What are the basic qualitative methods for identifying risk factors? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each method?

What will be an ideal response?

A number of qualitative methods are available for conducting risk factor identification for industry specific risks. A brainstorming meeting is valuable for bringing a team together and generating many ideas quickly. If one member dominates a brainstorming meeting or members pass judgment on ideas as they are generated, such a meeting may be less valuable. The Delphi method collects expert opinions anonymously in two or more rounds of questions posed by an expert. There is no "in-the-moment" synergy among experts unless a real-time decision support system is being used, but there is also little chance of a single member dominating the proceedings. The Delphi method would also suffer if the experts were unable to articulate their methods or if the moderator screened out an idea that might have triggered additional thoughts. The "experience counts" approach looks for individuals in the organization that have had similar project experiences and seeks their input with regards to "lessons learned" and risks anticipated. This method is less formal and the lack of structure may result in less knowledge transfer, but it permits great richness of observations. Past history examines patterns that have emerged prior to problems in previous projects. This technique is appropriate if the same underlying causal structure is assumed to exist, but there is no guarantee that history is a reliable predictor of the future. Multiple (or team-based) assessments bring together a diverse group of team members that specialize in different aspects of the project and therefore have a different perspective on potential risks. This approach encourages identification of a comprehensive set of risks but carries with it the pitfalls that accompany any group discussion exercise.