...
Start with | Reasons for | Reasons against |
---|---|---|
Student information | Delivers benefit to key user group Builds on the existing student hubs Few internal dependencies Could deliver some early benefits | Low recruitment benefit No clear product owner Has manageable external dependency on Learning Success Large and may be difficult o break in to smaller releases |
Course and Subject Information | Meeting stakeholder (i.e. PMO) expectations User numbers (GA) Already partially done in WIP I Valuable for recruitment | Requires decision on purpose of F&S sites (assumption that it is desirable to move this information out of departmental structures) Requires (simple) decision on the purpose of PG hub Require a reference group to provide product owner input Has manageable external dependency on CIP and COO Large and may be difficult o break in to smaller releases
|
Postgraduate information | Large room for improvement Key focus group Few internal dependencies No external dependencies Could deliver some early benefits | May be difficult to identify a product owner |
Research Centres, Institutes and Chairs | No internal dependencies Could deliver some early benefits
| Fringe to WIP II purpose Low visitor numbers |
Faculty and School Information | Central to WIP II purpose Meeting stakeholder (i.e. PMO) expectations Frequently clicked links Easy to break into small releases, delivering benefit early and often | Large, as in many faculties and schools Complex, as in the most internal dependencies Some very large faculties (i.e. many schools) |