Scope

1 area implies 2 topics across 2 modules

Disaster Recovery

You did not pick these

Integration

Your streams cross into this module, so the work happens there too. That is the part most scoping exercises miss.

The end-to-end

Detect-to-Continue (BCP/DR)

Security & Identity → Integration

Integration points

Every module boundary a stream crosses is an interface. The ones marked straddle your scope — you are changing one side and not the other, which is the interface most often missed at scoping and found during testing.

Security & Identity→Integration

Detect-to-Continue (BCP/DR)

One side of this is outside your scope

The order to do it in

01

Resilience

Nothing in scope blocks these — they can start together.

Sequence is a delivery judgement rather than a fact about the taxonomy. These are proposals from common tier-1 ordering — argue with them.

Concerns raised

Australian obligations in scope

Nothing AU-specific in this scope.

Everything in scope — 2 topics

The ones you chose, and the ones they brought with them. An implied topic cannot be dropped on its own — it is here because of a pick, and the pick is named.

You picked these — 1

Sub-module · Security & Identity

Came with them — 1 you did not pick

BCP
Process · Security & Identityhere because of Disaster Recovery

Next

This is a diagnosis, not a plan

Build takes the same scope and turns it into the documents somebody has to write — the investment brief, the business case, the plans — starting with what each one needs as an input before its headings can be answered honestly.

Build it →

Share this scope

The scope is in the address bar. Send the link and the other person sees the same picture.