Business case
AlphaThe case for spending the money, with the costs that are usually left out and benefits that somebody has agreed to own.
What it is for
To let an investment decision be made on a full cost, a measurable benefit and a named alternative — rather than on a vendor quote and a strategic sentence.
- Audience
- Board, executive, or whoever holds the investment delegation.
- The decision it supports
- Fund it, fund a smaller version of it, or do something else.
Inputs — 7 blocking
Blocking means the document cannot be honestly drafted without it. The rest can be left open and marked as such.
Problem statement, in one sentence
Only you have it
What is actually wrong, stated so that the scope follows from it. If it takes a paragraph, the scope will sprawl to match.
Sponsor
Current-state assessment
In the library
Where the estate stands: what is worked around, the measured data quality, the customisation count, the interface count, the support concentration.
Finance and technology · ERP Health Check
Total cost of ownership today
Only you have it
Licence, support, infrastructure and internal effort for the current estate, per year. The internal share is the one nobody has.
Finance · ERP Health Check
Options, including doing nothing
In the library
Fix, upgrade, replace and defer — each costed and each with its consequence. A case with one option is a proposal.
Sponsor and finance · Finding the One
Cost model for the change
In the library
Software, implementation, internal effort at a real rate, backfill, data work, integration, change, training, infrastructure, contingency, and the twelve months after go-live.
Delivery and finance · Comprehensive Guide to ERP Project Budgeting: Ensuring Financial Health Amidst Complexity
Benefits with owners and baselines
Only you have it
Each benefit named, quantified, baselined before the change, and accepted by someone outside the programme who will be measured on it.
Business owners · Change is the word
Scope and explicit exclusions
From /scope
The areas being changed, and named exclusions with reasons. Exclusions left unstated become scope fights in month four.
Sponsor
Draft around these if needed
Organisational context
From /start
Industry, size, organisation type and jurisdiction — they change which obligations are fixed inputs and which controls intensify.
Delivery
Capitalisation and funding position
Only you have it
What can be capitalised and what cannot, agreed with finance, because it changes the approval route and the reported result.
Finance · Comprehensive Guide to ERP Project Budgeting: Ensuring Financial Health Amidst Complexity
Risk position
In the library
The risks material to the investment decision, not the delivery register. Capacity, data condition, sponsorship tenure and end of support.
Delivery · Digital Transformation Readiness Checklist
What your scope already answers
- Scope and exclusions: 6 topics across 2 modules — including Supply Chain Management, unpicked.
First draft
3/8 sections the scope could speak to
Generated from your scope. It is not a finished document and it does not pretend to be — where a section needs something only you have, it says so rather than inventing a plausible sentence, because plausible sentences are the ones that get left in.
Business case
Problem and why now
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Current state, evidenced
1 data flow straddles the scope boundary — one side is changing and the other is not. Customer orders (Order Processing ← Sales Force Automation, continuous; without it: orders are rekeyed and differ from what was agreed.).
Options considered, including do nothing
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Recommended approach and scope
The change covers 1 chosen area — Quote to Order — which in turn implies 6 topics across 2 modules: Customer Relationship Management and Supply Chain Management.
Supply Chain Management was not chosen. It is in scope because the value streams the chosen areas sit on cross into it, so work happens there whether or not it was planned for. This needs to be accepted or the scope reduced — it should not be left unstated.
Cost, full and phased
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Benefits, owners and baselines
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Risks and what would make us stop
The scope raises 8 of the nine considerations: Strategy, Technology, Data, Compliance, People, Delivery, Governance and Process.
Funding, capitalisation and approval path
To write. The scope cannot supply this one.
Still needed
- Problem statement, in one sentence — What is actually wrong, stated so that the scope follows from it. If it takes a paragraph, the scope will sprawl to match.
- Total cost of ownership today — Licence, support, infrastructure and internal effort for the current estate, per year. The internal share is the one nobody has.
- Benefits with owners and baselines — Each benefit named, quantified, baselined before the change, and accepted by someone outside the programme who will be measured on it.
As markdown, to lift into a document
# Business case ## Problem and why now > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Current state, evidenced 1 data flow straddles the scope boundary — one side is changing and the other is not. Customer orders (Order Processing ← Sales Force Automation, continuous; without it: orders are rekeyed and differ from what was agreed.). ## Options considered, including do nothing > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Recommended approach and scope The change covers 1 chosen area — Quote to Order — which in turn implies 6 topics across 2 modules: Customer Relationship Management and Supply Chain Management. Supply Chain Management was not chosen. It is in scope because the value streams the chosen areas sit on cross into it, so work happens there whether or not it was planned for. This needs to be accepted or the scope reduced — it should not be left unstated. ## Cost, full and phased > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Benefits, owners and baselines > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Risks and what would make us stop The scope raises 8 of the nine considerations: Strategy, Technology, Data, Compliance, People, Delivery, Governance and Process. ## Funding, capitalisation and approval path > To write. The scope cannot supply this one. ## Still needed - **Problem statement, in one sentence** — What is actually wrong, stated so that the scope follows from it. If it takes a paragraph, the scope will sprawl to match. - **Total cost of ownership today** — Licence, support, infrastructure and internal effort for the current estate, per year. The internal share is the one nobody has. - **Benefits with owners and baselines** — Each benefit named, quantified, baselined before the change, and accepted by someone outside the programme who will be measured on it. _First draft from a scope. 3 of 8 sections had something the scope could say; the rest need a person, and so does everything under Still needed._
Outline
- 01Problem and why now
- 02Current state, evidenced
- 03Options considered, including do nothing
- 04Recommended approach and scope
- 05Cost, full and phased
- 06Benefits, owners and baselines
- 07Risks and what would make us stop
- 08Funding, capitalisation and approval path
What separates a useful one from a compliant one
- —Internal effort and backfill are in the cost, at a real rate.
- —Every benefit has a named owner outside the programme and a measured baseline.
- —Doing nothing is costed, not dismissed.
- —The twelve months after go-live are funded inside the envelope.
- —There is a stated condition under which the programme would stop.
The rest of the set