Score
99. Is the improvement team aware of the different versions of a process: what they think it is vs. what it actually is vs. what it should be vs. what it could be?
<--- Score
100. How do you catch Power system simulation definition inconsistencies?
<--- Score
101. What was the context?
<--- Score
102. What is the context?
<--- Score
103. What are the Power system simulation use cases?
<--- Score
104. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
105. What critical content must be communicated – who, what, when, where, and how?
<--- Score
106. Are task requirements clearly defined?
<--- Score
107. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?
<--- Score
108. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
109. What is the scope of the Power system simulation work?
<--- Score
110. Is data collected and displayed to better understand customer(s) critical needs and requirements.
<--- Score
111. Who is gathering Power system simulation information?
<--- Score
112. Is there a clear Power system simulation case definition?
<--- Score
113. How did the Power system simulation manager receive input to the development of a Power system simulation improvement plan and the estimated completion dates/times of each activity?
<--- Score
114. What are the Roles and Responsibilities for each team member and its leadership? Where is this documented?
<--- Score
115. What intelligence can you gather?
<--- Score
116. How often are the team meetings?
<--- Score
117. Is it clearly defined in and to your organization what you do?
<--- Score
118. Has a high-level ‘as is’ process map been completed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
119. Does the team have regular meetings?
<--- Score
120. What gets examined?
<--- Score
121. Is the work to date meeting requirements?
<--- Score
122. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?
<--- Score
123. How do you gather Power system simulation requirements?
<--- Score
124. Has your scope been defined?
<--- Score
125. How would you define the culture at your organization, how susceptible is it to Power system simulation changes?
<--- Score
126. The political context: who holds power?
<--- Score
127. Is the team formed and are team leaders (Coaches and Management Leads) assigned?
<--- Score
128. What happens if Power system simulation’s scope changes?
<--- Score
129. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
130. What is the definition of Power system simulation excellence?
<--- Score
131. Has a Power system simulation requirement not been met?
<--- Score
132. Is there any additional Power system simulation definition of success?
<--- Score
133. How is the team tracking and documenting its work?
<--- Score
134. Who defines (or who defined) the rules and roles?
<--- Score
135. Are the Power system simulation requirements complete?
<--- Score
136. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
137. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Power system simulation work? How is the team addressing them?
<--- Score
138. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?
<--- Score
139. Has the direction changed at all during the course of Power system simulation? If so, when did it change and why?
<--- Score
140. Is full participation by members in regularly held team meetings guaranteed?
<--- Score
141. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Power system simulation?
<--- Score
Add up total points for this section: _____ = Total points for this section
Divided
