Step 2 of the Solution Search Path, as it is applied during any phase of a CSD project (see the figure in The Three-Phase CSD Project Paradigm), is to create a Definition of Success that contains all the qualities of outcome that the various stakeholders need or want to be delivered by the solution to the current phase of the project, regardless of whatever form of solution may be selected. These outcomes include all the positive benefits that the stakeholders look for, and just as important, the negative impacts they want to avoid.
Purpose of the Definition of Success
The Definition of Success has two purposes that are important for maximizing overall stakeholder satisfaction with the final solution.
- Defines the objectives to be served by, and guides the design process for, the various solution options that are gathered or created in Step 3 of the SSP.
- Provides the basis for selection criteria to be used in Step 4 of the SSP
The qualities of outcome desired by various stakeholders will frequently be in agreement. Finding a solution that delivers these outcomes is the easy part of CSD. Perhaps just as frequently, the qualities of outcome from various stakeholders will be in conflict. Resolving those conflicts by various creative means is the real meat of CSD.
Another task regarding the Definition of Success is to discover the qualities of outcome that have been missed entirely, yet turn out to be important once they are discovered as the project moves forward. This also is an important aspect of the CSD process, and should constantly be a concern of those in the project core group who are managing the process.This means tht the Definition of Success is a living document, to be continually updated throughout the CSD project.
Definition of Success in Each Project Phase
Each project phase in a CSD project has its own Definition of Success associated with the goal of that phase.
Creating the Definition of Success
The qualities of outcome in the Definition of Success are distilled from the aggregate of information collected by the stakeholder query process in Solution Search Path Step 1. While there is no set formula for doing this, it can be viewed as a job of organizing stakeholder inputs into categories, crafting a summary statement for each category that accurately represents it, and adding sufficient detail so all stakeholder interests are covered, while keeping the overall product clear and concise. It is accomplished through the judgement and hard work of the CSD project core team.
When a workable draft of the Definition of Success has been prepared, run it by the stakeholders for their review and concurrence. Update as required based on stakeholder critique.
as already pointed out, the Definition of Success is a living document. Need for additions and corrections will be discovered throughout the course of a CSD project. Maintaining a current version of the Definition of Success to support the work of the project is a vital function of Knowledge Management,
Gaps, Inconsistencies and Conflicts in the Definition of Success
If the Definition of Success is constructed with competence, openness and honesty, it will contain gaps, inconsistencies and conflicts. That is a good thing. Resolving these “flaws” is, in a way, the main job of a CSD project. Having them out in the open early in the project makes that possible. Keeping them unknown or hidden plants land mines along the path to success for the project that will, sooner or later,explode with destructive effect.
Gaps in the Definition of Success are inevitable because our knowledge of the needs and wants of stakeholders is incomplete, especially early in the project. Even the stakeholders themselves do not know entirely what they need and want until they begin to see the final solution-form emerging. As that solution-form emerges, and with it the consequences become apparent, the full extent of stakeholder needs and want will become more clear. Therefore, it is important that the project keep updating the Definition of Success to reflect the new insights so the solution can be adjusted accordingly.
Inconsistencies and conflicts among the qualities of outcome described in the Definition of Success will be inevitable, because the interests and viewpoints of various stakeholders themselves will inconsistent and in conflict. The better a solution resolves these issues, the better that solution is. This standard of excellence for a solution cannot be met unless the issues to be resolved are known and accessible to resolution by various methods applied in the solution-design activity of the project. As with the gaps, the earlier in the project that these issues are known, the more likely a good solution will emerge.
Measures of Effectiveness
Measures of Effectiveness is the technical term for the set of singular, quantifiable parameters that are used as the design requirements for any proposed solution option, and are the basis of criteria for bringing the better options to the top of the stack for the evaluation and final selection of the desired solution. They are derived from the qualities of outcome in the Definition of Success.
By “singular” is meant that any particular Measure of Effectiveness expresses one and only one quality of the solution, and is not a composite of more than one quality.
“Quantifiable” means that there is an objective scale by which the effectiveness of any solution option can be measured. Preferably, that scale would be numerical. However, in many cases, particularly with human activity systems, a numerical scale is not possible, In that case, a scale can be set up using examples for comparison, ranging form very poor to excellent.
When the project function is to design a new and unique solution option from scratch, the full set of Measures of Effectiveness is necessary as the requirements the designers must meet with their creations. On the other hand, when shopping for off-the shelf solution concepts, and screening options in the solution option menu, then only a subset of the Measures of Effectiveness are necessary. These are the selection discriminators, and are chosen as being both necessary and sufficient for sorting out competing options.