Читать книгу Microsoft Ignite A Complete Guide - 2020 Edition - Gerardus Blokdyk - Страница 8
ОглавлениеCRITERION #2: DEFINE:
INTENT: Formulate the stakeholder problem. Define the problem, needs and objectives.
In my belief, the answer to this question is clearly defined:
5 Strongly Agree
4 Agree
3 Neutral
2 Disagree
1 Strongly Disagree
1. How did the Microsoft Ignite manager receive input to the development of a Microsoft Ignite improvement plan and the estimated completion dates/times of each activity?
<--- Score
2. Are resources adequate for the scope?
<--- Score
3. Has a high-level ‘as is’ process map been completed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
4. What are the Microsoft Ignite use cases?
<--- Score
5. How do you manage scope?
<--- Score
6. Is the improvement team aware of the different versions of a process: what they think it is vs. what it actually is vs. what it should be vs. what it could be?
<--- Score
7. Are all requirements met?
<--- Score
8. Is there a completed, verified, and validated high-level ‘as is’ (not ‘should be’ or ‘could be’) stakeholder process map?
<--- Score
9. Are customer(s) identified and segmented according to their different needs and requirements?
<--- Score
10. Do you have a Microsoft Ignite success story or case study ready to tell and share?
<--- Score
11. What is a worst-case scenario for losses?
<--- Score
12. Why are you doing Microsoft Ignite and what is the scope?
<--- Score
13. What is the scope of the Microsoft Ignite effort?
<--- Score
14. What constraints exist that might impact the team?
<--- Score
15. Are there different segments of customers?
<--- Score
16. What is in scope?
<--- Score
17. Is data collected and displayed to better understand customer(s) critical needs and requirements.
<--- Score
18. How do you think the partners involved in Microsoft Ignite would have defined success?
<--- Score
19. What are the record-keeping requirements of Microsoft Ignite activities?
<--- Score
20. Who defines (or who defined) the rules and roles?
<--- Score
21. Is Microsoft Ignite currently on schedule according to the plan?
<--- Score
22. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Microsoft Ignite work? How is the team addressing them?
<--- Score
23. What would be the goal or target for a Microsoft Ignite’s improvement team?
<--- Score
24. How is the team tracking and documenting its work?
<--- Score
25. Is it clearly defined in and to your organization what you do?
<--- Score
26. Is there a Microsoft Ignite management charter, including stakeholder case, problem and goal statements, scope, milestones, roles and responsibilities, communication plan?
<--- Score
27. What are the Roles and Responsibilities for each team member and its leadership? Where is this documented?
<--- Score
28. Is there a completed SIPOC representation, describing the Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, and Customers?
<--- Score
29. Who is gathering information?
<--- Score
30. What are the rough order estimates on cost savings/opportunities that Microsoft Ignite brings?
<--- Score
31. What information do you gather?
<--- Score
32. When is/was the Microsoft Ignite start date?
<--- Score
33. How do you manage unclear Microsoft Ignite requirements?
<--- Score
34. What system do you use for gathering Microsoft Ignite information?
<--- Score
35. What baselines are required to be defined and managed?
<--- Score
36. What Microsoft Ignite services do you require?
<--- Score
37. How do you hand over Microsoft Ignite context?
<--- Score
38. Has/have the customer(s) been identified?
<--- Score
39. What is out-of-scope initially?
<--- Score
40. Are different versions of process maps needed to account for the different types of inputs?
<--- Score
41. Has everyone on the team, including the team leaders, been properly trained?
<--- Score
42. Is the current ‘as is’ process being followed? If not, what are the discrepancies?
<--- Score
43. When is the estimated completion date?
<--- Score
44. How do you manage changes in Microsoft Ignite requirements?
<--- Score
45. How have you defined all Microsoft Ignite requirements first?
<--- Score
46. How are consistent Microsoft Ignite definitions important?
<--- Score
47. Will team members regularly document their Microsoft Ignite work?
<--- Score
48. What are the requirements for audit information?
<--- Score
49. Are audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods defined?
<--- Score
50. Has a team charter been developed and communicated?
<--- Score
51. Has a Microsoft Ignite requirement not been met?
<--- Score
52. How can the value of Microsoft Ignite be defined?
<--- Score
53. Is the Microsoft Ignite scope manageable?
<--- Score
54. How do you catch Microsoft Ignite definition inconsistencies?
<--- Score
55. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
56. What was the context?
<--- Score
57. Do the problem and goal statements meet the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound)?
<--- Score
58. What sort of initial information to gather?
<--- Score
59. Does the scope remain the same?
<--- Score
60. What specifically is the problem? Where does it occur? When does it occur? What is its extent?
<--- Score
61. How was the ‘as is’ process map developed, reviewed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
62. What are (control) requirements for Microsoft Ignite Information?
<--- Score
63. Is the team equipped with available and reliable resources?
<--- Score
64. Has the improvement team collected the ‘voice of the customer’ (obtained feedback – qualitative and quantitative)?
<--- Score
65. Have specific policy objectives been defined?
<--- Score
66. What is the definition of Microsoft Ignite excellence?
<--- Score
67. What scope do you want your strategy to cover?
<--- Score
68. In what way can you redefine the criteria of choice clients have in your category in your favor?
<--- Score
69. Are task requirements clearly defined?
<--- Score
70. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
71. What are the Microsoft Ignite tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
72. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Microsoft Ignite?
