Tirsvad
a1ff73580f
Review BC-001, SA-001, PP-001 and MIL-001 and record the results as RC-001 to RC-004. All four verdicts are Go, so their Version History rows become Accepted and the previous rows Deprecated. MIL-002 to MIL-004 stay Proposed. BC-001 failed criterion 1 (cost-benefit not justified as qualitative). Add the justification and a target-completion constraint (2026-10-14) that PP-001 and MIL-001 are checked against. Add the Traceability Matrix (TM-001) and register RC and TM in the artifact registry. PP has no QC checklist, so RC-003 checks the plan against BC-001 and the milestones instead. Author and reviewer are both S01, a deviation noted in each record. Refs #5
48 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
48 lines
2.0 KiB
Markdown
# SQA Review Record: Business Case
|
||
|
||
## Metadata
|
||
| Key | Value |
|
||
| --- | --- |
|
||
| ID | RC-001 |
|
||
| CrossReference | [BC-001], [QC-BC-001] |
|
||
|
||
## Version History
|
||
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|
||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||
| 2026-10-04 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | pending |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
## Artifact Under Review
|
||
|
||
- Instance reviewed: [BC-001]
|
||
- Checklist used: [QC-BC-001]
|
||
|
||
## Checklist Results
|
||
|
||
| # | Criterion | Status | Evidence/Notes |
|
||
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||
| 1 | ROI/Cost-Benefit analysis is quantitative, or where qualitative, is explicitly justified | Pass | Qualitative; justification paragraph added under Cost–Benefit Assessment (personal project, no revenue or budget). |
|
||
| 2 | Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation | Pass | Three risks, each with impact and mitigation. |
|
||
| 3 | Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets | Pass | Five criteria with target and measure. |
|
||
| 4 | Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope | Pass | Separate subsections. |
|
||
| 5 | Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs | Pass | S01–S03 used; the table only states interest. |
|
||
| 6 | Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (Optional) | Pass | SQA/QC framework and ISO/IEC 25010:2023 named. |
|
||
| 7 | Assumptions and constraints are explicit and distinguished | Pass | Separate sections; target date added to Constraints. |
|
||
| 8 | Document supports executive decision-making with a clear recommendation | Pass | Recommendation: Proceed, with rationale. |
|
||
|
||
## Overall Verdict
|
||
|
||
Go — all mandatory and optional criteria pass. Reviewer and author are both S01: the project has a single participant, so the framework's author/reviewer separation cannot be met. S01 accepted this deviation when requesting acceptance (2026-10-04).
|
||
|
||
## Action Items
|
||
|
||
| Action | Owner | Due |
|
||
| --- | --- | --- |
|
||
| None | — | — |
|
||
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
[BC-001]: ../../business-case.md
|
||
[QC-BC-001]: ../../../framework/qc/qc-business-case.md
|