Читать книгу Source Coding A Complete Guide - 2020 Edition - Gerardus Blokdyk - Страница 8

Оглавление

CRITERION #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. 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

2. Has the direction changed at all during the course of Source coding? If so, when did it change and why?

<--- Score

3. 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

4. How have you defined all Source coding requirements first?

<--- Score

5. Scope of sensitive information?

<--- Score

6. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Source coding?

<--- Score

7. Are different versions of process maps needed to account for the different types of inputs?

<--- Score

8. How would you define the culture at your organization, how susceptible is it to Source coding changes?

<--- Score

9. Are the Source coding requirements complete?

<--- Score

10. What sources do you use to gather information for a Source coding study?

<--- Score

11. What is the context?

<--- Score

12. Are there different segments of customers?

<--- Score

13. When is the estimated completion date?

<--- Score

14. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?

<--- Score

15. Is there a clear Source coding case definition?

<--- Score

16. What critical content must be communicated – who, what, when, where, and how?

<--- Score

17. What are the Source coding tasks and definitions?

<--- Score

18. Is there a completed SIPOC representation, describing the Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, and Customers?

<--- Score

19. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?

<--- Score

20. Is there any additional Source coding definition of success?

<--- Score

21. What are the dynamics of the communication plan?

<--- Score

22. What was the context?

<--- Score

23. Has a Source coding requirement not been met?

<--- Score

24. What baselines are required to be defined and managed?

<--- Score

25. Are approval levels defined for contracts and supplements to contracts?

<--- Score

26. Have all basic functions of Source coding been defined?

<--- Score

27. How do you catch Source coding definition inconsistencies?

<--- Score

28. What happens if Source coding’s scope changes?

<--- Score

29. What would be the goal or target for a Source coding’s improvement team?

<--- Score

30. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Source coding work? How is the team addressing them?

<--- Score

31. Is the scope of Source coding defined?

<--- Score

32. Is the Source coding scope manageable?

<--- Score

33. Is the Source coding scope complete and appropriately sized?

<--- Score

34. What are the record-keeping requirements of Source coding activities?

<--- Score

35. Is data collected and displayed to better understand customer(s) critical needs and requirements.

<--- Score

36. How can the value of Source coding be defined?

<--- Score

37. What information should you gather?

<--- Score

38. Has the Source coding 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

39. When is/was the Source coding start date?

<--- Score

40. If substitutes have been appointed, have they been briefed on the Source coding goals and received regular communications as to the progress to date?

<--- Score

41. Is the work to date meeting requirements?

<--- Score

42. Is the current ‘as is’ process being followed? If not, what are the discrepancies?

<--- Score

43. How do you build the right business case?

<--- Score

44. What are the core elements of the Source coding business case?

<--- Score

45. What is the scope?

<--- Score

46. Are all requirements met?

<--- Score

47. Are customer(s) identified and segmented according to their different needs and requirements?

<--- Score

48. How do you manage unclear Source coding requirements?

<--- Score

49. What intelligence can you gather?

<--- Score

50. Who defines (or who defined) the rules and roles?

<--- Score

51. Is Source coding required?

<--- Score

52. Who is gathering Source coding information?

<--- Score

53. What is the definition of success?

<--- Score

54. What is the scope of the Source coding work?

<--- Score

55. How and when will the baselines be defined?

<--- Score

56. Has a team charter been developed and communicated?

<--- Score

57. What key stakeholder process output measure(s) does Source coding leverage and how?

<--- Score

58. What are the Roles and Responsibilities for each team member and its leadership? Where is this documented?

<--- Score

59. What are the tasks and definitions?

<--- Score

60. How do you think the partners involved in Source coding would have defined success?

<--- Score

61. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?

<--- Score

62. What sort of initial information to gather?

<--- Score

63. What is in scope?

<--- Score

64. Do you have a Source coding success story or case study ready to tell and share?

<--- Score

65. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?

<--- Score

66. Is it clearly defined in and to your organization what you do?

<--- Score

67. What knowledge or experience is required?

<--- Score

68. What are the Source coding use cases?

<--- Score

69. How does the Source coding manager ensure against scope creep?

<--- Score

70. How did the Source coding manager receive input to the development of a Source coding improvement plan and the estimated completion dates/times of each activity?

