What is the worst case scenario?
<--- Score
8. What is out-of-scope initially?
<--- Score
9. How do you manage scope?
<--- Score
10. Is Public service management linked to key stakeholder goals and objectives?
<--- Score
11. What are the Public service management tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
12. Who approved the Public service management scope?
<--- Score
13. Has the direction changed at all during the course of Public service management? If so, when did it change and why?
<--- Score
14. How did the Public service management manager receive input to the development of a Public service management improvement plan and the estimated completion dates/times of each activity?
<--- Score
15. How does the Public service management manager ensure against scope creep?
<--- Score
16. Has the Public service management work been fairly and/or equitably divided and delegated among team members who are qualified and capable to perform the work? Has everyone contributed?
<--- Score
17. What information should you gather?
<--- Score
18. Are the Public service management requirements testable?
<--- Score
19. What scope to assess?
<--- Score
20. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
21. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
22. Is scope creep really all bad news?
<--- Score
23. Is the current ‘as is’ process being followed? If not, what are the discrepancies?
<--- Score
24. Are different versions of process maps needed to account for the different types of inputs?
<--- Score
25. Are the Public service management requirements complete?
<--- Score
26. What is a worst-case scenario for losses?
<--- Score
27. If substitutes have been appointed, have they been briefed on the Public service management goals and received regular communications as to the progress to date?
<--- Score
28. Are audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods defined?
<--- Score
29. Who defines (or who defined) the rules and roles?
<--- Score
30. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?
<--- Score
31. Has a team charter been developed and communicated?
<--- Score
32. Have all of the relationships been defined properly?
<--- Score
33. Why are you doing Public service management and what is the scope?
<--- Score
34. Is Public service management currently on schedule according to the plan?
<--- Score
35. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
36. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Public service management?
<--- Score
37. When is/was the Public service management start date?
<--- Score
38. Has the improvement team collected the ‘voice of the customer’ (obtained feedback – qualitative and quantitative)?
<--- Score
39. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
40. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
41. How often are the team meetings?
<--- Score
42. How would you define the culture at your organization, how susceptible is it to Public service management changes?
<--- Score
43. Will a Public service management production readiness review be required?
<--- Score
44. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
45. What is in scope?
<--- Score
46. Are all requirements met?
<--- Score
47. What sources do you use to gather information for a Public service management study?
<--- Score
48. How was the ‘as is’ process map developed, reviewed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
49. Is there a clear Public service management case definition?
<--- Score
50. How and when will the baselines be defined?
<---
