Score
19. What are the compelling stakeholder reasons for embarking on Environmental finance?
<--- Score
20. What is the scope?
<--- Score
21. Will a Environmental finance production readiness review be required?
<--- Score
22. What are the Environmental finance use cases?
<--- Score
23. Have all of the relationships been defined properly?
<--- Score
24. Is there a clear Environmental finance case definition?
<--- Score
25. What key stakeholder process output measure(s) does Environmental finance leverage and how?
<--- Score
26. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
27. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
28. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
29. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Environmental finance work? How is the team addressing them?
<--- Score
30. Is there a completed SIPOC representation, describing the Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, and Customers?
<--- Score
31. Scope of sensitive information?
<--- Score
32. What intelligence can you gather?
<--- Score
33. What constraints exist that might impact the team?
<--- Score
34. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
35. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?
<--- Score
36. When is the estimated completion date?
<--- Score
37. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
38. What are (control) requirements for Environmental finance Information?
<--- Score
39. Do you have a Environmental finance success story or case study ready to tell and share?
<--- Score
40. What would be the goal or target for a Environmental finance’s improvement team?
<--- Score
41. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
42. Why are you doing Environmental finance and what is the scope?
<--- Score
43. Do the problem and goal statements meet the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound)?
<--- Score
44. How will variation in the actual durations of each activity be dealt with to ensure that the expected Environmental finance results are met?
<--- Score
45. Is Environmental finance required?
<--- Score
46. Has your scope been defined?
<--- Score
47. Is special Environmental finance user knowledge required?
<--- Score
48. 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
49. Is the Environmental finance scope manageable?
<--- Score
50. How do you keep key subject matter experts in the loop?
<--- Score
51. Is there a critical path to deliver Environmental finance results?
<--- Score
52. Are the Environmental finance requirements testable?
<--- Score
53. How do you manage changes in Environmental finance requirements?
<--- Score
54. How have you defined all Environmental finance requirements first?
<--- Score
55. What scope do you want your strategy to cover?
<--- Score
56. What is in scope?
<--- Score
57. What specifically is the problem? Where does it occur? When does it occur? What is its extent?
<--- Score
58. What is out-of-scope initially?
<--- Score
59. Who approved the Environmental finance scope?
<--- Score
60. Has the Environmental finance 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
61. Is scope creep really all bad news?
<--- Score
62. Where can you gather more information?
<---
