Establishing a Realistic Performance Expectation
Hedging with Stakeholders entails setting expectations on quality, quota and unit cost that are achievable. In other words, negotiating a lower learning curve than you think you can achieve leaving some wiggle room for misadventures in process management.
As per classical project management practice, uncertainty is generally broken into Known unknowns and unknown unknowns, i.e. adverse events that can be identified without the ability to establish the certainty of the event transpiring and adverse events for which one would want to bank a reserve given experience with this type of project for which there is no identifiable event per se. For Level 2 Project Managers, getting the science of risk forecasting correct can make the difference between winning and losing a bid and between making a profit or loss at the end of the project. With this contingency can be applied to ensure the Project Manager keeps things on the proper side of the balance sheet.
This is a challenging consideration for Level 3 initiatives. The Dynamic complexity inherent in Level 3 is not readily predictable. Risks considered at Level 2 revert substantially to unknown unknowns. It should be know from the outset that a Level 3 initiative will entail a dynamically evolving methodology to maintain course for the objective. Success in this regard is not measured by adherence to cost and schedule as one would at Level 2, but rather by the skillful strategy imparted by the Project Manager in learning swiftly, forecasting intelligently, compromising as required, and to achieve all that, persevering.
The bitter reality is, they never achieve their objective. In lectures we often refer to this a zero percent chance of success. At the outset, there is no prescribed reference for success or failure. The project needs to be initiated, to then engage the end user base with whom you will find the objective. Hence, the zero percent success rate is a logical deduction. Level 4 initiatives are often initiated with a Level 2 Framework. Though, fallacious, the initial baselining may provide some useful orientation of the organization.
If we think the dynamics are Level 4 resulted in 0% chance of succeeding with the initial concept, Level 5's have higher dynamics. The make or break for these initiatives remains contingent on sound public facilitation.