英语翻译As it becomes apparent from the above mentioned models,and as also noted by Raz and Hillson (2005),the risk management processes presented have a great deal in common,suggesting that there is a universal consensus regarding what the risk

英语翻译As it becomes apparent from the above mentioned models,and as also noted by Raz and Hillson (2005),the risk management processes presented have a great deal in common,suggesting that there is a universal consensus regarding what the risk
英语翻译
As it becomes apparent from the above mentioned models,and as also noted by Raz and Hillson (2005),the risk management processes presented have a great deal in common,suggesting that there is a universal consensus regarding what the risk management process should cover.Where there are apparent differences in processes,these are largely attributable to variations in terminology.This divergence in terminology as a matter of fact is one of the biggest problems towards standardization.The ISO/IEC (British Standards Institute,2002) definition guide was intended to create a common language for all risk standards documents,but this has not yet been reflected in currently available standards and methodologies.
However,despite this important unevenness,all the above mentioned risk models and standards suggest a very similar process for risk management,with the following stages:
• Initialization – Defining the Context,
• Risk Identification,
• Risk Analysis,
• Risk Response,
• Monitoring and Control,
• Communication.
The above-mentioned stages constitute the minimum common resultant of stages that are suggested in the risk management standards and models,since in some standards or models some additional elements beyond the central risk management process are included or a different scope of coverage is followed; certain standards cover mainly the risk management process itself,and ignore the aspects involved in establishing the organisational infrastructure needed to apply the process,or in some other cases,such as the COSO standard,they provide an integrated framework with other disciplines,e.g.internal control.
The focus of this paper will however be primarily on the three first stages,i.e.initialization,risk identification and risk analysis.
Considering program risk management and particularly large scale program risk management,as used in this paper,all presented standards / models tend to be quite general,without any particular specialization,leaving thus space for completely different approaches.Besides,it is interesting to note that none of these standards are currently used for certification purposes,though in some cases this has been proposed and is being actively pursued.Rather,they all provide guidance and advice,and encourage the adopting organisations to adapt them to their own needs.
用翻译器辅助也ok 只是麻烦理顺下语句

英语翻译As it becomes apparent from the above mentioned models,and as also noted by Raz and Hillson (2005),the risk management processes presented have a great deal in common,suggesting that there is a universal consensus regarding what the risk
根据上述模型,Raz和Hillson也指出,目前的风险管理过程中有很多相似之处,普遍的共识是关于风险管理过程中应包括些什么.当在过程中有明显的差异,这很大程度上是由于术语的变化.这种术语上的差异实际上是标准化的最大问题.ISO / IEC 定义指南的目的是为所有风险标准文件创造一个通用的语言,但是这目前还没有反映在现有的标准和方法上.
尽管这很重要,所有上述风险模型和标准都有非常类似的过程,其风险管理的阶段包括:
背景-定义 初始化
风险识别
风险分析
风险应对
监控
通讯
上述这些组成了风险管理水平和模型最少的共同阶段,因为在某些标准或模型的一些附加元素,超出了中央风险管理过程中所包含范围;某些标准涵盖了主要的风险管理过程本身,而忽视了其他方面包括建立组织基础设施,或在其他情况下,如COSO标准,它们提供了一个集成框架与其它条例,例如内部控制.
本文的重点是前三个阶段,即初始化、风险识别、风险分析.
考虑到项目的风险管理,特别是大型项目风险管理,标准/模式都很一般有很多共同点,没有任何特别的专业化,因此给完全不同的方法留下了空间.除此之外,有趣的是,这些标准没有目前用于鉴定的,虽然在某些情况下,这已经被提出,正积极追求.相反,他们都提供了指导和建议,并鼓励采用适应自己需要的结构