Question 1
An architect has made an assumption that existing support staff are adequately skilled to operate the proposed infrastructure design.
The risk associated with this assumption would be that existing support staff are inadequately skilled to operate the proposed infrastructure design.
How would the architect mitigate the risk?
I agree with the suggested answer B. While a skills assessment (Option A) is a necessary prerequisite to understanding the extent of the problem, it is an analysis or assessment activity rather than a mitigation strategy. Mitigation requires taking action to reduce the impact or likelihood of the risk, which is achieved by providing the resources (time and budget) to bridge the skill gap.
Reason
Option B is correct because Risk Mitigation involves taking specific actions to minimize the impact of a risk. Since the risk is that staff are 'inadequately skilled,' the direct way to mitigate this is to ensure they become adequately skilled through training. By allocating budget and time, the architect ensures the plan is actionable and the risk is physically addressed before the infrastructure goes into production.
Why the other options are not as suitable
- Option A is incorrect because it is an assessment of the risk, not a mitigation. Identifying a gap does not close it; the staff remain unskilled until training occurs.
- Option C is incorrect because engaging a third party for deployment and configuration only addresses the implementation phase, leaving the Day 2 operations (which the support staff are responsible for) still at risk.
- Option D is incorrect because hiring staff with the same skillsets does not solve the problem if the existing skillsets are what was identified as inadequate for the new design.