026-nato-alphabet/docs/sqa/reviews/rc-001-business-case.md

SQA Review Record RC-001: BC-001

Metadata

Key	Value
ID	RC-001
CrossReference	BC-001, QC-BC-001, QC-LANG-001

Version History

Date	Status	Author	Reviewer	Change	Commit
2026-10-13	Accepted	Jens Tirsvad Nielsen	AI as stand-in for S01	Review of BC-001	7212302

---

Artifact Under Review

• Instance reviewed: BC-001
• Checklist used: QC-BC-001 and QC-LANG-001
• Scope: full review
• Language and domain: en / it
• Language reviewer: none (the reviewer reads the language and knows the domain)
• Mode: autonomous, not independent (the reviewer is AI as stand-in for S01)

Checklist Results

#	Criterion	Status	Evidence/Notes
1	ROI/Cost-Benefit analysis is quantitative, or where qualitative, is explicitly justified	Pass	Cost-Benefit is qualitative and the section states why (personal learning exercise, no revenue).
2	Risks are identified with documented impact and mitigation	Pass	Five risks, each with impact and mitigation.
3	Success criteria are measurable, stating explicit targets rather than vague aspirations	Pass	Six success criteria, each with a numeric or checkable target and a measure.
4	Scope explicitly separates In Scope vs Out of Scope	Pass	### In Scope and ### Out of Scope are separate subsections.
5	Stakeholders are cross-referenced to Stakeholder Analysis IDs rather than re-described inline	Pass	The Stakeholders table cites S01, S02 and S03 from [SA-001]; roles are not re-described.
6	Methodology and quality-standard foundation are stated explicitly (e.g. ISO/IEC 25010, Larman)	Pass	The foundation section names the framework, ISO/IEC 25010:2023 and Clean Architecture.
7	Assumptions and constraints are explicit and clearly distinguished from one another	Pass	Assumptions and Constraints are separate sections.
8	Document supports executive decision-making with a clear, unambiguous recommendation	Pass	The Recommendation is a single "Proceed" with a rationale.

Language and Domain Results

#	Criterion	Status	Evidence/Notes
1	The Metadata table has a Language row and a Domain row, and neither is a placeholder	Pass	`Language
2	Language is a BCP 47 code and Domain is a value from the registry's domain list	Pass	en is a BCP 47 code; it is in the registry's domain list.
3	The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language	Pass	All prose and table cells are English; the course title is quoted source text. Checked by the stand-in reviewer, who reads English.
4	The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type	Pass	The registry gives IT Executive English for this type; the text matches it.
5	Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms	Pass	No dictionary (DICT) exists yet; the terms letter, code word and NATO alphabet are used consistently with no synonyms. Checked by the stand-in; open to challenge.
6	Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English	Pass	Metadata keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English.
7	No translated twin (<name>.<language>.md) exists beside the document	Pass	No translated twin of the file exists.
8	A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again	Pass	First version; no change of language or domain.
9	A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly	Pass	The domain is software and IT and the language English; the reviewer stood in for (S01) reads both. A person may challenge this in the run summary.
10	Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language	Pass	Abbreviations are spelled out on first use or are identifiers (IDs, tool names).

Overall Verdict

Go — every Mandatory criterion of QC-BC-001 and of QC-LANG-001 passes. The review is a stand-in review by the author's AI and is not independent; it is open to challenge in the run summary.

Action Items

Action	Owner	Due
None	S01	n/a

---