Note: This template is designed for internal IT software products built on Microsoft Power Platform (e.g. Power Apps, Power Automate, DataVerse). It is intended to be used by both IT teams and Business-Led Developers. Each section below includes its Purpose, Instructions on how to fill it out, an Example, Prerequisites needed before completing the section, and relevant Standards/Best Practices to consider. This template follows Agile / XP best practices, emphasizing clarity, collaboration, and compliance needs. Please keep language clear and accessible, as non-IT professionals may be contributors and readers.

Use of AI: This template has been built to be used by Large Language Models to help you create the template and for you to perform a quality check on your template. Finally LLMs can give you impact analysis on the quality check that it performed. Here are several prompts to use with this template.

Prompt to Build:  Be an Product Owner Responsible for building an PRD.  Use the PRD Template below to build out the PRD.  I have attached documents that cover many of the information needed to fill out the template.  Read this attached information and then read over the template and then ask me questions until you get enough information and then start filling out the template. 
<PRD Template>
{Insert this template here}

Prompt to perform a QDRT:  Be an member of a Quality Design Review Team who is trying to determine if a PRD is complete enough to proceed into Construction.  Use the PRD Template below to compare the attached PRD to standards.  Use your own knowledge and the attached template to perform your assessment.  The review should contain an assessment of quality using a 6 point scale from Excellent to Unacceptable.  It should contain an assessment of Clarity and Completeness using a 3 point scale from Exceeds Expectations to Does Not Meet Expectations. It should contain an assessment of Recommended Next Steps that Include: Approved as-is to proceed to human review, Approved with Minor Revisions, Unapproved with Major Revisions.  It should then list out each item that does not meet expectations.  Finally, each piece of Feedback should have each of the following sections under each piece of feedback.  Feedback Item / Description: Briefly describe what is missing or unclear.  Impact: Describe the impact to the overall effort if not addressed in terms a non-technical college student could understand. Recommendation: Suggest specific corrective actions. Priority: Critical, High, Medium, Low.  Estimation Time To Fix: Number of hours it commonly takes to address this shortcoming.

<PRD Template>
{Insert this template here}

Product Requirements Document (PRD) Template – Power Platform Solutions

1. Executive Summary

Purpose

Provide a high-level overview of the product and its objectives, allowing any reader to quickly grasp what the product is, who it’s for, and why it’s being developed. The executive summary aligns everyone on the vision and sets the stage for the details to follow. It serves as a quick reference for stakeholders to understand the essence of the project.

Instructions

Write 1-3 short paragraphs summarizing the product. Include the product’s name, a brief description of its function, the target users or audience, and the core business problem it addresses. Ensure you mention why this product is important to the organization (e.g. what value or benefit it delivers). Keep it concise and free of technical jargon. Imagine this as an “elevator pitch” for the project that anyone – from executives to developers – can understand. Make sure to cover who the product is for, what it will do, and why it’s being built.

Example

Project Falcon is a mobile Power App for field engineers at Southern California Edison Utility. It streamlines the asset inspection process by replacing paper forms with a digital solution. Field technicians will use the app on tablets to record equipment readings and maintenance notes, even while offline. The data is then automatically uploaded to a central database (Microsoft Dataverse) and routed to supervisors for review. This product addresses the current delays and errors in paperwork processing, improving data accuracy and saving an estimated 20% of technicians’ time. By providing real-time visibility into field inspections, Project Falcon enhances regulatory compliance and operational efficiency, aligning with the company’s goal of leveraging digital tools to improve reliability.

Prerequisites

• A clear definition of the business problem and idea for the solution.
• Identification of the target user group and their needs.
• Management buy-in or a project mandate outlining high-level goals.
• Any prior research or feasibility studies to ensure the project’s viability (if available).

Standards/Best Practices

Ensure the summary is brief and comprehensive. Many PRD frameworks recommend an executive summary or introduction that covers the product’s purpose, key benefits, and alignment with business goals. Avoid technical details here – focus on what and why, not how. This section should be understandable to all stakeholders, including business executives, auditors, or new team members. Following the SMART guideline for objectives (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) can help keep the content focused. Finally, remember that even in agile environments, having this high-level overview is valuable for getting all stakeholders aligned on the product vision.

2. Background & Problem Statement

Purpose

Describe the business context and the problem that this product will solve. This section provides background information on why the project is needed, helping readers understand the current pain points or opportunities. It sets the “why now” and the urgency or importance of the initiative.

Instructions

Explain the current situation or process in the business that led to the need for this product. Identify pain points, inefficiencies, regulatory drivers, or business opportunities. Be factual and specific: include any data or anecdotes that illustrate the problem (e.g. “X process takes N days” or “error rate is Y%”). If this product replaces or improves an existing system, mention what is in place today and its shortcomings. Ensure the problem is clearly stated – a reader should be able to say, “I understand what issue we’re trying to fix.” This section can also reference any strategic initiative or mandate (for example, a digital transformation goal or a regulatory requirement) that makes the project a priority. Keep the tone straightforward so that even non-technical stakeholders grasp the significance.

Example

Currently, field inspection data at Southern California Edison is collected via paper forms. This manual process is error-prone and slow – completed forms are physically transported to the office and re-entered into spreadsheets, causing an average 5-day delay in updating records. Errors in data entry have led to compliance issues, as seen in last year’s audit where 15% of records had discrepancies. Additionally, there is no easy way to track if an asset was inspected without calling the office, leading to miscommunication and occasional missed inspections. This project was initiated after a review by the Operations Excellence team highlighted that digitizing this process could significantly improve data accuracy and timeliness.

Prerequisites

• Gather information on the current process or system (through interviews, observations, or reports).
• Identify any quantitative metrics that illustrate the problem (e.g. error rates, time delays, costs).
• Ensure clarity on the scope of the problem (which departments or business units are affected, how widespread or severe it is).
• If applicable, confirm any external factors pushing this project (such as audit findings, new regulations, or strategic goals set by leadership).

Standards/Best Practices

Clearly articulating the problem statement is a best practice in requirements documentation – it aligns the team on why the project matters. Many product documents and standards (like IEEE recommendations) emphasize describing the current context and issues as part of the introduction. Make sure the problem is stated in business terms (avoid assuming a solution at this stage). This section should resonate with readers from the business side and justify the need for investment. In agile terms, understanding the problem is key to ensuring we build the right solution, and it provides context for user stories and requirements that follow.

3. Goals & Business Objectives (Success Metrics)

Purpose

Define what the product aims to achieve in business terms and how success will be measured. This section translates the problem into concrete goals, linking the product to strategic business objectives and outcomes. It ensures everyone knows the target results and can later verify if the product delivered the expected value.

Instructions

List the specific goals or objectives of this product. Objectives should address the problem stated above and provide a vision of what success looks like. Where possible, quantify the goals (e.g. “reduce processing time by 50%” or “increase user satisfaction to 90% positive feedback”). Include any key performance indicators (KPIs) or success metrics that the business will track. If there are non-quantifiable goals (like improving user experience or compliance), describe how you will know if those goals are met (for example, “zero audit findings related to this process in the next SOX audit”). Ensure objectives are SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-bound. Also mention alignment with higher-level business strategies or mandates if relevant (e.g. “This supports the corporate initiative to digitalize field operations”). Keep the list focused (3-5 primary objectives is typical) and prioritize clarity over technical detail.

Example

• Reduce the average time to update inspection records from 5 days to 1 day by automating data capture and transmission.
• Eliminate manual data entry errors, achieving 99% data accuracy in recorded inspection information (measured by comparing field input vs. database records).
• Improve compliance with maintenance schedules: ensure 100% of required inspections are logged and tracked, supporting regulatory reporting with no missed entries.
• Enhance user satisfaction for field engineers and supervisors, aiming for a >90% positive feedback rating in post-implementation surveys.
• Align with Southern California Edison’s digital transformation goal: this project will contribute to the target of a 20% efficiency improvement in field operations this fiscal year.

Prerequisites

• Agreement on business priorities (e.g. through discussions with the project sponsor or Business Process Owner).
• Baseline measurements for current performance (so improvements can be quantified – e.g., current error rate, current process time).
• Access to any strategic documents or corporate goals to ensure alignment.
• Input from stakeholders on what success would look like (for example, feedback from end-users, or audit requirements for compliance).

Standards/Best Practices

Goals should directly address the problem and be measurable. Industry best practices suggest that well-defined success metrics keep the team focused and provide a basis for acceptance. Make sure each goal is realistic and tied to a business outcome, not a technical output. According to agile/product guidance, goals (or “release criteria”) should be easy to understand and clearly actionable and measurable. It’s also wise to review goals with stakeholders to ensure they agree these reflect a successful outcome. In regulated environments (like utilities), linking to compliance and risk reduction is a best practice, and objectives may include meeting specific audit or regulatory criteria.