<--- Score

71. How is the team tracking and documenting its work?

<--- Score

72. What scope do you want your strategy to cover?

<--- Score

73. What is the scope of Source coding?

<--- Score

74. Has your scope been defined?

<--- Score

75. How do you hand over Source coding context?

<--- Score

76. In what way can you redefine the criteria of choice clients have in your category in your favor?

<--- Score

77. What is out of scope?

<--- Score

78. Is there a completed, verified, and validated high-level ‘as is’ (not ‘should be’ or ‘could be’) stakeholder process map?

<--- Score

79. Has a high-level ‘as is’ process map been completed, verified and validated?

<--- Score

80. Is there a critical path to deliver Source coding results?

<--- Score

81. How do you gather requirements?

<--- Score

82. Is special Source coding user knowledge required?

<--- Score

83. Have all of the relationships been defined properly?

<--- Score

84. Does the team have regular meetings?

<--- Score

85. How do you manage scope?

<--- Score

86. How will variation in the actual durations of each activity be dealt with to ensure that the expected Source coding results are met?

<--- Score

87. What constraints exist that might impact the team?

<--- Score

88. Are required metrics defined, what are they?

<--- Score

89. How often are the team meetings?

<--- Score

90. Why are you doing Source coding and what is the scope?

<--- Score

91. Does the scope remain the same?

<--- Score

92. Has the improvement team collected the ‘voice of the customer’ (obtained feedback – qualitative and quantitative)?

<--- Score

93. How are consistent Source coding definitions important?

<--- Score

94. What is the worst case scenario?

<--- Score

95. Has/have the customer(s) been identified?

<--- Score

96. Has everyone on the team, including the team leaders, been properly trained?

<--- Score

97. What is the definition of Source coding excellence?

<--- Score

98. What is a worst-case scenario for losses?

<--- Score

99. How will the Source coding team and the group measure complete success of Source coding?

<--- Score

100. What gets examined?

<--- Score

101. Do you all define Source coding in the same way?

<--- Score

102. What information do you gather?

<--- Score

103. What Source coding services do you require?

<--- Score

104. Are resources adequate for the scope?

<--- Score

105. Who are the Source coding improvement team members, including Management Leads and Coaches?

<--- Score

106. The political context: who holds power?

<--- Score

107. Is Source coding currently on schedule according to the plan?

<--- Score

108. Is Source coding linked to key stakeholder goals and objectives?

<--- Score

109. How do you gather the stories?

<--- Score

110. What system do you use for gathering Source coding information?

<--- Score

111. What are (control) requirements for Source coding Information?

<--- Score

112. Are roles and responsibilities formally defined?

<--- Score

113. 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

114. Are task requirements clearly defined?

<--- Score

115. What defines best in class?

<--- Score

116. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?

<--- Score

117. Will a Source coding production readiness review be required?

<--- Score

118. Where can you gather more information?

<--- Score

119. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?

<--- Score

120. Have specific policy objectives been defined?

<--- Score

121. Is there a Source coding management charter, including stakeholder case, problem and goal statements, scope, milestones, roles and responsibilities, communication plan?

<--- Score

122. Who is gathering information?

<--- Score

123. Is scope creep really all bad news?

<--- Score

124. How was the ‘as is’ process map developed, reviewed, verified and validated?

<--- Score

125. How would you define Source coding leadership?

<--- Score

126. How do you keep key subject matter experts in the loop?

<--- Score

127. Are audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods defined?

<--- Score

128. What Source coding requirements should be gathered?

<--- Score

129. Are the Source coding requirements testable?

<--- Score

130. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?

<--- Score

131. What are the requirements for audit information?

<--- Score

132. Do the problem and goal statements meet the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound)?

<--- Score

133. What specifically is the problem? Where does it occur? When does it occur? What is its extent?

<--- Score

134. What are the rough order estimates on cost savings/opportunities that Source coding brings?

<--- 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 Source coding Index at the beginning of the Self-Assessment.

Source Coding A Complete Guide - 2020 Edition

Подняться наверх