Skip to content
WHO/AFRO HIS Review

Search is only available in production builds. Try building and previewing the site to test it out locally.

11 · Risk register (client-facing)

Owner: Pallavi Dani · Editors: Steven Uggowitzer, Stephanie Berrada (political-sensitivity review) Effort: ~1.0 person-day · Due: v0.5 EOD Fri 2026-09-04 · v0.8 Fri 2026-09-11

What WHO expects here

A register that reads as honest — every risk paired with a mitigation and a review cadence — without exposing internal team politics or capacity concerns. WHO reviewers see through a sanitised register that omits obvious risks (e.g., “the ten-week timeline is tight”) just as easily as they see through an over-shared register that names individuals in embarrassing ways.

Sanitisation posture

Client-facing language is deliberately different from internal-team language. No IQVIA-internal politics; no Simon-Steven-Charles capacity language; no consultant-personal-risk material. Political-sensitivity review with Stephanie before submission.

Ultimate contents

Table structure

IDRiskLikelihoodImpactMitigationOwnerReview cadence

Risks visible to WHO (categories)

  • Timeline — ten-week envelope; dependency on contract signature date; validation-workshop availability.
  • Access — availability of WHO focal points for KIIs; access to WHO/AFRO IT registers; access to prior-incumbent design documentation.
  • Data — completeness of the platform inventory; verifiability of cost data; anonymisation of KII transcripts.
  • Delivery — Brazzaville trip logistics; francophone-support availability; language balance of KIIs.
  • Scope — shadow-IT layer discovery may surface material we did not scope for; cost baseline may not be obtainable in the ten-week window.
  • Governance — steering committee cadence; escalation-ladder responsiveness.

Risks deliberately NOT in the client-facing register

Named here in the docs-site skeleton so future authors remember what belongs in the internal Part M register instead: IQVIA-internal politics; individual consultant capacity concerns; commercial-envelope pressure; opinions about prior incumbents’ work.

Review cadence

Weekly review at the Friday progress update (C14). Amber-and-above risks reviewed at each steering committee meeting (C15/C16). Any risk that moves from amber to red triggers an escalation email within 24 hours.

Evidence to draw on

  • workspace/plan/00_MASTER_PLAN.md Part M (internal risk register)
  • IQVIA Technical Approach §Risk Management (bid-committed baseline)
  • Boucher briefing on morale / scale / burn caution

Complementary effort triggered

Sanitisation pass over Part M. Political-sensitivity review with Stephanie. Explicit statement of what is deliberately NOT in the client-facing register so future authors do not accidentally leak internal material.