Practising the practices I: business case, organizing, plans and quality

The seven practices carry a large share of the marks in both exams, because they contain most of the method's products, responsibilities and techniques. This lesson covers the first four: business case, organizing, plans and quality. Lesson 8 covers risk, issues and progress. For each practice, a short revision table lists the points exams test most often; then original practice questions show how those points turn into Foundation and Practitioner items. Organizing was revised alongside the people element in lesson 6, so here it appears mainly in combination with the others.

Business case: revision points

The chain from output to benefit is a favourite exam topic. In the digital library card project, the wallet pass software is an output; patrons using phone cards instead of plastic ones is an outcome; a 50 % fall in plastic card purchases is a benefit. A question that calls the software a benefit, or the reduction in cards an output, has mixed the levels.

Plans: revision points

A common trap is the exception plan. When stage tolerances are forecast to be exceeded and the board asks for an exception plan, that plan replaces the current stage plan; it does not sit beside it. When project tolerances are forecast to be exceeded, the business layer is involved, and an exception plan for the project replaces the project plan if the business layer approves it.

Quality: revision points

Many questions test which product holds which quality information. Customer expectations and acceptance criteria go in the project product description; quality criteria for individual products go in their product descriptions; how quality will be achieved for the project goes in the quality management approach; the schedule and results of quality checks go in the quality register.

Foundation-style practice

Practitioner-style practice: the digital library card

Scenario extract. Harbour City Libraries' digital card project (140 thousand, hybrid delivery) replaces plastic library cards with phone wallet passes and a printable temporary card. The business case expects plastic card purchases to fall by 50 % within a year of launch and the share of new members from lower-income postal areas to rise to at least 22 %. The project plan uses three management stages after initiation. The quality management approach requires an accessibility audit of the sign-up pages before release. Stage 2 is under way.

The equity target links to the library board's strategic plan and to provincial public-library funding reports, which ask about access for underserved communities. In exam terms, a benefit that supports corporate strategy should be traceable from the business case to the business layer's objectives.

A matching question on plans

Checking a benefit forecast

Practitioner scenarios often include numbers from a business case or benefits management approach. Questions rarely need arithmetic, but understanding what the numbers mean helps judge statements about them. The program below checks the card project's two benefit targets against invented first-year measurements and tolerances.

baseline_cards = 4200                     # plastic cards bought in the year before launch (invented)
year1_cards = 2300
reduction = 1 - year1_cards / baseline_cards
target_reduction, tol_reduction = 0.50, 0.05
equity_share, target_equity, tol_equity = 0.205, 0.22, 0.02
print(f"plastic card reduction: {reduction:.1%} (target {target_reduction:.0%} +/- {tol_reduction:.0%})")
ok1 = reduction >= target_reduction - tol_reduction
print("  within benefits tolerance" if ok1 else "  outside benefits tolerance")
print(f"equity share of new members: {equity_share:.1%} (target {target_equity:.0%}, tolerance {tol_equity:.0%})")
ok2 = equity_share >= target_equity - tol_equity
print("  within benefits tolerance" if ok2 else "  outside benefits tolerance: report to the business layer")

plastic card reduction: 45.2% (target 50% +/- 5%)
  within benefits tolerance
equity share of new members: 20.5% (target 22%, tolerance 2%)
  within benefits tolerance

The plastic card reduction of about 45 % is within the 5-point tolerance, and the equity share of 20.5 % is within its 2-point tolerance. Had either fallen outside, the measurement would be reported as the benefits management approach describes, which after closure usually means reporting to the business layer rather than to a project board that no longer exists.

Organizing in combination

Organizing appears in questions about the other three practices because every product has an owner and every decision has a role. The executive owns the business case; senior users specify benefits and quality expectations; senior suppliers confirm that products can be delivered and help set quality methods; the project manager prepares the plans and most management products; project assurance checks them independently on behalf of the board; and project support maintains registers and configuration records. When a question asks who should do something in business case, plans or quality, start by matching the activity to the interest it serves: business, user or supplier.

A typical example: a question asks who should confirm that the printable temporary card meets its quality criteria before release. The answer depends on the product description, which names the quality reviewers and approvers. Usually users or their representatives review usability, the supplier checks technical performance, and approval comes from the authority named in the description. An option giving approval to the project manager alone, regardless of the product description, should be treated with suspicion.

Plans questions often combine with organizing too. The board approves the project plan and stage plans; the project manager approves team plans in the sense of accepting them as part of a work package agreement; and exception plans are approved by whoever set the tolerance being breached. Keeping those approval levels straight answers many questions that look at first like planning questions.

Quality questions with numbers

Some quality questions include measurements, such as page load times, error rates or response times, alongside acceptance criteria with tolerances. The test is whether the measured value is within the criterion's tolerance and who decides if it is not. A product that fails a criterion is an off-specification; it can be corrected, or the board can grant a concession if the shortfall is acceptable. For example, if the card sign-up page must load in under three seconds with a tolerance of half a second, a measured 3.3 seconds is within tolerance and needs no escalation, while 3.8 seconds is outside it and should be raised as an issue.