Prosjektledelse Prosjektledelse nr. 1 2020 | Page 36
DEBATT
requirements (tolerable or worst case levels) can levels will be measured before requirements exit
be delivered and maintained. And that reasonable to next process by Specification Quality Control [3]
success-goal levels, for all critical objectives, can 3. The Defect Density Level of the Requirements
be reached. for exit level should be less than 1.0 deficits per
page.
“An absolute prioritisation of the
goals is recommended.
….. An absolute prioritisation
across all goals in order to be
aware of one’s own priorities is helpful”
‘delimitation of benefit and non-
objectives’ (MW):
The term ‘absolute prioritisation’ is not defined, Definition of all these 3 concepts is necessary,
and I can think of many bad interpretations, par- and not provided. The method to ‘delimit’ and the
ticularly I think of well-known methods of giving meaning is missing. So instead of guessing, we
numeric weights (as in Balanced Scorecard) in need more information from the author. Other-
advance. My deeper view of prioritization is in a wise it is meaningless.
paper. I believe that you cannot cost effectively do
any up front absolute prioritization, because there
are far too many dynamically changing variables
and unknowns, which can destroy your intent.
You need to compute your residual priority step
by step, based on continuous measurements of
budgeted resources consumed, and of performan-
“In addition to the magic triangle,
the aim is to distinguish between
non-targets, benefit targets and
now consciously the negative
benefit targets as damage and to provide
resource planning optimised for all
organisations involved.”
ce-value levels delivered. Detail on this process is
in my Value Planning book.
Wow, magic triangle. What is that (not the maths
concept?)? Does he mean the Iron (Project Mana-
“In the case of objectives, one
must always pay attention to the
combination of SMART objectives,
completeness of the objectives
and, above all, the delimitation of benefit and
non-objectives.”
gement) Triangle? See Fig-2.
Assuming he does mean this, then I am of the
opinion that it is a false and misleading concept.
It is clearly possible to reduce costs and improve
quality. This is the well known ‘design to cost’
engineering paradigm.
Well this is confusingly vague. Let me try to See Fig-3 smart is nice idea but not the smartest
rephrase it and give more meaning. requirements clarification idea.
1. Requirements must meet the defined Rules for
Specification for your organization. [3] So, some comments on SMART, a nice simplifica-
2. The adherence to defined requirements quality tion, but not the best industrial strength methods.
36 PROSJEKTLEDELSE • NR. 1 2020