Score
94. Are stakeholder processes mapped?
<--- Score
95. In what way can you redefine the criteria of choice clients have in your category in your favor?
<--- Score
96. How do you build the right business case?
<--- Score
97. Does the scope remain the same?
<--- Score
98. What are the core elements of the Human language technology business case?
<--- Score
99. Are the Human language technology requirements complete?
<--- Score
100. Is there a completed, verified, and validated high-level ‘as is’ (not ‘should be’ or ‘could be’) stakeholder process map?
<--- Score
101. When is/was the Human language technology start date?
<--- Score
102. Will a Human language technology production readiness review be required?
<--- Score
103. What is the scope?
<--- Score
104. Who approved the Human language technology scope?
<--- Score
105. What Human language technology requirements should be gathered?
<--- Score
106. How and when will the baselines be defined?
<--- Score
107. Are customer(s) identified and segmented according to their different needs and requirements?
<--- Score
108. What was the context?
<--- Score
109. Is Human language technology required?
<--- Score
110. What is out of scope?
<--- Score
111. Do you have organizational privacy requirements?
<--- Score
112. Is full participation by members in regularly held team meetings guaranteed?
<--- Score
113. What information should you gather?
<--- Score
114. Has a project plan, Gantt chart, or similar been developed/completed?
<--- Score
115. What baselines are required to be defined and managed?
<--- Score
116. What are the Human language technology use cases?
<--- Score
117. Where can you gather more information?
<--- Score
118. What are the dynamics of the communication plan?
<--- Score
119. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?
<--- Score
120. Is the current ‘as is’ process being followed? If not, what are the discrepancies?
<--- Score
121. How do you hand over Human language technology context?
<--- Score
122. Is the work to date meeting requirements?
<--- Score
123. Are there different segments of customers?
<--- Score
124. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?
<--- Score
125. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?
<--- Score
126. Has a team charter been developed and communicated?
<--- Score
127. What is the scope of the Human language technology work?
<--- Score
128. What is the definition of success?
<--- Score
129. Is the Human language technology scope manageable?
<--- Score
130. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
131. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
132. 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
133. Will team members regularly document their Human language technology work?
<--- Score
134. Is scope creep really all bad news?
<--- Score
135. How do you catch Human language technology definition inconsistencies?
<--- Score
136. What is the context?
<--- Score
137. Has anyone else (internal or external to the group) attempted to solve this problem or a similar one before? If so, what knowledge can be leveraged from these previous efforts?
<--- Score
138.