4. Scope of Work (In-Scope & Out-of-Scope)

Purpose

Clearly delineate what features and deliverables are in scope for this product (especially for the initial release or project phase) and what is out of scope. This prevents scope creep and sets correct expectations by outlining the boundaries of the product. It helps all parties understand what will be delivered and equally what will not be part of this effort.

Instructions

List the major features, functionalities, or components that will be included in the product. This can be a bullet list grouped by categories if needed. For each in-scope item, provide a brief description if not obvious. Then, provide an Out-of-Scope list of items that people might expect but which will not be addressed in this project (perhaps deferred to future phases or explicitly excluded). For example, if the product is an internal app, out-of-scope might be “customer-facing portal” or integration with a system that you won’t tackle now. Be specific enough to remove ambiguity. If using agile MoSCoW prioritization, you might label items as “Must have”, “Should have”, etc., but at minimum separate the included vs. excluded items. Keep in mind the resources and timeline – scope should be realistic for the project’s constraints. Also, ensure any regulatory or critical feature is not mistakenly left out if it’s needed (tie back to objectives: if an objective needs a feature, it should be in scope).

Example

In-Scope

• Development of a Canvas Power App with screens for asset selection, inspection data entry (including photo upload and GPS capture), and submission.
• A Power Automate workflow to route submitted inspection reports for supervisory approval and log approvals in the audit log.
• Integration with the Dataverse to store inspection records centrally, with appropriate data schema for assets, inspections, and approvals.
• Basic analytics dashboard in Power BI for supervisors to view inspection status (e.g., completed vs. pending inspections), using the collected data.
• User access control setup: only authenticated field engineers can submit data; supervisors can review/approve; admins can view all records.

Out-of-Scope

• Integration with the legacy Asset Management System’s maintenance scheduling (this will be handled in a later phase; in this phase, asset data will be imported manually or via a simple data sync).
• Any direct customer-facing functionality (this app is for internal field use only, not for customers).
• Offline mapping or GIS integration beyond basic GPS capture (not included due to time constraints).
• Support for non-standard devices or operating systems (the app will be designed for company-issued Windows tablets only, not personal mobile phones).

Prerequisites

• A brainstorming or requirements workshop to list all desired features.
• Prioritization of features (perhaps with stakeholder input) to decide what must be in the initial release versus what can wait.
• Understanding of any constraints (time, budget, technology) that limit scope.
• Agreement from project sponsors or owners on what the focus is (and isn’t) for this release.
• If this is an ongoing product, clarity on release phasing (what is targeted now vs. later).

Standards/Best Practices

Defining scope is critical in any requirements standard. For example, the Product Scope section in many templates outlines boundaries and included features. Clearly stating out-of-scope items is equally important to prevent misunderstandings. Best practices suggest using visual aids (like a scope diagram or context diagram) if needed, but a well-structured list suffices. In agile contexts, scope can evolve, but it’s still useful to have an initial scope definition for planning. If using MoSCoW or similar prioritization, document those priorities. Ensure traceability: each in-scope item should relate to an objective or user need, and each objective should be covered by scope. By following scope definition guidelines (such as those in IEEE 830 SRS standard, which emphasizes stating product scope and exclusions), you improve stakeholder alignment and make later change management easier.

5. Stakeholders & User Personas

Purpose

Identify who will use or be affected by the product, and who is involved in its success. This section lists key stakeholders (including end users, project sponsors, Business Process Owners, etc.) and provides profiles of primary user personas. It ensures the product is designed with the right audience in mind and clarifies roles and responsibilities (e.g. who will approve changes, who will support the system). A user-centric approach keeps development aligned with user needs.

Instructions

Define the different groups of people related to this product:

• User Personas: For each main type of end user, provide a short persona description. Include their role, typical background or skill level (especially with tech), goals, and pain points relevant to this product. Keep personas realistic (you can base them on actual employees if known). For example, “Field Technician Alice: 5 years experience, needs to quickly log inspections with minimal typing; not very tech-savvy, values simplicity and offline capability.” List 2-5 personas depending on how many user types the product has.

• Stakeholders: List other stakeholders such as the Business Process Owner (the person responsible for the business process this app supports), project sponsor, IT owner, compliance officer, etc. For each, indicate their interest or role (e.g. “Finance Manager (Business Process Owner) – will sign off that the solution meets SOX control requirements,” or “IT Security Analyst – will review the app for security compliance”). Also include who will develop and maintain the product if relevant (e.g. a citizen developer or IT developer, support team). If needed, note any external parties (perhaps auditors or regulators who will review outputs, though they are not users of the app itself).

Make sure to capture how each persona or stakeholder interacts with or benefits from the product. This will guide requirements to satisfy each group’s needs.

Example

• End User – Field Technician: Frontline employee in the maintenance department. Typically operates in substations or field sites using a tablet. Needs a quick, straightforward way to input inspection results. Pain points: limited time at each site, often works with gloves (accuracy of input is a concern), sometimes has no internet connectivity. Goal: finish data entry during the inspection itself and reduce paperwork.
• End User – Maintenance Supervisor: Office-based supervisor overseeing 10-15 field techs. Uses a desktop PC. Needs to review incoming inspection reports, ensure they are complete, and sign off work daily. Pain point: current process requires chasing paperwork and manually updating a tracking spreadsheet. Goal: get real-time visibility of field work and easily ensure all inspections are completed and approved.
• Business Process Owner – Maintenance Manager (Jane Doe): Responsible for the overall asset inspection process. Ensures the process meets internal controls and regulatory compliance (e.g., SOX controls if inspection data impacts financials). Will need to approve the new process and system and sign off that it meets required controls. Interest: that the app improves efficiency without sacrificing accuracy or compliance.
• Project Sponsor – Operations Director: Champion of the project providing budget and support. Interested in high-level outcomes like efficiency gains and compliance improvements. Will receive periodic updates and will approve major scope or priority changes.
• IT Security Analyst: Responsible for reviewing the app for security vulnerabilities and data protection compliance. Ensures the solution meets corporate IT security policies (like proper authentication, data encryption, etc.). Will need documentation of the app’s security measures.
• Development & Support Team: A small team including a Power Platform Developer (could be an IT developer or a trained business user), and an IT Support Lead who will maintain the app after launch. They need to understand the requirements, design accordingly, and be prepared to support the user base (e.g., handle issues, enhancements). Future maintenance staff will refer to this PRD to understand the app’s purpose and design decisions.

Prerequisites

• Identify all user groups through interviews or process maps (make sure to involve actual end users and get their input).
• Identify the Business Process Owner and ensure they are engaged (especially since sign-offs are required).
• Clarify who the project sponsor is and other governance roles (e.g. who must approve changes, who oversees compliance).
• Confirm any external stakeholders (like auditors or regulatory bodies) who won’t use the system but will use outputs or need it to meet certain criteria.
• Collect any relevant characteristics about users (technical skill level, environment they work in, any special needs like accessibility).

Standards/Best Practices

Writing down user personas is a widely recommended practice to keep the product user-centered. Each persona should highlight user needs and pain points, which drive functional requirements. For stakeholders, it aligns with the RACI approach (knowing who is Responsible, Accountable, Consulted, Informed). Ensure that you consider user experience differences – for example, a standard that might apply is to design for the “least technical” user in your persona set, to maximize usability. Including stakeholders like BPO and auditors is particularly important in a regulated industry; industry frameworks like COSO suggest strong business ownership of controls, which is why we list the Business Process Owner and their role in sign-off. Overall, involving all relevant stakeholders in defining requirements is a best practice – this section essentially documents who those people are.

6. UI / UX Design Specifications

Purpose

Describe how the product should look and feel so that developers and designers deliver a consistent, user‑friendly experience aligned with corporate style and field‑use constraints.

Instructions

1. Design Principles – List the key principles to follow (e.g., “mobile first,” “glove‑friendly controls,” “minimal data entry”).
2. Visual Standards – Reference corporate style‑guide elements: color palette, typography, spacing, iconography.
3. Interaction Patterns – Define reusable UI patterns (e.g., bottom‑navigation bar, modal confirmation dialogs, offline status banner).
4. Accessibility – Specify WCAG 2.1 AA criteria the app must meet (contrast ratios, alternative text, focus order, etc.).
5. Artifacts – Link to wireframes, high‑fidelity mock‑ups, interactive prototypes, and a component library (e.g., Figma file).
6. Usability KPIs – List measurable UX targets (task completion time, error rate, SUS score).

Example

• Design Principle: “Field‑Friendly.” All actionable controls ≥ 44 × 44 px; primary buttons left‑aligned for one‑handed thumb use.
• Visual Standards: Use Blue Fire #00A9E0 for primary actions; body text 16 pt San Francisco; icons from the internal Ion Icon set.
• Interaction Patterns: Swipe‑to‑complete pattern for quickly closing a work order.
• Accessibility: All static text passes 4.5:1 contrast; voice‑over labels present on every icon.
• Artifacts: See Figma → Field App v2 → Frames 1‑20 for annotated mock‑ups.
• Usability KPIs - These Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) measure how usable and efficient the Field Service Mobile App is for real-world use by utility field technicians and supervisors.
  • SUS, error rates, and first-time success should be measured via pilot studies or usability tests.
  • Tap accuracy, task time, and navigation steps can be tracked via usage analytics or observed in test labs.
  • KPIs should be reviewed after initial deployment and used to inform iterative UX improvements.

