1. Is it clear what the 5. Have the benefits 9. Has a reasonable 13. Consistent with the problem is that that will result from spread of preferred response needs to be fixing the problem interventions been option, has a addressed, both the been adequately identified and reasonable spread cause and effect? defined? packaged into of project options sensible response been analysed? options? Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No ? ? ? ? 2. Is there sufficient 6. Are the benefits of 10. Is evidence to 14. Is the recommended evidence to confirm high value to the demonstrate that project solution the both the cause and government? the response best value for effect of the options are feasible money way action, problem? and can respond to and have future uncertainty? opportunities for building flexibility to deal with uncertainty been considered? Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No Yes No ? Yes Maybe No ? ? ? 3. Does the problem 7. Are the KPIs 11. Were the strategic 15. Is the solution need to be SMART and will options evaluated specified clearly and addressed now and they provide strong fairly to reflect fully and have by this government? evidence that the ability to respond to opportunities for benefits have been the problem and adding value been delivered? deliver the benefits? identified and costed? (all business changes and assets) Yes No ? Yes No ? Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No ? ? Does the defined Have the sources of Is the Can the solution 4. 8. 12. preferred 16. problem capture its uncertainty and key response option the really be delivered full extent/scope dependencies most effective way (cost, risk, including sources of critical to benefit to address the timeframes etc.)? future uncertainty? delivery been problem and deliver considered? the benefits? Yes No ? Yes No ? Yes Maybe No Yes Maybe No ? ? questions are addressed in more detail and expanded on in stage 2
1. Is it clear what the problem is that needs to be addressed, both the cause and effect? 5. Have the benefits that will result from fixing the problem been adequately defined? 9. Has a reasonable spread of interventions been identified and packaged into sensible response options? 13. Consistent with the preferred response option, has a reasonable spread of project options been analysed? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? 2. Is there sufficient evidence to confirm both the cause and effect of the problem? 6. Are the benefits of high value to the government? 10. Is evidence to demonstrate that the response options are feasible and can respond to future uncertainty? 14. Is the recommended project solution the best value for money way action, and have opportunities for building flexibility to deal with uncertainty been considered? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? Yes No ? Yes Maybe No ? 3. Does the problem need to be addressed now and by this government? 7. Are the KPIs SMART and will they provide strong evidence that the benefits have been delivered? 11. Were the strategic options evaluated fairly to reflect ability to respond to the problem and deliver the benefits? 15. Is the solution specified clearly and fully and have opportunities for adding value been identified and costed? (all business changes and assets) Yes No ? Yes No ? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? 4. Does the defined problem capture its full extent/scope including sources of future uncertainty? 8. Have the sources of uncertainty and key dependencies critical to benefit delivery been considered? 12. Is the preferred response option the most effective way to address the problem and deliver the benefits? 16. Can the solution really be delivered (cost, risk, timeframes etc.)? Yes No ? Yes No ? Yes Maybe No ? Yes Maybe No ? questions are addressed in more detail and expanded on in stage 2
Investment%20Lifecycle%20and%20High%20Value%20High%20Risk%20Guidelines%20-%20Conceptualise%20.docx