048-the-coockie-factory-new/docs/sqa/reviews/rc-002-stakeholder-analysis.md

SQA Review Record

Metadata

Key	Value
ID	RC-002
CrossReference	SA-001, QC-SA-001

Version History

Date	Status	Author	Reviewer	Change	Commit
2026-10-28	Accepted	Jens Tirsvad Nielsen	AI as stand-in for S02	Review record, full review	cadc5ef

---

Artifact Under Review

• Instance reviewed: SA-001
• Checklist used: QC-SA-001 (QC-SA-001)
• Scope: full review
• Language and domain: en / it
• Language reviewer: none
• Mode: autonomous, not independent (the reviewer is AI as stand-in for S02)

Checklist Results

#	Criterion	Status	Evidence/Notes
1	Power/Interest grid is filled for every stakeholder, with no gaps or unclassified entries	Pass	Three stakeholders, each with power, interest and quadrant.
2	Each stakeholder is assigned a unique, stable ID (e.g. S01-S11 style) reusable for RACI assignments in other artifacts	Pass	S01 to S03, stable; none renumbered.
3	Roles and organizational context are defined with explicit Power and Interest levels, not just narrative description	Pass	Role, organization, power and interest levels are in the summary table.
4	Communication needs (channel, frequency, deliverable type) are mapped to project phases or milestones	Pass	CM-001 to CM-003 give channel, frequency, deliverable and phase.
5	Conflicting stakeholder interests are identified with documented mitigation or resolution strategies	Pass	Two conflicts, each with a mitigation.
6	Stakeholder concerns are explicitly traced to Business Case objectives	Pass	Business Goal Alignment table maps concerns to O1 to O6.
7	Primary concerns are expressed in both business language and a recognized quality-attribute mapping (e.g. FURPS+)	Pass	Concern register maps each concern to a FURPS+ attribute.
8	Document is understandable and navigable by non-technical stakeholders reviewing their own entry	Pass	Short entries in plain language.
9	Every concern has a stable ID (CN-NNN) in the concern register, with the stakeholder who raised it; IDs are never renumbered or reused	Pass	CN-001 to CN-009, each with the stakeholder who raised it.

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	Metadata has Language = en and Domain = it.
2	Language is a BCP 47 code and Domain is a value from the registry's domain list	Pass	en is BCP 47; it is in the registry domain list.
3	The content (prose and table cells) is written in the stated language	Pass	All prose and table cells are English.
4	The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type	Pass	Register of the type is IT Professional English (registry, Languages).
5	Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms	Pass	Terms follow DICT-001: bot, cookie, cookies per second, lecture step, upgrade.
6	Metadata keys, section headings, IDs and statuses are in English	Pass	Keys, headings, IDs and statuses are English.
7	No translated twin (<name>.<language>.md) exists beside the document	Pass	No translated twin exists in docs/.
8	A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again	N-A	First version; no language change.
9	A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly	Pass	The stand-in reviewer reads English and checked the IT terms in context.
10	Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language	Pass	Abbreviations (ADR, QC, ISO/IEC, S-IDs) are spelled out or defined where first used, or are the framework's own IDs.

Overall Verdict

Go — SA-001 meets every Mandatory criterion. No blocking finding. The review is not independent: the AI authored and reviewed it as stand-in for S02, and S01 can challenge it in the end-of-run summary.

Action Items

Action	Owner	Due
None	S01	-

---