<--- Score
12. How was the ‘as is’ process map developed, reviewed, verified and validated?
<--- Score
13. Is it clearly defined in and to your organization what you do?
<--- Score
14. Scope of sensitive information?
<--- Score
15. Do you have organizational privacy requirements?
<--- Score
16. What is the scope of Constraint learning?
<--- Score
17. Is Constraint learning required?
<--- Score
18. How do you gather the stories?
<--- Score
19. What is the scope of the Constraint learning work?
<--- Score
20. Does the scope remain the same?
<--- Score
21. Do the problem and goal statements meet the SMART criteria (specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time-bound)?
<--- Score
22. Are customer(s) identified and segmented according to their different needs and requirements?
<--- Score
23. Has everyone on the team, including the team leaders, been properly trained?
<--- Score
24. 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
25. Is there any additional Constraint learning definition of success?
<--- Score
26. Is there a completed, verified, and validated high-level ‘as is’ (not ‘should be’ or ‘could be’) stakeholder process map?
<--- Score
27. Have specific policy objectives been defined?
<--- Score
28. Do you have a Constraint learning success story or case study ready to tell and share?
<--- Score
29. Has the Constraint learning 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
30. Has the improvement team collected the ‘voice of the customer’ (obtained feedback – qualitative and quantitative)?
<--- Score
31. What is the scope?
<--- Score
32. What information should you gather?
<--- Score
33. Have the customer needs been translated into specific, measurable requirements? How?
<--- Score
34. How is the team tracking and documenting its work?
<--- Score
35. Is data collected and displayed to better understand customer(s) critical needs and requirements.
<--- Score
36. What are the tasks and definitions?
<--- Score
37. How are consistent Constraint learning definitions important?
<--- Score
38. How have you defined all Constraint learning requirements first?
<--- Score
39. Are the Constraint learning requirements testable?
<--- Score
40. What are the requirements for audit information?
<--- Score
41. Are the Constraint learning requirements complete?
<--- Score
42. What are the boundaries of the scope? What is in bounds and what is not? What is the start point? What is the stop point?
<--- Score
43. How and when will the baselines be defined?
<--- Score
44. Who approved the Constraint learning scope?
<--- Score
45. Is the scope of Constraint learning defined?
<--- Score
46. Are different versions of process maps needed to account for the different types of inputs?
<--- Score
47. Is the team adequately staffed with the desired cross-functionality? If not, what additional resources are available to the team?
<--- Score
48. How often are the team meetings?
<--- Score
49. Are there any constraints known that bear on the ability to perform Constraint learning work? How is the team addressing them?
<--- Score
50. What sort of initial information to gather?
<--- Score
51. When are meeting minutes sent out? Who is on the distribution list?
<--- Score
52. When is/was the Constraint learning start date?
<--- Score
53. What sources do you use to gather information for a Constraint learning study?
<--- Score
54. What Constraint learning requirements should be gathered?
<--- Score
55. What is in the scope and what is not in scope?
<--- Score
56. Does the team have regular meetings?
<--- Score
57. Are required metrics defined, what are they?
<--- Score
58. What are the Constraint learning use cases?
<--- Score
59. What is the context?
<--- Score
60. What customer feedback methods were used to solicit their input?
<--- Score
61. In what way can you redefine the criteria of choice clients have in your category in your favor?
<--- Score
62. Are accountability and ownership for Constraint learning clearly defined?
<--- Score
63. Is there regularly 100% attendance at the team meetings? If not, have appointed substitutes attended to preserve cross-functionality and full representation?
<--- Score
64. What is a worst-case scenario for losses?
<--- Score
65. How does the Constraint learning manager ensure against scope creep?
<--- Score
66. What