055-higher-lower/docs/sqa/reviews/rc-002-stakeholder-analysis.md

RC-002 review

Metadata

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

Version History

Date	Status	Author	Reviewer	Change	Commit
2026-11-06	Accepted	Jens Tirsvad Nielsen	AI as stand-in for S01	Initial version	fe0f272

---

Artifact Under Review

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

Checklist Results

#	Criterion	Status	Evidence/Notes
1	Power/Interest grid is filled for every stakeholder, with no gaps or unclassified entries	Pass	S01, S02 and S03 each have 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	IDs S01–S03 are unique and stable
3	Roles and organizational context are defined with explicit Power and Interest levels, not just narrative description	Pass	Role, organization and levels are explicit
4	Communication needs (channel, frequency, deliverable type) are mapped to project phases or milestones	Pass	CM-001 to CM-003 map channel, frequency and deliverable to milestones
5	Conflicting stakeholder interests are identified with documented mitigation or resolution strategies	Pass	One conflict (small code vs. three-language documentation) with a mitigation
6	Stakeholder concerns are explicitly traced to Business Case objectives	Pass	Business Goal Alignment table traces each concern to BC-001 objectives
7	Primary concerns are expressed in both business language and a recognized quality-attribute mapping (e.g. FURPS+)	Pass	Each concern has a business statement and a FURPS+ attribute
8	Document is understandable and navigable by non-technical stakeholders reviewing their own entry	Pass	Short plain-language table; each stakeholder can find their row
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-007, each with its stakeholder

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
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	SA-001 prose and table cells are in English
4	The register matches the one the registry gives for the artifact type	Pass	Register is IT Executive English for BC, PP and MIL, IT Professional English for SA, as the registry gives
5	Domain terms are the PO terms of the domain's dictionary, with no synonyms	Pass	Only standard IT terms are used (Flask, route, decorator, test); the project has no DICT and no PO-specific term needs one
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 .en.md/.da.md twin exists beside the document
8	A change of language or domain since the previous accepted version has a Version History row and was reviewed again	Pass	No change of language or domain; this is the first version
9	A reviewer competent in the domain, and in the language, has confirmed that the domain terms are used correctly	Pass	AI as stand-in for S01 read the terms as correct IT usage; S01 accepted the plan in chat on 2026-11-06. Stand-in decision, not independent; open to challenge in the run summary
10	Abbreviations are spelled out on first use, in the stated language	Pass	Abbreviations (BC, SA, MIL, GIF, HTML, PR) are spelled out or are standard IT abbreviations

Overall Verdict

Go — All criteria pass; no blocking finding.

Action Items

Action	Owner	Due
None	S01	2026-11-06

---