Prerequisites

• Finalized corporate style guide and component library access.
• UX research insights/persona pain points.
• Device usage constraints (sunlight readability, glove use, etc.).

Standards & Best Practices

WCAG 2.1, ISO 9241‐210 (Human‑centred design), Nielsen 10 usability heuristics, Apple HIG / Material Guidelines (for native iOS/Android patterns).

7. Functional Requirements & Features

Purpose

To enumerate the specific functional capabilities that the product must provide. This section breaks down the product into individual features or requirements, describing what the system should do to support the user needs and scenarios described earlier. It forms the core checklist for developers to implement and testers to verify.

Instructions

• List the functional requirements of the product. There are two common ways to do this, and you can choose based on your methodology (or even combine them):

  • User Story format (Agile/XP): Write requirements as user stories, e.g., “As a [user persona], I want [some capability], so that [benefit].” Each user story represents a feature or piece of functionality. Include acceptance criteria for each story if possible, to clarify when the story is “done.” (e.g., “Given I am logged in, when I submit a work order form offline, then it is saved locally and synced later.”)

  • System Requirement format (Traditional/Waterfall): Write statements of what the system accomplishes, these requirements follow this format: “The [System that this requirement is assigned to] [Shall {for requirements}

    Will {for facts or declaration of purpose}

    Should = {for goals}] [Do some capability or create some business outcome] while [some set of conditions need to be met that can be measured] [under some measurable constraint]. These should be clear, atomic requirements. They might be organized under feature headings (e.g., “Work Order Management” as a sub-section with multiple requirements). Each requirement can be tagged/numbered (e.g., REQ-1, REQ-2) for traceability.

  • Acceptance Criteria: Write Acceptance Criteria for each requirement using Gherkin Scripts taken from Behavior-Driven Development, e.g., “[Scenario: A labor for the behavior being described]: Given [The Starting Condition for the scenario to test, include any preconditions, environmental details, or relevant information], When [A specific action that the user takes or an automated process takes within the system takes]. Then [The expected outcome of the “When”, which could be used as confirmation that something happened correctly or a failure of it] And [Chain together up to three Given, When, Then statements].”
• Ensure that each requirement is clear, testable, and necessary. Avoid ambiguity. For instance, instead of “system should be user-friendly” (which is vague), specify “system shall allow a technician to complete the work order form in 5 minutes or less” or capture “user-friendly” aspects under UX requirements.
• It can be helpful to group requirements by feature area or module (matching perhaps the “Epics” or major features). For example: “Login & User Management,” “Work Order Processing,” “Mapping/GIS Features,” “Reporting,” etc., each with specific requirements.
• If priority or release phase is relevant, mark each requirement with a priority (High/Must-have, Medium/Nice-to-have, Low/Future) that link to the MoSCoW categories. In Agile, you might implicitly do this via backlog ordering, but in a PRD it’s often helpful to indicate critical vs optional features.
• Use bullet points or a numbered list for readability. Keep each requirement concise (one feature per statement). If additional explanation is needed for a requirement, you can indent a sub-bullet or add a brief rationale.
• Verify that every functional requirement traces back to a user need or objective (use the earlier sections to ensure coverage).

Example

• Work Order Management:

1. [Scenario: Viewing Assigned Work Orders] - “As a Field Technician, I want to view a list of my assigned work orders for the day, so that I can plan and prioritize my tasks.”

• Given the Field Technician logs into the mobile application at the start of the day and has at least one work order assigned,
  • When the technician navigates to the “Today’s Work Orders” section,
  • Then the system shall display a list of work orders showing order ID, location, priority, and due date.
  • And the list shall be sorted first by priority (descending), then by due time (ascending).

1. [Scenario: Updating Work Orders While Offline] - “The system shall allow the Field Technician to update a work order’s status and record task results while offline.”

• Given the Field Technician is working in an offline environment and opens a previously downloaded work order, When they update the status of the work order to “Started,” add notes, and attach photos, Then the system shall allow all changes and store them locally on the device.
• Given a network connection is later established, When the application detects connectivity or the technician taps “Sync Now,” Then the stored data shall be uploaded to the central server and reflected in the supervisor’s dashboard in real time.

1. [Scenario: Notifying Supervisor on High-Priority Completion] - “The system shall send a notification to the supervisor when a high-priority work order is completed.”

• Given a Field Technician completes a work order that is marked as high priority and updates its status to “Completed,” When the application syncs this change to the server, Then a push notification or alert message shall be sent to the assigned Supervisor’s device or dashboard immediately. And the notification shall include the work order ID, location, and technician name.

1. [Scenario: Viewing Work Orders on a Map] - “As a Field Technician, I want to see the location of my work orders on a map, so that I can navigate to the site efficiently.”

• Given the technician opens the “Map View” screen within the app while online, When the system loads the map tiles for the current and upcoming work order locations, Then pin markers shall be displayed for each assigned work order with basic details accessible upon tap.
• Given the technician loses internet connection, When they reopen the app in an offline area, Then the previously loaded map and work order markers shall remain visible and functional, And tapping a marker shall still show work order info and provide an option to open the location in an external navigation app.

1. [Scenario: Logging in with Corporate SSO] - “The system shall integrate with the corporate Single Sign-On (SSO).”

• Given the user opens the mobile or web app and is not logged in, When they click “Sign in,” Then the system shall redirect to the corporate SSO login screen and accept valid company credentials.
• Given the credentials are valid, When the user successfully authenticates, Then the system shall create a session and route the user to their appropriate dashboard. And no separate app-specific password shall be required.

1. [Scenario: Enforcing Role-Based Access Control] - The system shall enforce role-based access control.

• Given a user logs into the system, When their role is identified as Technician, Then they shall only be able to view and update work orders assigned to them.
• Given a Supervisor logs in, When they access the work order list, Then they shall be able to view and reassign work orders within their region.
• Given an Admin user logs in, When they navigate to the user management or audit section, Then they shall be able to view all user accounts, roles, and audit logs across all regions.

1. [Scenario: Downloading a Daily Summary Report] - “As a Field Supervisor, I want to download a daily summary report of completed and pending work orders, so that I can report progress to management.”

• Given the Supervisor logs into the web dashboard before 5 PM, When they navigate to the “Daily Reports” section and select “Download,” Then the system shall generate a report (PDF or Excel) including all completed and pending work orders as of that day. And the report shall include metadata such as task IDs, completion timestamps, technician names, and any overdue items.

Prerequisites

• You should have completed the user scenarios and have a good understanding of what functions are needed. Ideally, you’ve also consulted subject matter experts or users to validate these functions.
• If following Agile, a product backlog or list of user stories might already exist from discovery workshops – those can be refined and included here. If following a traditional approach, a business requirements document or use case documents might have been created, which you now translate into functional requirements.
• The team should align on a level of detail for requirements. Sometimes early PRDs keep it higher-level (epics/features), especially in agile contexts, deferring detailed user stories to the backlog. Make sure this section’s granularity matches how the team will implement (e.g., each bullet could correspond to a backlog item or development task).
• Acceptance Criteria should be completed as the stories and the requirements are finalized. If the stories and requirements are not finalized, then the Acceptance Criteria needs to be updated every time the associated need is changed.
• Before Acceptance Criteria is finalized, there needs to be an agreement with the customer and business process owner where the testing will take place (Test Environment) and which datasets will be used.

Standards and Best Practices

Functional requirements should be clear, unambiguous, and verifiable. According to IEEE standards, each requirement should be concise, complete, and testable. In a Waterfall model, you might enumerate “The system shall…” statements with unique identifiers. In Agile, writing user stories is common; when doing so, follow the INVEST criteria – each story should be Independent, Negotiable, Valuable, Estimable, Small, and Testable. For example, ensure every user story clearly states the value (so that it’s truly needed) and is small enough to implement in a short iteration. It’s also advisable to avoid prescribing the solution in this section – focus on what the system should do, not how to do it (leave design decisions for later), unless a particular implementation is a constraint. By adhering to these guidelines, the requirements become actionable for development and measurable for QA. INVEST & BDD guidelines; IEEE 829 / ISO 29119 for test documentation; Agile Definition‑of‑Done checklists.

8. Non-Functional Requirements (Quality Attributes)

Purpose

To specify the criteria that judge the operation of the system, rather than specific behaviors. These include performance, security, usability, reliability, and other quality attributes. Non-functional requirements (NFRs) ensure that the product not only does what it should, but does so with the desired level of quality, speed, safety, etc., which is crucial in a utility context where reliability and safety are paramount.

