Feasibility Analysis
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.

Overview
Feasibility Definitions
 Goals
 Types of Feasibility
 Feasibility Assessment
 Risk

Goals
Will the project be a success?
 The objective of a feasibility study is:


To find out if a project can be done
Types of Feasibility
Technical
 Resource
 Economic
 Schedule
 Cultural
 Legal
 Marketing

Technical Feasibility
Does the technology exist?
 Is it available locally?
 Can it be obtained?
 Are fundamentally new inventions
required?
 How much Technical Risk is there?

Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
 Do we have sufficient equipment?
 Do we have sufficient number of
people?
 How much Resource Risk is there?

Economic Feasibility


Is the project possible, given resource
constraints?
How much Economic Risk is there?
Schedule Feasibility
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?

Feasibility Analysis



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
Cultural Feasibility

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?

Legal Feasibility
Organizational conflicts and policies?
 Laws or regulations impeding the
Project?
 Laws of regulation limiting the project

Marketing Feasibility

Will the general public accept the
product?
Feasibility Assessment
Do we have
sufficient
skills?
Do we have
sufficient
equipment?
Do we have
sufficient a
number of
people?
5 High
4
2
Attribute
Resource Feasibility
3 Med
1 Low

Feasibility is Measured Against Attributes
Weighted Scale. 1 to 5 scale the different attributes contribute to the
total in different proportion.
Weight

X
X
X
Why?
Solution
We don't know how to program
microcontrollers
Take a Crash Course
The Lab Does not have a Program
Station
Buy One
Three people in the team
Enough
Weighted Scale Example
Attribute
Score
This is not a template, use your own attributes
Why?
Solution
Resource Feasibility
Do we have sufficient skills?
Do we have sufficient
equipment?
Do we have sufficient a
number of people?
TOTAL
AVERAGE
2.0
3.0
5.0
10.0
3.33
We don't know how to program
Take a Crash Course
microcontrollers
The Lab Does not have a Program
Buy One
Station
Three people in the team
Enough
Obtaining Weights
Technical
Resource
Economic
Schedule
Cultural
Legal
Marketing
1 = equal
Technical
Resource
Economic
Schedule
Cultural
Legal
Marketing
1
1/5
1/3
1/3
1/3
1/5
1/5
5
1
1
1/3
1/3
1/5
1/5
3
1
1
1/5
1/5
1/3
1/5
3
3
5
1
1
1
5
3
3
5
1
1
1
1
5
5
3
1
1
1
3
5
5
5
1/5
1
1/3
1
3 = moderate
5 = strong
7 = very strong
9 = extreme
Technical
Technical
Resource
Economic
Schedule
Cultural
Legal
Marketing
1.00
0.20
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.20
0.20
Resource
5.00
1.00
1
0.33
0.33
0.20
0.20
Economic
3.00
1
1.00
0.20
0.20
0.33
0.20
Schedule
Cultural
3.00
3
5
1.00
1.00
1.00
5.00
3.00
3.00
5.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Total
G.Mean  ( A1  A2         AN )
w  G.Mean / total
Legal
5.00
5.00
3.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
3.00
1
N
Marketing G. Mean
5.00
5.00
5.00
0.20
1.00
0.33
1.00
3.191825
1.722555
1.993235
0.46129
0.580533
0.46129
0.738677
9.149405
w
0.35
0.19
0.22
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.08
Weighted Scale Example
Attribute
Weight
Score
W. Score
Technical
Resource
Economic
Schedule
Cultural
Legal
Marketing
0.35
0.19
0.22
0.05
0.06
0.05
0.08
1.00
4.0
3.3
3.0
5.0
3.0
5.0
2.0
25.3
1.40
0.63
0.66
0.25
0.18
0.25
0.16
3.53
3.53
TOTAL
WEIGHTED AVERAGE
Weighted Average 
W .Score
Weight
Risk
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.

Risk Categories
Technical
 Resource
 Economic
 Schedule
 Cultural
 Legal
 Marketing

Proactive Risk Management

“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 Assessment



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
Likelihood of Occurrence
Undesirable
Outcomes

Very Likely
Possible
Unlikely
Class IV
Catastrophic
Catastrophic
Severe
Class III
Catastrophic
Severe
Moderate
Class II
Severe
Moderate
Low
Class I
Moderate
Low
Low
Risk Management





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
2. Determine your Risks
Fault Tree Analysis
1. Brainstorm
Resource
Technical
T1
New Invention
Required
R1
Skills to be
Acquired
M1
Survey
Indicated Price
Constraint
Legal
Class
Class
Class
Class
IV
III
II
I
Likelihood of Occurrence
Legend
Very Likely Possible Unlikely
T1, E2 Catastrophic
S2, E1
Severe
R1,L1, S1
R2
Moderate
T2
M1
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
E2
T1 Would
Require Extra
Funding
E1
Funding
Required
R2,M1, T2
S2
E1
T2 Technology
Does Not
Exist
R2
Team Size
L1
Any Laws of
Regulation
against
Project?
Undesirabl
e
Outcomes
Marketing
S2
Impact of
Semester's
Break
3. Determine your responses
S1
Team Members
Procrastination
Economic
All Considerations Fictitious
Use Facts That Apply to You Project
Schedule
Continuous Risk Management
References






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
Review
Definitions
 Goals
 Types of feasibility
 Feasibility Assessment
 Risk

&
Questions
Answers