Show me anyone who is employing formal risk assessment methods before every flight, especially in private flying, and I'll show you someone who should not be flying an aeroplane (or any aerial conveyance). Come to think of it, they're probably spending so much time filling out pointless forms that they don't have time to fly anyway!
Using checklists is best practice in formal risk management and I seem to remember that these are quite widely used in flying light aircraft.
Too many people on this thread are making inappropriate judgments driven by emotion, as a result of cognitive bias.
There is a balance to be struck in flying light aircraft and one does not wish to get bogged down with needless bureaucracy, but on the other some rigour is also required for safe flight.
For example, what are the risks in flying a SEP.
One is obviously total engine failure.
If one visualises a grid of 4 cells, in two layers of two, with a scale of low to high across the top and up the left hand side and the top axis reading 'severity of impact' and the left hand reading 'probablility', one has constructed a probability/impact matrix.
How probable is a total engine failure? Well I don't know anyone who has had one, although I have read of a number on here, so let's say LOW.
How severe is the impact of total engine failure? Well that depends. The financial impact must be assumed to be HIGH as the point of failure is unpredictable and it would be wise to assume the worst case, but the more important aspect of personal safety can be estimated .....
EFATO is potentially HIGH, as there may be strictly limited options.
In IMC, it may be HIGH due to a low cloudbase and limited options on becoming visual.
At night, it may be HIGH, due to more difficult field selection.
Over the water, it may be HIGH due to the nature of ditching and subsequent survival challenges.
In VMC, with a route planned over lots of fields with low standing crops, I would say LOW.
I can then choose a sensible risk response for each potential event.
For all events, I will insure my aircraft against damage, because even though the probablity is low, the impact is high.
From a safety perspective, I have some options to mitigate the impact....
For EFATO, become familiar with the forced landing options immediately around the airfield.
For IMC, decide whether the flight is viable.
At night, fly a tight circuit so a forced landing can be made on the airfield.
Over water, carry sensible survival equipment and get trained in using it.
In VMC, keep looking for suitable fields as you fly and practice forced landings enought o stay current.
I could also choose to stop flying and avoid the risk completely, but as the probablity is LOW, I would not feel the need to take such a drastic step.
What I have just described is a process of formal risk management, conforming to ANSI/PMI 99-001-2008, a US nantional standard.
But, please note, (a) I haven't filled in a form (just used a mental model) and (b) my process has not covered anything that airmanship would not cover.
The risk management process in flying light singles should be more concerned with becoming aware of the risks and remedies, than doing some exotic calculation to define them to four decimal points - I mean, what is the MTBF and standard deviation for an aero engine and does this really mean anything to a PPL? I would argue not really.
For new PPL's, I am surprised that using a P/I matrix is not on the syllabus, as it is a very effective method to seperate the component of Probability from the component of Impact and to relate these together as I did above, to clarify thinking and help to develop airmanship - without writing anything down.
Thats my tuppenceworth and as ever, many will no doubt disagree.