Instructions

List and describe the key non-functional requirements. It’s often useful to categorize them by type of quality attribute. Common categories include:

• Performance & Scalability: Requirements about response times, throughput, capacity, and scalability of the system. e.g., “The system shall support 500 concurrent users with an average response time of <2 seconds for data retrieval operations.” or “Must handle up to 1000 work orders per day without degradation.” Also consider offline performance (like app should load within X seconds on device).
• Reliability & Availability: Define uptime or availability requirements (e.g., “99.9% uptime during business hours” or specific acceptable downtime per month). Also any requirements for fault tolerance (e.g., what happens if a sync fails?), and data backup/recovery (important for utility data – ensure no data loss).
• Security: (Can be in its own section, but you may list basic security NFRs here or cross-reference the Security section below.) For example, “All data in transit must be encrypted (TLS 1.2 or higher)” or “User sessions expire after 15 minutes of inactivity.”
• Usability & Accessibility: Requirements about the user experience – e.g., “The mobile app interface shall be usable with minimal training (target: field users can perform main tasks after 1 hour of training).” Or “The interface must adhere to corporate UX standards (fonts, colors) for consistency.” If accessibility is important: “The product should meet WCAG 2.1 AA guidelines for accessible design, to accommodate color blindness and screen reader usage.”
• Maintainability & Extensibility: e.g., “The system shall be built using modular architecture to allow future enhancements (like adding new task types) with minimal refactoring.” Or maintainability metrics such as “Important: Code will follow internal coding standards and will include unit tests for at least 80% of new code.” These might not always be in a PRD (sometimes they’re in an engineering plan), but for internal projects it’s often relevant to note.
• Compatibility: e.g., “Must be compatible with Chrome and Edge browsers (latest two versions) for the web part,” or “Mobile app must support iOS 15 and later.” Also any backward compatibility or data migration from old systems if relevant.
• Regulatory/Compliance (non-functional aspects): Some compliance requirements impose NFRs, like data retention (e.g., “System must retain field data for at least 5 years to meet regulatory audit requirements”) or audit logging (“System shall log all user actions related to work order completion for audit purposes”). If not covered in the Security & Compliance section, include them here.
• Localization: If the app will be used in multiple locales or languages (likely not for an internal utility app in California, but if Spanish support is needed for some employees, mention that).
• Other: Any other quality requirements such as Safety (for example, “The software shall not distract the driver: if tech is driving, app locks certain features” – a safety requirement relevant to a utility where crews drive; or “Follow OSHA guidelines for electronic devices usage in hazardous areas” if any), or Environmental conditions (e.g., “Tablet screen must remain readable in bright sunlight” – which is more of a hardware spec but can be noted).

Use bullet points, each starting with the category or a short name of the NFR followed by the specific requirement. Provide measurable criteria where possible (e.g., actual numbers for performance, dates for retention, etc.).

Example

• Performance: The mobile app shall load the day’s work orders in under 5 seconds on average (when online). The system backend must support processing up to 100 work order updates per minute during peak usage (morning dispatch), without errors.
  • Given the Field Technician logs into the mobile app during active network connectivity and has one or more work orders assigned for the day,
    When the technician opens the “Today’s Work Orders” screen,
    Then the list of work orders shall load and render within 5 seconds on average.
  • Given the backend server is processing incoming updates from the field during peak morning hours (e.g., 7–9 AM),
    When up to 100 work order updates per minute are submitted simultaneously,
    Then the system shall accept and persist all updates without producing errors,
    And the average processing latency shall remain within operational thresholds (e.g., under 1.5s per request).
• Availability: The system (server side) should achieve 99.5% uptime during 6am-6pm Monday-Saturday (field operation hours). Scheduled maintenance windows must be communicated and preferably performed off these peak hours. The mobile app shall allow offline operation for at least 8 hours and queue data for later sync to ensure continuous work in case of network outages (supports reliability in the field).
  • Given it is between 6:00 AM and 6:00 PM on Monday through Saturday,
    When a field technician or supervisor attempts to connect to the system,
    Then the backend service shall be available at least 99.5% of the time without interruption.
  • Given maintenance is required for the backend infrastructure,
    When a scheduled window is planned,
    Then it shall be communicated to all users in advance and occur outside field operation hours when possible.
  • Given the mobile app is offline due to poor signal,
    When a technician performs updates for up to 8 hours,
    Then the system shall store all data locally and queue it for sync once network connectivity returns.
• Security: All API communication between the mobile app and backend will use TLS 1.2+ encryption. Sensitive fields (e.g., crew personal info, if any) should be encrypted in the database. The application must enforce Multi-Factor Authentication on login when off-site (in line with corporate security policy).
  • Given a technician is using the mobile app,
    When the app communicates with the backend API,
    Then all requests and responses shall be encrypted using TLS 1.2 or higher.
  • Given a user’s session contains sensitive data (e.g., personal crew info),
    When it is written to the backend database,
    Then all sensitive fields shall be encrypted at rest using approved encryption methods.
  • Given a user is attempting to log in from an off-site location,
    When authentication is initiated,
    Then the application shall enforce multi-factor authentication per corporate policy.
• Usability: The app’s UI shall be simple and uncluttered, with large buttons suitable for use with gloves. Use of text input is minimized (preferring picklists, voice-to-text, or scanning where possible) to accommodate field conditions. The design will follow the company’s UI style guide for consistency. New users (field techs) should be able to perform basic functions (view tasks, update status) with no more than 1 hour of training.
  • Given the Field Technician is operating in a harsh environment (e.g., gloves, bright sunlight),
    When they use the mobile app,
    Then the UI shall display large, accessible buttons and avoid small or cluttered elements.
  • Given an input is required,
    When the user selects or enters data,
    Then the system shall prefer picklists, voice input, or barcode scanning over free-text entry.
  • Given a new technician is onboarded,
    When they are trained for 1 hour or less,
    Then they shall be able to view assigned tasks and update task status without assistance.
• Accessibility: (If applicable) The web portal shall meet WCAG 2.1 AA standards – for example, it should support screen readers for visually impaired office staff and have sufficient color contrast. (Mobile app should at least have scalable text and colorblind-friendly icons.)
  • Given a visually impaired user accesses the web portal,
    When they use screen reader software,
    Then the portal shall meet WCAG 2.1 AA standards, including labeled form fields, navigation hints, and alternative text for icons.
  • Given a colorblind user opens the mobile app,
    When viewing task status indicators or buttons,
    Then icons shall include textual or shape-based cues, and all color usage shall maintain a minimum contrast ratio of 4.5:1.
  • Given a user requires larger text,
    When system font scaling is enabled on the device,
    Then the app shall honor accessibility settings and scale UI text appropriately without layout breakage.
• Maintainability: The solution should be built on standard company-supported frameworks. All code will include documentation comments. We will also provide an admin interface for common configurations (so changes like adding a new work order type don’t require a code change).
  • Given the system is deployed and in active use,
    When engineers review the source code,
    Then all components shall follow company-supported frameworks and include documentation comments in-line.
  • Given an administrator needs to configure a new work order type or region,
    When they access the admin panel,
    Then such settings shall be available without requiring a code change or deployment,
    And the configuration shall be audit-logged and version-controlled.
• Data Retention: All work order completion records must be stored for at least 5 years in the central database to comply with regulatory record-keeping requirements. Audit logs of user actions should be retained for 1 year.
  • Given a technician completes a work order,
    When the data is synced with the backend,
    Then the work order record shall be retained in the central database for no less than 5 years.
  • Given a user performs actions within the system (e.g., edit, delete, assign),
    When those actions occur,
    Then an audit log entry shall be created and retained for a minimum of 1 year,
    And these logs shall be searchable by Admin users for compliance or troubleshooting.
• Interoperability: The system should use standardized data formats (e.g., JSON for APIs with field naming aligned to industry standards where possible) so that future integrations (such as with analytics tools or external contractors’ systems) can be done with minimal transformation.
• Given a third-party system or future integration is added (e.g., analytics, contractor apps),
  When it interfaces with the backend APIs,
  Then all APIs shall return and accept data in JSON format with field names aligned to industry standards.
• Given another system consumes exported work order data,
  When the export is generated,
  Then the data shall be easily parseable without custom transformation,
  And should require minimal mapping to external schemas.

Prerequisites

• Consult corporate IT non-functional requirements guidelines or checklists (many organizations have a security checklist, performance criteria, etc., for new applications).
• Involve specialists: e.g., Performance engineers for load expectations, Security team for specific security requirements, UX designers for usability heuristics.
• Review any regulatory documents for explicit non-functional mandates (like data retention from regulations, or specific safety rules). For a California electric utility, reliability standards (like not losing data) and security (NERC CIP) are often mandated.
• Determine usage assumptions: how many users, how often they’ll use it, which informs performance and capacity requirements.

