Can you please develop appropriate response strategies, including a proposed course of action, to effectively manage each identified risk below.

Through the visual representation of the cause-effect diagram, it is possible to extract the following risks that Robert L. Frank Construction Company presents to develop the Lewis Project: It highlights challenges such as delays in the delivery of materials, possible budget excesses, tensions due to project prioritisation, discrepancies between customer expectations and company capacity, and technical challenges associated with the involvement of multiple operating divisions. Each point is addressed in detail below.

• Delays in vendors' materials: The project schedule is at risk of being delayed due to the dependence with suppliers. Delays can occur for various reasons, such as unfavourable environmental conditions, internal production issues, or logistical challenges. These delays can have a direct impact on the project schedule and lead to additional expenses such as the need to resort to alternative suppliers who have higher prices to meet established deadlines. This could result in possible cost overruns.

• Budget Overrun: Cost overruns can be a significant risk for any project. This can happen due to inaccurate cost estimates or unforeseen expenses. Several factors can contribute to this risk, including changes in the project scope resulting from unclear scope definitions at the beginning or changes requested by stakeholders during the development process. Another factor may be inaccurate or unrealistic estimates of labour hours or projected material costs. Going over the allocated budget can deplete financial resources, cause dissatisfaction among stakeholders, and compromise the project's quality.

• Lewis Project Prioritization: Given the current financial situation of Robert L. Frank Construction Company, where the number of projects has been decreased, the Lewis project has been given an elevated level of importance. However, this could potentially have a negative impact on the team. The increased priority may lead to high levels of stress and lower team morale, as well as causing hasty decisions or unnecessary risks due to the excessive expectations surrounding the project. Increased workload and pressure to meet deadlines can lead to burnout and decreased productivity, which could compromise the quality of work and increase the risk of errors.

• Lack of alignment between customer expectations and the company's delivery capacity: Since the project was prioritised as a measure to drive the financial recovery of Robert L. Frank Construction Company, there is a risk of setting unrealistic expectations in terms of project timelines, quality and scope. If Lewis has unrealistic expectations or constant changes in project requirements, it could create significant challenges in execution. This could result in conflicts between the customer and the company, delivery delays, increased costs due to constant changes, and lower customer satisfaction.

• Technical Challenges: The requirement for both Frank Chicago operating divisions to participate in the Lewis project presents a unique challenge regarding project coordination and integration. Since previous contracts were typically suitable for either the Petroleum and Chemicals Division (P&C) or the Iron and Steel Division (I&S), the involvement of both divisions implies a need for collaboration and alignment of expertise in different technical domains. The chemical process involved in the Lewis project, which transforms coal into a form of liquid energy, presents specialised requirements that may span the expertise of both divisions. However, each division may have different approaches, standards and methodologies, which could potentially lead to coordination problems and discrepancies in project execution.