1. Case Background

On 3rd January 2026, at approximately 10:30pm, I was involved in an unplanned road incident while driving toward Spintex Road. The vehicle experienced a sudden mechanical malfunction while navigating a sharp curve in a poorly lit area, resulting in damage to the suspension and immobilization of the vehicle. An Okada rider (motorbike rider) narrowly avoided a collision while swerving away.

No fatalities occurred, but the situation rapidly evolved into a high-uncertainty, multi-stakeholder incident requiring immediate decision-making under pressure.

This case study examines how project management principles (applied informally and in real time) enabled effective risk containment, stakeholder alignment, and adaptive resolution.

2. Risk Identification

Once the incident occurred, multiple risks were immediately present:

Primary Risks

 Safety risk: Potential injury to passengers and third parties

 Escalation risk: Panic, conflict, or blame leading to confrontation

 Legal and financial risk: Liability exposure and unresolved claims

 Operational risk: Vehicle immobilization in an unsecured location

At this point, risks were no longer hypothetical; they had materialized into active issues, requiring immediate response.

3. Risk Response Strategy: Stabilize Before Optimize

The initial response prioritized risk containment over optimization.

Actions Taken

 Activated hazard lights to prevent secondary risk incidents

 Confirmed the passenger was unharmed

 Checked the okada rider’s condition and avoided blame attribution

 Maintained calm, factual communication with bystanders

Rationale

The objective at this stage was not cost efficiency or fault determination, but stabilization:

 Prevent injury escalation

 Reduce emotional volatility

 Create space for rational decision-making

This aligns with risk response implementation, where exposure is reduced before longer-term

decisions are made.

4. Stakeholder Identification and Management

Key Stakeholders

 Vehicle passenger

 Okada rider

 Bystanders

 Local security personnel

 Author (accountable decision-maker)

Engagement Approach

Rather than attempting to address all concerns simultaneously, communication focused on:

 Clarifying immediate next steps

 Ensuring transparency

 Assigning clear responsibilities

The okada rider indicated a possible ankle injury. As no ride-hailing services were available, a taxi was arranged with assistance from bystanders, and he was accompanied to a nearby hospital. Before departure, the vehicle was relocated to a secure location and oversight delegated to on duty security personnel.

This approach reduced uncertainty and maintained stakeholder cooperation under stress.

5. Adaptive Approach Under Uncertainty

Following initial stabilization, attention shifted to resolution.

Constraint Analysis

 The incident occurred late at night

 It was a weekend (Sunday), limiting service availability

 Full scope of vehicle and bike damage was unknown

 Towing to distant workshops would significantly increase cost

Decision

Rather than committing to a fixed plan prematurely, an adaptive approach was adopted:

 Inspection preceded commitment

 Scope definition was deferred until facts were available

 Decisions were sequenced based on emerging information

This mirrors adaptive, time-and-materials-style logic, commonly used when scope cannot be reliably defined upfront.

6. Negotiation and Issue Resolution

Once medical treatment was completed, options for resolving the matter were discussed. While formal insurance processes existed, they were assessed as administratively heavy relative to the situation. By mutual agreement and within the specific context, a direct resolution path was selected.

A local mechanic near the incident site enabled immediate vehicle repairs, avoiding towing and extended downtime. The okada rider and I later negotiated a mutually acceptable amount to cover bike repairs once constraints were reassessed.

Clear agreement and follow-through enabled formal closure without escalation or residual conflict. This resolution reflected situational judgment under specific constraints and is not presented as a universal model for incident handling.

7. Retrospective: What Worked and WhyWhat Worked Well

 Early focus on stabilization prevented secondary risks

 Calm stakeholder engagement reduced conflict

 Adaptive planning avoided unnecessary cost and delay

 Explicit closure prevented lingering ambiguity

What Could Be Improved

 Earlier documentation of agreed decisions

 Faster access to emergency contacts and service providers

 Pre-incident contingency planning for vehicle failure scenarios

8. Lessons Learned

This incident reinforced several transferable project management lessons:

1. Risk response begins with stabilization, not optimization: Immediate containment reduces downstream complexity.

2. Stakeholder alignment is a risk response strategy: Clear communication prevents escalation more effectively than authority.

3. Adaptive approaches outperform predictive plans under uncertainty: Deferring commitment until information is available is often the safest choice.

4. Context matters in governance decisions: Effective management balances formal processes with situational realities.

5. Closure is intentional: Explicit agreements and follow-through prevent issues from resurfacing.

9. Conclusion

This real-world incident illustrates that project management is not limited to formal projects, documentation, or tools. It is fundamentally structured decision-making under uncertainty. Although informal in setting, the actions taken aligned with principles promoted by the Project Management Institute, demonstrating how professional judgment, adaptability, and stakeholder awareness translate effectively beyond traditional project environments.

Written by: Rukie Kwaku Agyeman, PMP