Standards and Best Practices

Covering a broad range of quality attributes aligns with industry standards like ISO/IEC 25010 (which defines product quality characteristics such as reliability, performance efficiency, usability, security, maintainability, portability, etc.). Ensuring each of these relevant attributes is addressed helps create a well-rounded product. For example, reliability is critical for utility software – downtime can affect operations, so stating uptime requirements is important. Security standards (e.g., following OWASP Top 10 for web/mobile security) should be referenced if applicable. Many organizations also adhere to NIST guidelines for cybersecurity and data protection – our PRD’s security NFRs should reflect those. By specifying these NFRs, we provide clear criteria for acceptance: the product isn’t done just when features are built, but when it meets performance benchmarks, passes security tests, and so on. INVEST & BDD guidelines; IEEE 829 / ISO 29119 for test documentation; Agile Definition‑of‑Done checklists.

9. Solution Architecture & Design Overview

Purpose

Provide a high-level overview of how the solution will be built and organized. This section describes the system architecture in simple terms – the major components, their interactions, and key design decisions. It bridges the gap between requirements and the actual implementation approach, helping both developers and non-technical stakeholders understand the solution’s structure. It’s especially useful for future developers, IT staff, or auditors to quickly see how data flows and where key functions reside.

Instructions

Describe the architecture using text and optionally diagrams. Focus on the components relevant to Power Platform solutions:

• Architecture Diagram: (Optional but encouraged) If possible, include or reference a simple diagram (could be attached separately) that shows components like the Power App, Power Automate flows, Dataverse or other data sources, and any external systems or APIs. Even a basic block diagram with arrows for data flow will help. (If embedding an image, ensure it’s clear and labeled.)
• Application Type: Specify if it’s a Canvas App or Model-Driven App (or a combination), or even a Power BI report, etc. Explain why that type was chosen if relevant (e.g. “Canvas app for full UI control and offline support”).
• Key Components: List the main components: e.g., “Canvas App (Project Falcon App) – for field data entry and supervisor approval interface”, “Power Automate Flow (Inspection Approval Flow) – to send notifications and log approvals”, “Dataverse – storing asset and inspection data”, “Azure API or Connector – if integrating with an external system (describe which one and why)”. Include any Microsoft 365 or Azure services if used (maybe SharePoint, if not using Dataverse, or Azure Functions, etc.).
• Data Model: Provide a brief overview of the data entities/tables involved and relationships. For example, “We will have a Dataverse table for Assets, one for Inspection Reports, and one for Approval Logs. Each Inspection is linked to an Asset, and each Approval links to an Inspection.” If using existing data sources, mention them (e.g., “Asset data will be pulled from the enterprise Asset Management system via a scheduled integration”).
• Integration Points: Describe how the app integrates with other systems or data sources. For instance, “The app uses a standard SQL connector to read equipment details from the maintenance database” or “We utilize the Office 365 Outlook connector in Power Automate to send emails.” If any custom connectors or APIs are used, mention them and their purpose.
• Solution Environment & Deployment: Note which environment the solution will reside in (Dev/Test/Prod Power Platform environments) and how it will be moved between them (if known, e.g., using solution export/import, managed solutions). This is especially relevant to auditors/IT to know how changes are promoted.
• Key Design Decisions/Patterns: Mention any important decisions like “Offline mode will be handled using the Power Apps LoadData/SaveData functions” or “We chose Dataverse over SharePoint list for data storage due to relational data needs and security.” Also, if any known limitations and their workarounds exist, include those (e.g., “We anticipate large data volume, so will implement data archiving by year to maintain performance”).
  Keep this section high-level – it’s not a detailed technical spec, but enough that someone could draw a mental picture of the system. Use non-technical language as much as possible (avoid deep code-level talk) so that business readers and auditors can follow.

Example

The solution consists of a Canvas Power App (working title “FieldInspect App”) which will run on tablet devices for field techs and on desktop for supervisors. The app has multiple screens: Login/Home, Asset Selection (with search or scan), Inspection Form, and Supervisor Review. Data will be stored in Microsoft Dataverse within our “FieldApps” environment. We have three main tables: Assets, Inspections, and Approvals. Assets (pre-loaded with asset ID, name, location info) relate one-to-many with Inspections (each Inspection record captures form data plus a lookup to the Asset and the Technician user). Approvals table records supervisor approvals/rejections, linked to Inspections. A Power Automate cloud flow called “InspectionApprovalFlow” is triggered when a new Inspection record is created or updated. This flow sends an email notification to the respective supervisor (looked up from a supervisor field in the asset or tech’s profile) and posts a message in the Team’s channel for visibility. The flow also updates the Approval table once the supervisor responds in the app. The app uses built-in Offline functionality: when launched with internet, it caches the list of Assets locally. Technicians can use the app offline; it uses SaveData/LoadData to store drafts. When back online, the technician can submit, and the app will write to Dataverse (which triggers the flow). To handle this, a local flag and a sync button exist in the UI. Integration: The solution will integrate with our Asset Management System (Maximo) by a daily data export of Assets into Dataverse (using a scheduled Azure Data Factory pipeline, managed by IT). No real-time integration is used to keep the app simple and mostly offline-capable. For email, the Power Automate uses the standard Office 365 Outlook connector (no external email system). Security Design: The app relies on Dataverse security roles. We will have a “Technician” security role (can Create Inspections, read only their own records), a “Supervisor” role (can read all Inspections for their team’s assets and approve them), and an “Admin” role (full access for IT support). Azure AD groups will map to these roles. This ensures data segregation by role. Environment & Deployment: The development is done in the “FieldApps Dev” Power Platform environment. Once tested, we will package the solution (Canvas app, tables, flows) into a managed solution and deploy to “FieldApps Prod” environment. Auditors can get a solution export if needed to review configurations. All configuration (e.g., list of supervisors, email templates) will be stored in a config entity so that changes do not require app re-publish. Key Design Considerations: We chose a Canvas App for flexibility in UI (needed to accommodate photos and custom layout for offline use). Dataverse was selected over SharePoint for robust offline sync and relational data support, and because it offers better security control for sensitive data. We are aware of the 2MB limit on offline data per table in Power Apps – our asset list is ~500 records, which is fine. We also took into account future expansion: by using Dataverse and a modular flow, adding another department’s inspections in the future would be straightforward. (Refer to Diagram 1 for an architecture overview – showing the app, Dataverse, Power Automate flow, and integration with external systems.)

Prerequisites

• Initial solution planning with an architect or senior developer to decide on the platform components and feasibility (e.g., confirming that Power Apps can meet offline requirements).
• Diagrams or lists of existing systems that need to interface with this product (for identifying integration points).
• Enterprise architecture standards (there may be guidelines which need to be followed, like “prefer Dataverse over SharePoint for data X” or approved connectors list).
• Knowledge of the licensing implications (e.g., using Dataverse and offline might require certain Power Apps licenses; ensure that’s accounted for in design decisions).
• Environment setup availability – ensure you know where this will be deployed (Dev/Test/Prod) and any constraints on those environments (some companies have a Center of Excellence with rules for Power Platform environments).
• Input from IT security or infrastructure teams on any design constraints (for instance, if there are policies about data residency, or if certain cloud connectors are disallowed in the utility company’s IT policy).

Standards/Best Practices

While this is not a full technical specification, it’s aligned with the idea of providing a Technical Specifications/Architecture outline as seen in formal templates. Best practices include using standardized diagramming (like UML deployment diagrams or C4 Model Level 1 context diagrams) to visualize the architecture. For Power Platform, Microsoft’s Power Platform Architecture Framework can be a guide – ensure the solution respects the governance (e.g., using Data Loss Prevention policies- which connectors are allowed). In an Agile environment, high-level design is often discussed but not always documented; however, given this document may be read by auditors and future support, including this overview is valuable. Industry standards like C4 model encourage a context and container view – you might include a context diagram showing users and systems, and a container diagram showing the app/flow/data components. Also, referencing any patterns or frameworks (like OWASP for security design, or COSO/COBIT if some controls are implemented as part of design) would assure reviewers that best practices are followed. In summary, this section should give a technically literate reader an idea of how everything fits together, while still being digestible by a non-technical stakeholder.

10. Security, Compliance & Controls (SOX Requirements)

Purpose

Document the security measures, compliance requirements, and internal controls that the product must adhere to – especially those related to Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) if the application impacts financial reporting or critical business processes. This section ensures that from the design stage, the solution includes necessary controls (both IT controls and business process controls) to meet corporate and regulatory standards. It also captures the plan for getting required sign-offs (e.g., Business Process Owner approval) for compliance. Auditors and risk analysts will refer to this section to understand how the solution manages risk and compliance.

