This page seeks to document the analysis tasks and associated outputs remaining in the HLS phase. Once all these tasks are completed the project team and the PMO should have sufficient understanding/certainty to:
- Propose an order of work: Time boxed phases of activity, logically sequenced to deliver the who scope in a given time frame.
- Start the agile development: As in the cycle of story writing, solution design, development of content and technology, testing, and depolyment that are the hallmarks of an agile approach
The following analysis tasks and their associated outputs are proposed:
- Across the full bredth/scope of the six HLS documents:
- Resolve a high level scope tension: The full scope of the six HLS documents is considerably larger than the scope of WIP II as stated in the Business Justification Case (BJC). Do we want to go with the smaller, the larger or somewhere in between? Once this question is answered one document (set) needs updating.
- Draft a vision or mission statement: A short, powerful, persuasive statement explaining why we are doing WIP II
- Make high level IA decisions: This would address issues such as "Will postgraduates be an audience at the top level of the banner, alongside future students and current students?" and "Will the Research zone be the home for the large number of research sites, institutes and chairs?". I expect that this is a web team decision, with input from senior management and a postgraduate stakeholder (e.g. product owner)?
- For each of the six HSL documents:
- Socialise with wider web team: Both the full scope of all six documents (like the overview given to the project team last Friday) (so that they can identify gaps, irregularities and inconsistencies) and (to the extent that time allows) workshop the specific content (scope, approach, assumptions, dependancies, etc) and to answer as many of the open questions as is possible.
- Hunt down answers to open question: For open questions, we recognise that some will only be answered while doing the work. However, those where greater value is realised if answered earlier are those that impact on the PMO decision (i.e. scope, priorities, assumptions and dependencies).
- Identify success indicators: There does not seem to be any measures of success, so lets propose some, both in output langauge (e.g. reduce the number of pages by X") and outcome oriented (.
- Stakeholder analysis: Identify the key stakeholders for each domain (a starting list), with suggestions for the "product owner", and an initial conversation with a small number of stakeholders from each area (i.e. make the introductions, present our role, listen to their expectations, identify any thorny issues, etc).
- Draft initial epic - story breakdown: Valuable to test our understanding of the scope, to allow initial estimation and to know what goes in the early sprints. But it will change as soon as we start
If more detailed analysis must begin ealrier (i.e. to keep project resources fully occupied) then I propose that it is in the areas of Programmes of Study and Faculties and Schools. Not only are these the two highest priorities from our sponsor / the PMO but they probably the heart of the BJC and inter-related.
Questions to answer/resolve: