【文章內(nèi)容簡介】 k norms Uniform cultural standard work performance Differing standards for work performce Risk management in such a collaborative environment must therefore address these new challenges, including differences in anizational cultures and goals, software development and documentation practices, intellectual property and security, and management conflicts resulting from changes in the business environment. Detection and mitigation are plicated by the distributed nature of problems and by the lack of a central authority. Appropriate planning, a risk management strategy, and wellstructured prehensive risk plans are needed to address each of these problems effectively. A collaborationaware risk management plan thus bees a necessary agreement and a critical binding and facilitation tool supporting collaboration. Collaborative software development therefore introduces changes to the traditional dimensions of risk classification shown in Table 3, including: (1) Form, view, and source: Additional perspectives on the risks must be added, and planning and resources to mitigate the associated problems must be supported. (2) Type: New risk types can be identified, related to collaboration. (3) Definiteness: A significant advantage to collaborationaware risk management is that some previously predictable risks bee known risks, so that they can be avoided, and some previously unpredictable or unknown risks bee predictable risks, so that a specific strategy can be developed. (4) Level, impact, and scope: Change in risk likelihood and effect can be observed certain kinds of risks and certain effects bee more likely and significant。 others may bee less significant. (5) Source, driver, and type: Many risks are likely to arise at the interfaces between collaborating partners, rather than within a single anization. New alternatives must be added in each case to identify these new problems. Table 3 Dimensions for Classifying Risk Dimensions for Classifying Risk Dimension Group Dimension Key Question Categories Nature and cause of risk Form What factor is stressed? Resource, technical, business, environmental, platform View In which aspect of the process will the problem occur? Technical/product。 requirements and technical environment management support, etc Source Which activities or constrains cause the problem? Product definition, business impact/environment, process definition, development environment, innovation, staff skills/training, legal/regulatory Definiteness Degree of risk Definiteness Known in advance? Known, predictable, unpredictable, unknowable Level How likely to arise? Estimated probability range Impact How serious if occurs? Negligible to significant to catastrophic Scope How much affected? Isolated ponent to subsystem to entire system Location of effects Diver What business aspects are most affected? Market, performance, support environment, cost, schedule, deployment, relationships Type How does it manifest? Functional specification/expectation Performance or other extrafunctional requirements Schedule, budget, process pliance Collaborative impact Contagion Where are the effects? Intraanizational, interface, global Trust How is ongoing cooperation/trust affected? Unaffected, recoverable, damaged, unrecoverable In addition, risk analysis must address the ongoing relationship between partners, rather than just the success of a single product or project. This overarching concern for collaboration and ongoing relationships introduces two new risk dimensions (and a new dimension group), as shown at the bottom of Table 3: ? Contagion (and risk confinement): Many risks, even those occurring within a single anization, may have effects beyond the anization. Where a risk cannot be confined to a single anization, it must be addressed collaboratively. ? Trust: Once collaboration has deteriorated, it is difficult or impossible to restore a good working relationship. Each risk must be examined for its potential effects on existing relationships. Collaborative software development also impacts the support activities in Table 1: ? Risk munication: Risk information has to be municated to multiple anizations, and risk information from multiple anizations must be correlated. ? Risk planning, RMMM review, and responsibility for managing project risks: When there are interanizational effects, there is no clear decisionmaking entity and central authority to administer and manage the RMMM effort. Ⅳ PRINCIPLES OF COLLABORATIVE RISK MANAGEMENT Successful collaboration requires collaborationaware management, intra and interanizationally. This entails collaborationaware risk management, which is an extension of traditional risk management as well as teambased risk management (Higuera et al., 1994, Higuera et al., 1994a): In the continuing application of the risk management process to large software development programs, the most dramatic effect has been in opening the munication channels for dialogues within anizations relating to risk and risk management. In addition to the usual benefits of a rigorous approach to risk management, collaborative risk management may itself be an important early step in establishing trust and handling cultural and language problems. Cultural familiarity and trust have consistently been identified among the top four important success factors in collaboration (Powell et al., 2020). Thus, a new and different set of munication protocols, standards, policies, and strategies are needed to ? Help with establishment and growth of trust ? Evaluate the suitability and adequacy of management and IT processes for support of both technical and social aspects of interteam and interanizational munication ? Address anizational, social, cultural, linguistic,