Instructions

Describe all relevant security and compliance requirements. Break it down into sub-areas for clarity:

• Data Classification & Privacy: State the classification of the data handled (e.g., Confidential, Internal, Public). For an electric utility, inspection data might be Internal, but if it ties to financial assets or customer info, it could be Confidential. Note if any personal data is involved (likely not, but if so, mention privacy measures like GDPR compliance or anonymization).
• Access Controls: Explain how access to the app and data is restricted. This overlaps with what was mentioned in architecture, but reiterate from a control perspective. E.g., “Only employees in Maintenance department can access the app; access is granted via Azure AD security groups mapped to roles. No external access is allowed. Role-based security ensures segregation of duties (technicians cannot approve their own work, only supervisors can).” Mention if principles like Least Privilege are implemented, and how (perhaps via those security roles).
• Authentication & Authorization: State that corporate Single Sign-On (SSO) is used (Azure AD). If Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) is required for all cloud app access (common policy), note that. Confirm that no shared accounts are used – each action is tied to an individual user identity for accountability (this is important for SOX audit trails).
• Audit Logging: Describe what audit logs or trails are in place. For SOX, having an audit trail of changes is critical learn.microsoft.com. E.g., “The system automatically logs all create/update/delete actions on inspection records, including timestamp and user ID, in an immutable audit log (provided by Dataverse out-of-the-box audit functionality, which is enabled). These logs will be retained for at least 7 years in line with financial record retention policies.” If Power Platform’s native audit is used, mention enabling it. Also mention logging of sign-offs/approvals as part of the business control (as in the functional requirements example).
• SOX Controls Implemented: Be explicit about which internal controls relevant to SOX are supported by the system. For instance:
  • Approval Control: “Every inspection affecting a regulated asset must be approved by a supervisor before it’s considered final. This ensures a second-level review, addressing segregation-of-duties – the person performing work isn’t the one approving it.”
  • Completeness Control: “The system ensures all required inspection data is entered (cannot submit if missing info), reducing risk of incomplete records - learn.microsoft.com.”
  • Accuracy Control: “Real-time validation (range checks on readings, etc.) to catch obvious errors at entry. Also, data is pulled from authoritative source (asset list) to avoid typos.”
  • Access Control: “Only authorized personnel can create or approve records, preventing unauthorized changes. Also, technicians cannot edit records after submission – to preserve data integrity (any changes post-submission require supervisor’s action).”
  • Change Management Control: If the application is considered a SOX application, note how changes to it will be controlled. E.g., “All changes to this application will go through IT change management. There is an approval process for changes, and an audit trail of modifications to the app configuration (Power Platform maintains version history of solutions).”
• Other Compliance: Mention if there are other regulatory or policy requirements: for example, NERC CIP (for critical infrastructure) might require certain cyber security practices if this system touches operational grid data – likely not in this context if it’s maintenance, but worth noting if any. Or any OSHA safety data considerations, etc. Also mention if any SOX 404 documentation will be produced (like a controls testing document or if this system will be included in SOX scope review annually).
• Business Process Owner Sign-off: Clearly state the plan for sign-off. E.g., “Before go-live, the Business Process Owner (Maintenance Manager) will review the system’s design and test results to confirm that the internal controls meet SOX requirements. A formal sign-off document will be completed, certifying that the business accepts the solution and its embedded controls.” This ensures accountability – essentially the BPO is attesting the solution does what’s needed for compliance. If there’s a control owner separate from BPO, mention them too.
• Security Testing & Reviews: Note if there will be a security assessment (like penetration test or at least IT security review) before deployment. Also, if applicable, mention any specific cybersecurity controls like vulnerability management (e.g., “the app will be scanned with Microsoft’s PowerApps Checker or other tools for any security issues prior to release”).

Organize these as bullet points or short paragraphs under subheadings if needed.

Example

• Data Classification: The data managed by this app (inspection records of company assets) is classified as Internal. It does not directly contain financial statement data but does feed into operational metrics that can influence financial decisions (e.g., asset health affecting capital expenditures). Thus, accuracy and integrity are important. No personal identifiable information (PII) is stored except employee IDs (corporate).
• Authentication & User Access: Users access the app via Azure AD SSO, with MFA enforced as per company policy. Technicians and supervisors are pre-authorized via security groups. The app will not be accessible outside the corporate network except through managed devices (this is enforced by Intune policies on the tablets).
• Authorization & Segregation of Duties: Role-based access is implemented. Technicians can create inspection records but cannot approve them. Supervisors can approve/reject but cannot create records for themselves. This enforces segregation of duties – a key SOX control to prevent a single person from completing a process end-to-end without oversight. Additionally, only designated supervisors (one level above technicians) are given approval permissions, ensuring managerial review of work.
• Audit Trail: The system keeps a detailed audit log. Dataverse Auditing is turned on for the Inspection and Approval tables, recording all changes. Every submission and approval action is automatically timestamped and tied to a user ID. These logs are read-only and periodically exported to secure storage for retention. This addresses SOX requirements for evidencing control effectiveness over financial-related data (accuracy, completeness of records) learn.microsoft.com. During audits, these logs can be provided to show who performed and who approved each inspection, and that no unauthorized edits occurred.
• SOX Financial Control Consideration: While an inspection app is not directly a financial system, it supports a key control: ensuring that required asset inspections (which can impact financial decisions like asset depreciation or investment) are completed and reviewed. Thus, the following controls are implemented in the app design:
  • Completeness Control: The app requires all fields to be completed and will not allow submission if any mandatory data is missing. This ensures completeness of data captured for each inspectionlearn.microsoft.com.
  • Accuracy Control: The app includes validation rules (for example, acceptable range checks for readings, dropdowns to prevent invalid entries). Also, by pulling asset info from a master list, it avoids free-text errors. These reduce errors in recorded data.
  • Approval Control: Each inspection record must be approved by the maintenance supervisor electronically. The system enforces this by marking new records as “Pending Approval” and only after a supervisor’s approval does it mark them “Approved”. This electronic sign-off is equivalent to a supervisor’s signature on a paper form, fulfilling the oversight control. The Business Process Owner (Maintenance Manager) will review samples of these records during UAT to ensure the approval workflow meets internal control expectations.
  • Exception Handling: If an inspection fails approval (rejected due to issues), the system flags it and requires resolution (either re-inspection or data correction with supervisor oversight). This ensures issues are not ignored – a control to maintain data integrity and follow-up.
• Compliance & Standards: The design aligns with the COSO Internal Control Framework, focusing on control activities and information & communication components. For IT general controls (ITGC), the app relies on the established controls of the Power Platform and Azure AD (access provisioning, change management, etc.). For example, deployment to production will go through Change Management (CAB approval), ensuring proper change control – which is an ITGC often audited under SOX. We also adhere to COBIT principles for IT governance, ensuring that the app’s lifecycle is managed and documented.
• Security Testing: Before go-live, the Cybersecurity team will perform a security review of the app and flow (checking for any insecure configurations, verifying least privilege access, etc.). Any findings will be addressed. Additionally, because this is a low-code solution, reliance is placed on Microsoft’s security (the app is built on a platform that has SOC 1 Type 2 attestation which covers internal controls over financial reporting learn.microsoft.com). However, our organization remains responsible for configuring controls correctly and monitoring them learn.microsoft.com. The BPO and IT will establish a periodic review (e.g., every quarter) of user access rights and audit logs, to ensure controls continue to operate effectively.
• Business Process Owner (BPO) Sign-off: Before deployment to production, the Business Process Owner (Jane Doe, Maintenance Manager) will sign off on a control checklist confirming that: (a) the app’s workflow meets the required business control (supervisory approval), (b) audit trails are sufficient, and (c) all compliance requirements are met. This sign-off will be documented and stored for audit evidence. The BPO’s sign-off indicates acceptance of the system from a process controls perspective and is required by our SOX governance process. The PRD (this document) will be one of the artifacts reviewed and approved by the BPO and IT Compliance before go-live.

Prerequisites

• Consult with the Compliance/Audit team to identify which SOX controls (if any) are relevant to this application. Determine if the application will be in scope for SOX 404 testing.
• Consult with the IT Security team to gather applicable security requirements and policies (like password/MFA policies, data encryption needs, logging requirements, etc.).
• Classification of data should be confirmed via the company’s data classification policy and possibly involve the Data Governance team.
• The Business Process Owner should be involved early to define what controls they need to see in the system (e.g., if they have existing control narratives for the manual process, use those to implement equivalent digital controls).
• Check if there are any corporate standard controls or frameworks to align with (many companies have an Internal Controls Framework document – see if any control objectives map to this system).
• Make sure you have the list of standards/regulations the system must comply with (besides SOX, possibly internal IT policies, NERC CIP if dealing with grid control systems, etc., and data privacy laws if any personal data is involved).

Standards/Best Practices

This section aligns with ensuring regulatory compliance and should reflect best practices from frameworks like COSO (for financial controls) and ISO 27001/NIST (for security controls). Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) specifically emphasizes internal controls over financial reporting learn.microsoft.com, so documenting controls such as access restrictions, approvals, and audit trails demonstrates compliance readiness. It’s considered best practice to involve internal audit or compliance experts when designing systems that touch financial processes, to ensure all necessary controls are in place. Common SOX-related controls include access controls, segregation of duties, change management, backup, and data integrity checks, all of which are covered in our instructions above. We also referenced that Microsoft’s cloud services provide SOC reports to help with SOX compliance learn.microsoft.com – leveraging such certified infrastructure is a plus, but the onus is on us to configure the app correctly learn.microsoft.com. Ensure that any control described here is also traceable in the requirements or design (and eventually in testing). From an agile standpoint, even if we work iteratively, compliance requirements are non-negotiable – they must be built into the product from the start. Having a dedicated section for these in the PRD is aligned with audit requirements and will assist Auditors and Cyber Security Risk Analysts in their evaluation of the solution (as they specifically will look for evidence of these controls).

