| 1 |
ROI/Cost-Benefit analysis is quantitative, or where qualitative, is explicitly justified |
Pass |
The Cost–Benefit Assessment states costs as qualitative with no external cost and lists benefits; the qualitative form is labelled. |
| 2 |
Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation |
Pass |
Risks table has Risk, Impact and Mitigation for every row. |
| 3 |
Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations |
Pass |
Four criteria, each with a target and a measure. |
| 4 |
Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope |
Pass |
Scope has separate In Scope and Out of Scope lists. |
| 5 |
Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline |
Pass |
Stakeholders table uses S01 to S05; the ID, not a role description, identifies each. |
| 6 |
Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman) |
Pass |
Methodological and Standards Foundation cites the framework, Larman and ISO/IEC 25010:2023. |
| 7 |
Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another |
Pass |
Separate Assumptions and Constraints sections. The 2026-10-10 change edits the mirror assumption only. |
| 8 |
Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation |
Pass |
Recommendation section: Proceed, with the reason. |
