This is not how I'd expect any professional engineering team to do risk mitigation. This is not hard. Enumerate risks. List them. Talk about them. If you wan

This is not how I'd expect any professional engineering team to do risk mitigation. This is not hard. Enumerate risks. List them. Talk about them. If you want to turn into something prioritisable, for each one, quantify them: on a scale of 1 to 10 what's the likelihood? On a scale of 1 to 10, what's the impact? Multiply the numbers. Communicate these numbers and see if others agree with your assessment of the numbers. As a team, if the product is more than 15, spend some time thinking about mitigation work you can do to reduce either likelihood or impact or both. The higher the number, the more important you put mitigations into your backlog or "definition of done". Below 15? Check with the team you're going to ignore this. Mitigations are extra work. They add time. They slow down delivery. That's fine, you add them to your backlog as dependent tasks, and your completion estimates move out. Need to hit a deadline? Look at descoping, and include in that descoping a conversation about removing some of the risk mitigations and accepting the risk likelihood and impact. Having been EM, TL and X in this story (and the TPM, PM, CTO and other roles), I don't want a "knob" that people are turning in their heads about their subjective measure of "careful". I want enumerated risks with quantified impact and likelihood and adult conversations about appropriate mitigations that lead to clear decisions.