11. Implementation Plan & Timeline

Purpose

Outline the high-level plan for implementing and delivering the product, including key milestones or phases. This provides transparency on how the project will be executed in time, which is useful for coordinating with stakeholders and setting expectations. It also helps identify any time-sensitive requirements (like regulatory deadlines) and ensures alignment with the agile delivery approach (iterations, sprints, etc.).

Instructions

Provide an overview of the project timeline. Even in an Agile/XP setting, it’s helpful to list important dates or phases. Possible inclusions:

• Project Phases or Sprints: If you have defined phases (e.g., Phase 1 - MVP, Phase 2 - enhancements) or you’re planning by sprints, describe them. For example, “Sprint 1 (Jan 5 - Jan 19): build core data entry form; Sprint 2: add approval flow; Sprint 3: user testing and refinements; Go-Live: March 1.” Alternatively, if not working in formal sprints, outline major chunks like Design, Development, Testing, Training, Deployment, each with target dates.
• Milestones: Key events like “PRD approved”, “Development complete”, “User Acceptance Testing (UAT)”, “Go-live”, etc., with dates. Include any gate reviews if relevant (like security review or audit review dates).
• Deliverables per milestone: Optionally, note what will be delivered at each milestone (e.g., prototype demo, documentation, training materials ready, etc.).
• Timeline Diagram or Schedule: You could present a simple timeline chart if needed (but text is fine).
• Release Criteria for Launch: Tie this to timeline – e.g., “Before go-live on March 1, the following must be true: 100% of test cases passed, BPO sign-off received (by Feb 25), training delivered to all users (by Feb 28), etc.” This ensures all pre-launch checks align with the timeline.
• Post-launch support plan: Briefly mention what happens after go-live in terms of hypercare or support timeline if applicable (e.g., “First two weeks after go-live will have daily check-ins with field users and quick bug fixes if needed”).
  Keep this section relatively high-level; it’s not a full project plan, but enough to give context of how the work is planned. If dates are not fixed, you can mention timeframes (e.g., Q4 2025 for pilot release). For agile, emphasize the iterative nature if appropriate (“We plan to pilot with one region in first release, then roll out to others in a subsequent release based on feedback.”). If no hard deadlines, state that the timeline is flexible but include expected duration of major tasks.

Example

• Project Start: Jan 10, 2025 – Project kickoff, PRD completed and approved by stakeholders by end of January.
• Development Sprints: Feb 2025 to Mar 2025 – Three 2-week sprints using XP practices (pair programming, test-driven development):
  • Sprint 1 (Feb 1 – Feb 14): Build the core Canvas app screens for data entry and basic data model setup in Dataverse. Deliverable: working form with offline capability demo.
  • Sprint 2 (Feb 15 – Feb 28): Implement Power Automate approval flow and supervisor interface in app. Deliverable: end-to-end submission and approval working in dev environment.
  • Sprint 3 (Mar 1 – Mar 14): Refine user interface, add validations, implement audit logging, and conduct internal testing. Deliverable: feature-complete app in UAT environment.
• User Acceptance Testing (UAT): Mar 17 – Mar 28, 2025 – Key users (5 field techs and 2 supervisors) will use the app in a test environment with sample data. Feedback will be collected daily and minor fixes performed. SOX control testing by Internal Audit will occur in this period too (they will verify that approval workflow and logging meet requirements).
• Security Review: Mar 20, 2025 – IT Security to perform final review (penetration test and policy compliance check). Any critical issues will be resolved by Mar 25.
• Training & Documentation: Mar 24 – Mar 31, 2025 – Develop quick reference guides and conduct training sessions for all 50 intended users. Training by a combination of online video and a live demo session.
• Go-Live (Production Deployment): Apr 1, 2025 – The solution will be deployed to Production environment. This will happen during a scheduled maintenance window (approx 1 hour downtime for initial data load). BPO and Project Sponsor sign-off required by Mar 30 to proceed.
• Post-Go-Live Support: Apr 1 – Apr 30, 2025 (Hypercare period) – The project team (developer and a support analyst) will closely monitor usage, respond to any issues, and ensure all inspections in April are successfully recorded. Weekly check-ins with the Business Process Owner to address any user concerns or requested tweaks.
• Phase 2 (Future Enhancements): (Tentative) Q3 2025 – If phase 1 is successful, plan to integrate with Asset Management System in real-time and add a Power BI dashboard for management. These are out-of-scope for now, but targeted for later in the year pending approval.

Prerequisites

• A rough estimation or sizing of the work (perhaps done with the team) to ensure timeline is realistic.
• Identification of dependencies that could affect schedule (e.g., availability of test users for UAT, or waiting on IT to provision an environment, etc.).
• Knowledge of any fixed deadlines (for example, “we want this live before end of fiscal year” or “must be in place before next audit in June”). If none, stakeholder agreement on a reasonable timeframe.
• Team availability and resource confirmation (e.g., developers, testers, users who will do UAT, trainers).
• Organizational change management considerations (ensuring users will be ready by that date, any labor agreements if this changes their workflow, etc.).

Standards/Best Practices

Even in agile projects, having a timeline or release plan is recommended for transparency. Agile focuses on flexibility, so this timeline may be updated as you progress; however, setting target milestones helps coordinate especially in a corporate environment. Many organizations follow a hybrid approach where iterative development is done but a release date is still targeted. Ensure that any date for go-live considers necessary compliance approvals – for instance, if internal audit needs to sign off, include that in plan (we did). For projects subject to oversight, stage gates (like “PRD approved”, “UAT sign-off”) often map to company standards – you can reference that (e.g., “per IT governance, a go-live requires Security and BPO approval – reflected in our milestones”). If you want to align with Scrum, you might call out sprint reviews or retrospectives, but those internal ceremonies usually need not be in the PRD. The key is communicating to stakeholders when they can expect to see results and what the key checkpoints are. Using a simple Gantt chart or milestone list is common. Since this document may be read by auditors or future staff, documenting the timeline also provides historical context (“When was it implemented? How long did it take?”). Lastly, ensure the timeline is realistic and account for testing and buffer – a rushed timeline that skips testing or security review would raise red flags. It’s better to under-promise and over-deliver, aligning with good project management practice.

12. Risks, Assumptions & Dependencies

Purpose

Identify potential risks that could impact the project or the successful operation of the product, as well as any assumptions made during planning and dependencies on external factors. By listing these, the team and stakeholders can proactively manage and mitigate issues. This section is crucial for transparency – especially for future operations and audit, as it shows due diligence in anticipating challenges.

Instructions

Break this into two parts: Risks and Assumptions/Dependencies.

Risks: List key risks along with their potential impact and mitigation strategy. A risk could be related to project execution (schedule, resources) or product performance (technical, adoption, etc.). Use a bullet or table format. Optionally, note the likelihood (high/med/low) and severity of impact. For each risk, briefly state how you plan to mitigate or monitor it. Each risk should ideally have an owner (who will monitor it) – though that level of detail is optional here.

Assumptions & Dependencies: List any assumptions made in this PRD or project plan. These are conditions you expect to be true but might not be guaranteed. Also list external dependencies that the project relies on. For each dependency, mention the party responsible and the expected delivery. For assumptions, it might be wise to note what happens if they fail (contingency if possible).

Example

Risks:

• Field adoption risk: Medium likelihood – Technicians might find using a tablet cumbersome initially. Mitigation: Provide hands-on training and initial on-site support. Emphasize management support for the new process (i.e., old paper method will be phased out to encourage use).
• Offline data loss risk: Low likelihood (Power Apps offline is robust if used properly) but high impact. Mitigation: We will implement local data saving after each form page. In case of app crash, data remains on device. We’ll test worst-case scenarios (battery die, etc.). Additionally, instruct users on procedure if a sync error happens (don’t uninstall app, call IT support to recover data file).
• Timeline risk: Medium likelihood – The integration development by another team might be delayed. Mitigation: If the Maximo integration isn’t ready by UAT, we will load a static asset list as a stopgap. The go-live can proceed with a static list (assuming asset list changes are minimal in short term), and live integration can be rolled out later. Communicate frequently with that team and have a backup plan (manual CSV import) ready.
• Security risk: Low likelihood – If a user’s account is compromised or a disgruntled insider attempts misuse. Mitigation: Rely on company’s SOC (Security Operations Center) monitoring for unusual behavior. All critical transactions (approvals) are logged and reviewable. Also, the principle of least privilege ensures even if misused, one cannot, for example, approve their own inspections or delete records without trace. Regular access reviews will be conducted (quarterly by the BPO) to remove or adjust permissions as people change roles.
• Data volume risk: Low – We expect ~500 inspections/month, which is fine. If usage grows beyond predictions or more data (like more photos), we might hit storage or performance limits. Mitigation: Monitor usage metrics. We have budget allocated for additional Dataverse capacity if needed. We can also implement an archiving strategy (e.g., move older than 2 years records to a separate storage) if performance becomes an issue.

