What you already suspect about your undertaking — named along five axes.
Fourteen questions, about five minutes. After that you see a profile across five axes and read, for each one, what follows from it and what would be worth doing. No mark, no estimate, no cost. Free.
14 questions, about five minutes
Why an early look changes something
Undertakings rarely get into difficulty suddenly. Usually the signs were there early — and what was missing was the time to look, or the language to say it out loud.
That is what an assessment does. It removes no risk. It makes risk sayable. «Our decisions take too long for this undertaking» can be discussed in a meeting. An uneasy feeling cannot.
And the moment is now. Before the award you can still move almost everything: the scope, the stages, the responsibilities. After the award, every one of those moves carries a price tag.
The five axes
We do not ask you about your risks. Anyone who can name them does not need this tool.
We ask about things you know anyway: how many systems? Is the scope settled? Who decides? The risk follows from that — instead of being asked for.
The first three axes come from the risk model of F. Warren McFarlan, published in the Harvard Business Review in 1981 and in use to this day. The other two we added, because they turn up again and again as causes in the audit reports on Swiss IT undertakings — and are missing from McFarlan.
01Size
How long, how many systems, how many people. The effort does not grow evenly with the interfaces: each new one brings coordination with all the others.
02Clarity
Is it settled what will be built? And can it be established at the end whether it was reached? Goals without a measure are intentions.
03Familiarity
Do you know the technology, does your organisation know it, has the supplier built exactly this before? Where the answer is no three times, no estimate holds any more — not even theirs.
04Decisions
Who decides on scope, dates and money? How long does that take? And who steps in when it jams? This axis carries more weight than any other and is the one most often overlooked.
05Availability
Have the specialist units committed their days — and have they been released to spend them? The difference between the two only shows when things get tight.
If you hesitated at one of the axes while reading: that is already a finding. You do not need the questionnaire for it.
What you get
01A profile, not a mark
Five axes, each with a level from 1 to 4. No score. A single number invites you to talk it up; a profile shows the weakest point — and that is exactly what there is to discuss.
02For each axis: finding, consequence, measure
What your answers mean. What usually follows from them. And what would be worth doing now. With a pointer to HERMES 5 where the model has something to say about it.
03A risk class — and what it means for the way you lead
Not «how risky», but: what follows from it for the way you run the undertaking? A manageable one is led differently from a critical one. That is McFarlan's actual point.
04Your answers in full
So that you can put the report in front of somebody without having to explain it.
What this assessment is not
It rests on your own account alone. We do not see your undertaking — we read how you describe it. That makes it a self-assessment, and its value lies in that too: it shows what you know about your own position. And where you do not know.
Whether your undertaking will succeed, it does not say. No questionnaire can, and we do not try.
It names no effort, no cost, no duration either. Not out of convenience: computing figures like that from fourteen answers would be false precision. This tool does not estimate. It places.
One request, and it is in your own interest: answer as things are — not as they ought to be. Where you are unsure, take the more cautious answer. A flattered profile is no use to anybody, and nobody but you reads it.
Start the assessment
Fourteen questions in five steps, about five minutes. The profile appears on screen straight away. The full report we send as a PDF.
All fourteen questions want an answer. Every axis needs its three — otherwise it tips on a single one.
The assessment rests exclusively on your own account. It replaces no examination of the undertaking and makes no statement about whether it will succeed. It contains no figures on effort, cost, duration or person-days — this tool does not estimate, it places.
Where the axes come from
McFarlan, 1981 — and why it holds
The model names three fields of risk: size, clarity of the undertaking, and familiarity with the technology. Its point is not to grade undertakings but to lead them differently — difficult ones differently from simple ones. The idea has aged well; work to this day takes it as a starting point.
Why two axes were added
The audit reports of the Swiss Federal Audit Office on the Confederation's key ICT projects are public. They name causes again and again that have nothing to do with technology: unclear responsibilities, risks that nobody reported upwards, specialist units whose participation was promised but never released. One report carries a chapter under the heading «Risk management not used as an instrument» — the report itself is in German.
Those are risks of leadership. Under McFarlan alone they fall through. Hence axes 4 and 5.
What we deliberately do not use
The most quoted source on failing IT projects is the Standish Group's CHAOS report. We do not rest on it. Its method is disputed in the literature — among other things because the underlying forecasts are skewed and lend themselves poorly to comparison.
We say so here because you will meet those figures elsewhere. An assessment built on a disputed basis is not one.
Where HERMES 5 comes in
HERMES 5 is the Swiss Confederation's project management method, adopted by many cantons. It sets out roles, phases and decision points. Where your finding touches a point that HERMES governs expressly, the report names it — so that you can read it up rather than take our word for it.
Frequently asked
How long does it take?
Fourteen questions, about five minutes. The profile appears straight away, the report comes by email.
Which undertakings does it suit?
IT undertakings of a certain size: introductions, replacements, integrations, migrations. For a new website it goes well beyond what the job needs.
We are already under way — is it still worth it?
Yes, but differently. Before the award, more can be moved. Under way it becomes a position check: where does the risk sit today, and how much of it can you still influence?
Do I have to relate it to one particular undertaking?
Yes. The axes describe an undertaking, not an organisation. Two undertakings, two runs.
What happens to my details?
They serve the assessment and the reply. Not passed on, not sold. You get the report and one follow-up email after seven days — nothing more. The privacy policy has the detail.
Why a business address?
The report concerns an undertaking of your organisation and belongs there. Disposable addresses are turned away.
What if the result is uncomfortable?
Then it cost five minutes and you know a month before the award. A high class is not a verdict on your organisation. It says that several things are acting at once — and that this calls for a different way of leading. Which one is in the report.
Does this replace an assessment?
No. An assessment sees documents, speaks to the people involved, checks. This reads how you describe your undertaking. A way in, not a substitute.
If one of the axes is on your mind, let us talk about it.
The most common findings settle in one meeting: who decides, how the scope is drawn, what the first step is. Where leadership is missing and time is short in-house, we take it on for a fixed period — with a clear brief and a clear end.
Talk about your undertaking→