{"text_format":"2","workbook":"xlsx","n_sheets":1,"sheets":["Scoring Guide"],"not_rendered":{"charts":0,"images":0,"macros":0,"external_links":0,"defined_names":0,"comments":0,"pivot_tables":0},"unopened":[],"bounds":{"document_bytes":16777216,"sheet_cells":100000,"run_cost":"one","rows_first":2000,"rows_last":500,"rows_between":2000,"halvings":0,"cell_chars":16384,"cell_head_chars":4096},"cells_cut":0,"cells_raw":0,"read":"whole","date_system":"1900"}

{"sheet":"Scoring Guide","index":0,"n_rows":14,"n_cols":9,"rows_kept":14,"cut":false,"hidden":false,"merged":[[2,0,3,0],[8,0,9,0],[12,0,13,0],[4,0,7,0],[0,0,0,2]]}
["PTEA Committee scoring guide"]
["Category","Subcategory","Definition","0 points","2 points","4 points","6 points","8 points","10 points"]
["Overall Project Satisfaction","Team Members","This category determines the level of satisfaction amongst project team members based primarily on the results and number of surveys completed. It also evaluates communication, conflict resolution and overall team dynamics.","Project team members expressed dissatisfaction with the project. ","Very few project team members returned polling and/or expressed dissatisfaction with the project. ","Less than 50% of team members returned polling and/or expressed  dissatisfaction with the  project.","More than half of team members returned polling and/or expressed overall satisfaction with the  project.","Everything in the 6 point category plus: examples were given of team members going out of their way to show support and collegiality towards other members on the team.","Allow 10 points only given extraordinary feedback from team members."]
[null,"Customers","This category determines the level of satisfaction amongst project customers. It evaluates satisfaction, and how the customer's needs were fulfilled. The PTEA committee will probe customer involvement and satisfaction by asking about post implementation tickets, user testing/training, feedback and customer involvement in the planning process.","The project team received many complaints about the project.","The project team received minor complaints about the project. ","The project team did not receive messages of either complaint or satisfaction from customers. Formal customer involvement was not planned into the scope of the project or was minimal.","Formal processes of active customer involvement were written into the project planning. Some examples of project customers expressing satisfaction were presented to the committee.",null,"Formal processes of active customer involvement were written into the project planning. Customers at the Leadership level went out of their way to communicate to the committee their satisfaction with the project."]
["Outstanding Product/Service","Flexibility (Integration)","This category evaluates how extensively and effectively the new product or service interacts with other systems or services within the University. ","The end product integrates with only one university system, workflow, or process.",null,"The end product cannot be widely integrated into university systems, workflows and/or processes. There are clear indications where integration would be useful, but the product is under-utilized.","The end product is widely integrated across university systems, workflows and/or processes. The integration might be a little rough, but a plan for improvement has been discussed.",null,"The end product integrates flawlessly into every university system, workflow and/or process."]
[null,"Robustness","This category evaluates the resiliency of the end product and how prepared the team is for situations that will disturb normal operations.","The end product will not withstand or recover from any system outages or alterations.",null,"Recovery from a system outage or alteration is slow, weak or gaps in the team's plan exist.","The project team presents a plan for potential system outages or disruptions that minimizes disruption to the user.","The project team presents a plan for potential system outages or disruptions that minimizes disruption to the user. The plan has been tested and proven effective.","The end product will withstand any potential system outage or alteration. The team has gone above and beyond to find a way to preserve service with no disruption to the user. "]
[null,"Security","This category determines how closely the security practices and standards relevant to the product or service were followed.","ISO wasn't consulted, no security review was conducted. ",null,"ISO was consulted but not all recommendations were followed, or exceptions were made to standard process, i.e., no MFA, or SSO. ",null,"All product results 100% follow recommended security practices and controls, and adhere to University standards.","The team went beyond recommended practices and implemented new security practices, setting up repeatable processes for others to follow."]
[null,"Elegance","This category evaluates the elegance of the product or service and how it demonstrates:\n- ease of implementation\n- ease of support\n- user-friendliness and improved visual aesthetics\nfor the project team and the customers","The end product is not user friendly and does not simplify implementation or support for either the project team or user.",null,null,"The end product is user friendly and simplifies implementation and/or support for either the project team or user, with one or two areas that might need improvement.","Multiple examples of the end product show strong user friendliness, simplified implementation and ease of support for the project team or user. These product/service characteristics should be clearly presented to the committee.","The Project as a whole reflects ultimate improved simplicity. The end product is user friendly in new ways and simplifies implementation and support for both the project team and user. These product/service characteristics should be clearly presented to the committee."]
