Risk Reduction vs Project Cost
Tier risks by consequence and probability, then apply proportionate controls rather than uniform mitigation intensity across all exposures.
CyberTRIZ analysis · GreenFieldIndustrialProjects contradiction SFR013 · one of 8,235 worked contradictions published by CyberTRIZ.AI
Regulations
Business Context
Reducing project risk can require additional studies, safeguards, contingency, redundancy, insurance, testing, and specialist resources. Applying maximum protection to every uncertainty can substantially increase project cost without producing proportional risk reduction.
Green Field Industrial Projects TRIZ Resolution
Differentiate risks by consequence, probability, detectability, and recoverability. Concentrate preventive investment on high-consequence exposures while using monitoring, flexibility, recovery capability, or transfer mechanisms for risks that do not justify permanent capital solutions.
Applicable TRIZ Principles
Principle 3 – Local Quality applies different protection levels according to actual risk.
Principle 11 – Beforehand Cushioning protects against significant foreseeable exposures before they occur.
Principle 23 – Feedback monitors changing risk conditions and triggers intervention when necessary.
Expected Outcome
Lower risk exposure
Controlled mitigation cost
Better use of contingency
More efficient risk management
Decision Indicators
Early indicators include:
All risks receive similar mitigation intensity.
Risk controls increase project cost without measurable exposure reduction.
Low-consequence risks receive expensive permanent solutions.
Major risks remain insufficiently protected despite extensive risk spending.
Risk reduction relies primarily on additional equipment or contingency.