why?
Solution
Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
Do we have sufficient equipment?
Do we have sufficient a number of people?
Schedule feasibility
What are the chances of meeting the intermediate mileposts?
Economic feasibility
0.43
0.18
0.24
0.07
Is the project possible, given resource constraints?
0.07
TOTAL
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
2.0
3.0
5.0
0.86
0.54
We don't know how to program microcontrollers
The Lab Does not have a
Program Station
Take a Crash Course
Buy One
1.2
Three people in the team Enough
5.0
3.0
0.99
17.0
0.35
We have carefully analyzed the schedule and we are convinced that it is OK
Not Required
0.21
3.16
3.19
We have only 25% of the required funds
Weighted
Find a sponsor
Average



W .
Score
Weight

Skills Equipment People Mileposts Economic Resources
Skills 1 5 3 3 3
Equipment 1/5 1 1 3 3
People 1/3
Mileposts 1/3
Economic Resources 1/3
1
1/3
1/3
1
1/5
1/5
5
1
1
5
1
1
1 = equal 3 = moderate 5 = strong 7 = very strong 9 = extreme
Skills Equipment People Mileposts Economic Resources G. Mean
Skills 1.00
5.00
3.00
3.00
3.00
2.667269
w
0.43
Equipment 0.20
People 0.33
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.00
5.00
3.00
5.00
1.124746
1.528142
0.18
0.24
Mileposts 0.33
Economic Resources 0.33
0.33
0.33
0.20
0.20
1.00
1.00
Total
1.00
1.00
0.467044
0.07
0.467044
0.07
6.254244
G .
Mean

( A
1

A
2 w

G .
Mean / total
    
A
N
) N
1

This is not a template, use your own attributes
Attribute
Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
Do we have sufficient equipment?
Do we have sufficient a number of people?
Schedule feasibility
What are the chances of meeting the intermediate mileposts?
Economic feasibility
1
Is the project possible, given resource constraints?
1
TOTAL
DIFFERENCE
2
+ Why?
1
1
1
3
1
We don't know how to program microcontrollers
The Lab Does not have a
Program Station
Take a Crash Course
Buy One
Three people in the team Enough
We have only 25% of the required funds
Solution
We have carefully analyzed the schedule and we are convinced that it is OK
Not Required
Find a sponsor

 The possibility of suffering loss
 Risk involves uncertainty and loss:
 Uncertainty: The degree of certainty about whether the risk will happen.
 Loss: If the risk becomes a reality, unwanted consequences or losses will occur.

 Technical
 Resource
 Economic
 Schedule
 Operational
 Cultural
 Legal
 Marketing


“The purpose of risk management is to identify potential problems before they occur so that action can be taken to reduce or eliminate the likelihood and/or impact of these problems should they occur.”





Risk Exposure Matrix
Clear and well defined risk acceptance thresholds are required in order to define the level of risk that can be tolerated.
The Exposure Matrix can be used to prevent entering into a project
You may use a fishbone diagram to discover risks
Class IV
Class III
Class II
Class I
Very Likely
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Severe
Moderate
Likelihood of Occurrence
Possible
Catastrophic
Severe
Moderate
Low
Unlikely
Severe
Moderate
Low
Low






In ongoing projects, the Exposure Matrix can be used to as a managing tool
Class I: Risks that are below the risk acceptance threshold and do not require active management
Class II: Risks that lie on the risk acceptance threshold and require active monitoring
Class III: Risks that exceed the risk acceptance threshold and require proactive management
Class IV: Risks that significantly exceed the risk acceptance threshold and urgent and immediate attention

M1
Survey
Indicated Price
Constraint
L1
Any Laws of
Regulation against
Project?
Marketing
Legal
R1
Skills to be
Acquired
R2
Team Size
E2
T1 Would
Require Extra
Funding
E1
Funding
Required
Resource
T1
New Invention
Required
T2 Technology
Does Not
Exist
Technical
R2,M1, T2
S2
E1
Class IV
Class III
Class II
Class I
Likelihood of Occurrence
Legend
Very Likely Possible Unlikely
T1, E2 Catastrophic
S2, E1
R1,L1, S1 R2
T2 M1
Severe
Moderate
Low
Actions
None
Assign Duties For Break Period
Designate a Dedicated Person to Solve This Issue
Continue Process
Senior II
Project Not
Completed on Time
S2
Impact of
Semester's
Break
S1
Team Members
Procrastination
All Considerations Fictitious
Use Facts That Apply to You Project
Economic Schedule






 http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~sme/CSC340F/slides/05feasibility.pdf
http://www.cdf.toronto.edu/~csc340h/winter/
Dorofee, A. J., Walker, J. A., Alberts, C. J., Higuera, R.
P., Murray, T. J., and Williams, R. J. Continuous Risk
Management Guidebook.
Pressman, R. S. 1997. Software Engineering: A
Practitioner’s Approach. New York, USA: McGraw
Hill.
Risk analysis and management guidance
June 2005, www.riotinto.com

 Definitions
 Goals
 Types of feasibility
 Feasibility Assessment
• 1 to 5 Score
• Weighted Score
• Pugh’s Method
 Risk

Q
A