["Significance/Impact","Project Impact (Quality of the project's impact)","This category determines the quality of the project's impact (how well it impacted the intended audience) in one or more of the following areas: Research, Teaching and Learning, Administrative Business Systems, the University Finances, Customer Service.","Zero impact. Upon completion, the project did not positively affect the intended audience.","Project results, while positive, did not significantly benefit staff time, tech output/results, and/or resources. ",null,"The project demonstrates to the committee improvements in staff time, tech output/results, and/or resources.","The project members conceived of significant, unique improvements that strongly affected the project's intended audience, saving  them considerable time, energy, and/or resources.","Peak significant impact. This project changed the paradigm for the intended audience, exceeding the teams goals and objectives. It is a role model for other cases/projects similiar in scope or design.  "]
[null,"Scope of Impact (Number of units/departments/schools impacted)","This category determines the extent of the project's beneficial effect and whether the project impacted its intended audience.","The project did not impact the intended audience.","The project had a positive effect on one or two units of the project's intended audience.","The project affected a few units of the project's intended audience and/or the number of impacted units was intentionally small.","The project did not affect ALL units of the project's intended audience and/or the project was aimed at a particular segment of the University, and no others were affected.","The project affected all of the project's intended audience which included a variety of different groups and units.","Extremely significant impact. The project grew to affect more than the project's intended audience. Results touch all University and beyond."]
["Innovation",null,"This category evaluates the project team on how they used innovative technologies. It looks at the following items: the use of new technologies, the innovation of existing technologies in a new or expanded way, and the level of complexity of the project's implementation.","The project team did not use any new technologies or existing technology in a new way. The project implementation required no effort from the team.","The project team made minimal use of new technologies and/or use existing technology in a new way. The project implementation required a small effort from the team.",null,"The project implementation has out-of-the-box components but also required development, problem solving or use of new technologies   from the team.","The project team researched and incorporated new technologies or used an existing technology in a new way. The project required multiple teams across Northwestern IT units to develop and solve problems for implementation.","Beyond the criteria for #8, this score is for extraordinary innovation and complex problem solving in implementation. "]
["Cross-Team Collaboration",null,"This category evaluates the extent and the quality of cross-team collaborations, including those across IT teams, between IT and Business/School(s), between IT and Vendor(s) as well as outreach and engagement with partners throughout the project's lifecycle.\n\n*Collaboration with more groups will be rewarded","The project team collaborated with no other teams.\nThe Outreach, Engagement, and Socialization of the Project throughout its life cycle was non-existent.",null,"The project team collaborated with 1-2 other teams and displayed adequate methods of communication.\nOutreach, Engagement, and Socialization of the Project throughout its life cycle was present.","The project team collaborated with more than 2 groups beyond their project and communicated clearly with those teams.\nOutreach, Engagement, and Socialization of the Project throughout its life cycle was present.","The project team collaborated with teams within IT and beyond. Communication with those teams was clear. \nOutreach, Engagement, and Socialization of the Project throughout its life cycle was effective.","The project demonstrates exemplery collaboration and communication skills, forging new relationships both within and outside Northwestern IT."]
["Project Management","Schedule\n","This category evaluates how well a project adhered to a delivery schedule. \n\n*Evaluation takes uncontrollable external factors to the project schedule into account","The Project was completed grossly late (3 or more extensions or schedule modifications) due to perceived (by the committee) poor organization or missteps.","The Project was completed behind the deadline (2 extensions or schedule modifications) due to perceived (by the committee) poor organization or missteps.","The Project was completed slightly behind the deadline (1 Extension or schedule modification)","The Project was completed slightly behind the scheduled deadline due to unforeseeable issues.","The Project was completed within the scheduled deadline.","The Project was completed well in advance of the schedule deadline due to extraordinary planning and diligence on entire team's efforts."]
[null,"Organization","This category determines the level of organization and the use of project management practices in executing the project.",null,"An organizational strategy was barely followed. Status reports were distributed on an infrequent basis.",null,"An organizational strategy was followed. Status reports were distributed on a somewhat regular basis.","An organizational strategy was followed closely. Status reports were distributed on a regular basis.","In addition to the criteria #8, the Status reports were comprehensive and impactful to the team."]