Abstract

It has been discussed at great length how dealing with the management of research projects can conduct to many and different kinds of risks. From structural to unpredictable, from regulatory to practical ones, up to financial instabilities, risks are physiological, inevitable and exciting aspects of a project for a RM. However, before a risky-event occurs, several strategies can be put in place to assess the actual possibility of such event to happen and foreseen mitigation measures to reduce its effects.
First, it is necessary to recall the definition of risk and how it is modeled within the RM field. It is imperative to clarify the distinction between risk and danger, also in accordance with the different results they can produce. Assuming that risk is a situation involving the exposure to peril, it appears evident how we are still operating within the field of possibility, but also of prevention (sometimes even of opportunity), and this is the reason why a virtuous RM can guide his/her project also on slippery roads, always taking into consideration different variables and multiple scenarios.
Public calls, deadlines, financial sustainability and even geographical distances can represent a florid field for risk to flourish. National regulations, to name an example, can be very strict and unbending in the eligibility of certain cost categories that, on the other hand, could be vital for the feasibility and success of a project. This applies, for instance, in those projects that follow a doubled-reporting path, at international level and at national one. The risky element in this case occurs when the two levels do not dialogue among each other, having incoherent results in reporting and thus in the project feasibility and sustainability.
How and when should then a RM intervene to reduce the risk is a very practical and changeable question that admits different and likewise unpredictable answers, but first of all it depends on the context and what is at risk in research projects. It must be clear that what is at stake, here, is that unforeseen events are quite a ritual in the RM everyday working life, but the capability to assess, prevent and eventually reduce their footprint on the project can be studied and applied to ensure its safe and successful development. First of all, a careful analysis of the project call already gives the boundaries for the space of manoeuvre of the RM action. Secondly, a correct and shared planning of the actions and efforts helps in scheduling the steps of the project and align team members’ expectations and intentions. Finally, a constant monitoring of the expenditures and activities allows to periodically assess the risk and update the foreseen mitigation measures accordingly.
In conclusion, taking a risk is always one of the two sides of a coin, and can often represent the successful action to take. An experienced RM should be confident that risk will accompany each project, but will not necessarily hamper its fluidity while, on the other hand, could create space for good and proper research management.