<--- Score
73. Will a Microsoft Ignite production readiness review be required?
<--- Score
74. What is the scope of Microsoft Ignite?
<--- Score
75. Has anyone else (internal or external to the group) attempted to solve this problem or a similar one before? If so, what knowledge can be leveraged from these previous efforts?
<--- Score
76. How will variation in the actual durations of each activity be dealt with to ensure that the expected Microsoft Ignite results are met?
<--- Score
77. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
78. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?
<--- Score
79. What is the context?
<--- Score
80. What Microsoft Ignite requirements should be gathered?
<--- Score
81. Are required metrics defined, what are they?
<--- Score
82. How do you build the right business case?
<--- Score
83. Are the Microsoft Ignite requirements testable?
<--- Score
84. Are accountability and ownership for Microsoft Ignite clearly defined?
<--- Score
85. Is the Microsoft Ignite scope complete and appropriately sized?
<--- Score
86. How do you gather Microsoft Ignite requirements?
<--- Score
87. What intelligence can you gather?
<--- Score
88. How would you define Microsoft Ignite leadership?
<--- Score
89. Have all basic functions of Microsoft Ignite been defined?
<--- Score
90. What critical content must be communicated – who, what, when, where, and how?
<--- Score
91. Who is gathering Microsoft Ignite information?
<--- Score
92. How often are the team meetings?
<--- Score
93. How do you keep key subject matter experts in the loop?
<--- Score
94. Are roles and responsibilities formally defined?
<--- Score
95. Who approved the Microsoft Ignite scope?
<--- Score
96. What scope to assess?
<--- Score
97. How and when will the baselines be defined?
<--- Score
98. The political context: who holds power?
<--- Score
99. Is there a critical path to deliver Microsoft Ignite results?
<--- Score
100. What key stakeholder process output measure(s) does Microsoft Ignite leverage and how?
<--- Score
101. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?
<--- Score
102. Is Microsoft Ignite linked to key stakeholder goals and objectives?
<--- Score
103. Is the scope of Microsoft Ignite defined?
<--- Score
104. What defines best in class?
<--- Score
105. Will team members perform Microsoft Ignite work when assigned and in a timely fashion?
<--- Score
106. Scope of sensitive information?
<--- Score
107. Is there a clear Microsoft Ignite case definition?
<--- Score
108. What information should you gather?
<--- Score
109. How does the Microsoft Ignite manager ensure against scope creep?
<--- Score
110. What are the dynamics of the communication plan?
<--- Score
111. What sources do you use to gather information for a Microsoft Ignite study?
<--- Score
112. Is the work to date meeting requirements?
<--- Score
113. Is special Microsoft Ignite user knowledge required?
<--- Score
114. What gets examined?
<--- Score
115. Is full participation by members in regularly held team meetings guaranteed?
<--- Score
116. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
117. Has the direction changed at all during the course of Microsoft Ignite? If so, when did it change and why?
<--- Score
118. Does the team have regular meetings?
<--- Score
119. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?
<--- Score
120. How do you gather the stories?
<--- Score
121. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?
<--- Score
122. How would you define the culture at your organization, how susceptible is it to Microsoft Ignite changes?
<--- Score
123. How do you gather requirements?
<--- Score
124. What are the boundaries of the scope? What is in bounds and what is not? What is the start point? What is the stop point?
<--- Score
125. Is there any additional Microsoft Ignite definition of success?
<--- Score
126. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
127. Have all of the relationships been defined properly?
<--- Score
128. What knowledge or experience is required?
<--- Score
129. What happens if Microsoft Ignite’s scope changes?
<--- Score
130. Has the Microsoft Ignite work been fairly and/or equitably divided and delegated among team members who are qualified and capable to perform the work? Has everyone contributed?
<--- Score
131. If substitutes have been appointed, have they been briefed on the Microsoft Ignite goals and received regular communications as to the progress to date?
<--- Score
132. How will the Microsoft Ignite team and the group measure complete success of Microsoft Ignite?
<--- Score
133. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
134. Has your scope been defined?
<--- Score
135. Where can you gather more information?
<--- Score
136. Who are the Microsoft Ignite improvement team members, including Management Leads and Coaches?
<--- Score
Add up total points for this section: _____ = Total points for this section
Divided by: ______ (number of statements answered) = ______ Average score for this section
Transfer your score to the Microsoft Ignite Index at the beginning of the Self-Assessment.