Assumptions & Dependencies:

• Assumption: All field technicians will have a compatible device (Company-standard tablet with the Power Apps app installed and updated). We assume IT has distributed devices and they are in good working order. Contingency if false: If some technicians lack devices, the department will provide shared devices or revert to paper for those individuals until devices are procured – but this would reduce the effectiveness, so we highlight it to management to ensure devices are ready.
• Assumption: The maintenance supervisors have basic computer skills to use the app on desktop. (They currently use email and Excel, so this seems valid.) If additional training is needed, we will accommodate that.
• Assumption: The regulatory environment remains the same during the project. (For instance, no new surprise compliance requirement emerges that would alter scope.) If something like a new regulation on digital record-keeping comes up mid-project, change control will be invoked to address it.
• Dependency: Integration team delivers asset data feed by Mar 1, 2025. Our plan relies on that data feed; a delay means we use a manual data import as Plan B. We’re coordinating with Integration Team Lead (John Smith) who has agreed to this timeline.
• Dependency: Internal Audit availability for SOX testing in UAT. We need an auditor to verify our controls in late March. This has been scheduled with Internal Audit, but if they are pulled away (e.g., due to another urgent audit), it might delay our sign-off. We have a commitment from the Audit Manager for a resource (Jane Doe from audit) to do this review. If she’s unavailable, we will seek a sign-off based on our own tests and get audit review post-go-live (not ideal, but as a fallback).
• Dependency: Power Platform Center of Excellence (CoE) approval. Our organization has a CoE governance that reviews new apps for compliance with standards. We have submitted an overview to them. Approval is needed by mid-March. We assume this will be routine given we followed guidelines; if CoE raises issues, we have time in late March to address them.

Prerequisites

• Risk identification should be done via a brainstorming with the project team and possibly stakeholders. Ensure to cover project management risks, technical risks, user adoption risks, and compliance risks.
• Assumptions should be reviewed – get a peer or stakeholder to challenge them (“Is this really true or are we just hoping?”). Clarify any uncertain assumption by either confirming it or planning a mitigation.
• Check dependencies with the owners: have explicit agreement or at least awareness from those external parties (e.g. integration team, audit team, CoE). Ideally, capture their commitment in writing or meeting minutes.
• Determine risk mitigation actions and owners – who will track each risk. Often the project manager or product owner will maintain a risk log; this section is a snapshot of the important ones.
• Update this section as things change – for example, if a risk is resolved or an assumption proven wrong, the PRD (if maintained through the project) can note that or be updated.

Standards/Best Practices

Identifying risks and assumptions is part of good project governance (PMI and PRINCE2 methodologies emphasize a risk register). In agile, teams often discuss risks in retrospectives or planning, so documenting them keeps everyone aware. IEEE and other SRS standards often have a section for assumptions and dependencies, understanding that requirements might hinge on them. By listing assumptions, you make it clear what conditions the solution relies on – if those change, requirements might need revisiting. For risks, referencing a standard risk management framework like ISO 31000 or simply following common practice (likelihood/impact assessment) is useful. The key is to show that the team has proactively considered what could go wrong and has plans in place. This is especially reassuring to stakeholders like project sponsors or auditors. Additionally, by including this section, future teams maintaining the product can see what issues were anticipated (for instance, they’ll know we worried about storage limits – so if in 2 years they face it, they realize it was known and there might be an archive plan in place). Remember to revisit and revise risks as the project proceeds – the PRD can be a living document, or you might manage risks in a separate log. In any case, the major ones should be captured here for completeness and accountability.

13. Glossary and References

Purpose

Provide definitions for any acronyms, technical terms, or domain-specific terminology used in this document, and list references to any external documents or standards that were consulted. This ensures that all readers share a common understanding of key terms and know where to find more information if needed. It is especially useful for new team members, auditors, or anyone not intimately familiar with the project’s context (e.g., a cybersecurity analyst reviewing it might need to know business terms, and a business user might need technical term clarity).

Instructions

List important terms alphabetically (or in logical grouping) with a brief definition for each. Also list any reference documents or links at the end. Include:

• Acronyms: (e.g., BPO – Business Process Owner, SOX – Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, MFA – Multi-Factor Authentication, UAT – User Acceptance Testing, CoE – Center of Excellence).
• Product names or systems: (e.g., Dataverse – Microsoft Dataverse, a cloud database for the Power Platform; Power Automate – Microsoft’s workflow automation service; Maximo – the legacy Asset Management System used by the company (IBM Maximo)).
• Domain terms: (e.g., Inspection – in this context, a routine check of an electrical asset’s condition; Asset – a piece of equipment like a transformer or circuit breaker that is maintained by the utility).
• Roles: (e.g., Field Technician – employee who performs on-site inspections; Maintenance Supervisor – employee who oversees technicians; Internal Audit – independent team that tests controls; etc.).
• Any technical terms: (e.g., Canvas App – a type of Power App with pixel-perfect design, as opposed to Model-driven App; Azure AD – Azure Active Directory, the identity service).
  Keep definitions succinct and clear. For references, list documents or web resources that were significant for this PRD or that are recommended for further info. This could include:
  • Internal policy documents (like “Southern California Edison IT Security Policy, version 2025.1” – if allowed to reference),
  • Standards (e.g., “COSO Internal Control Framework (2013) – used for designing financial controls”),
  • External links (like Microsoft’s documentation on Power Apps, or relevant regulatory info if needed).
    Make sure not to include overly sensitive links if this document might be shared externally; focus on public or internal references as appropriate.

Example – Glossary:

• Asset Management System (Maximo): The legacy system used by Southern California Edison to track equipment and maintenance activities. Our app will import asset data from here.
• BPO (Business Process Owner): The person accountable for the business process the app supports. For this project, it’s the Maintenance Manager who ensures the inspection process meets business needs and compliance.
• Canvas App: A Power Apps application type that allows custom design of the user interface by dragging and dropping controls onto a canvas. Suitable for flexible UI, as used in this project for the inspection app.
• COBIT: An IT governance framework (Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies) that provides best practices for aligning IT with business goals and managing IT controls. Referenced for ensuring good IT controls in our solution.
• COSO: A framework (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission) for designing, implementing, and evaluating internal controls for financial reporting. Used to guide SOX compliance controls in this project.
• Dataverse: Microsoft Dataverse is a cloud-based data storage service (part of Power Platform) that lets you store and manage data used by business applications. It provides relational data storage, security, and integration capabilities. We use it as the back-end database for the app.
• MFA (Multi-Factor Authentication): A security mechanism requiring multiple forms of verification (e.g., password + phone approval) to authenticate a user. Enforced for accessing the app to enhance security.
• Power Automate: A Microsoft Power Platform service that enables creation of automated workflows between apps and services. We use a Power Automate flow for sending notifications and handling approvals in this project.
• PRD (Product Requirements Document): This document itself – detailing the requirements and expectations for the product being built. It’s used to align stakeholders and guide the development team.
• SOX (Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002): A U.S. law establishing requirements for financial reporting and internal controls for public companies. It mandates proper internal control structures to ensure financial data accuracy - learn.microsoft.com. In this context, certain features of our app (like approval workflow and logging) are designed to satisfy internal controls relevant to SOX compliance.
• UAT (User Acceptance Testing): A phase in the project where end users test the system in a controlled environment to verify it meets their needs and requirements before full deployment.
• WCAG 2.1 AA: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines version 2.1, Level AA – an international standard for accessibility of digital content. Meeting this level ensures the app is usable by people with disabilities (color contrast, screen reader support, etc.).

Example – References:

• Southern California Edison IT Security Policy, v2025 – Internal document outlining security requirements (user access, MFA, data handling) that this project adheres to.
• Southern California Edison Software Change Management Procedure – Internal guideline that describes how changes to production systems (including Power Platform apps) must be reviewed and approved (relevant for our deployment and control plan).
• Microsoft Power Apps & Dataverse Documentation – Microsoft Learn articles on Power Apps Canvas Offline capabilities and Dataverse Security Model – used to design the app’s offline and security approach.
• Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) Overview – Microsoft’s summary of SOX compliance considerations - learn.microsoft.com and AuditBoard’s guide on SOX controls - auditboard.com, which informed our compliance section.
• IEEE 830-1998 / ISO/IEC/IEEE 29148:2018 – Standards for software requirements specification. Used as a reference checklist to ensure this PRD covers key areas (scope, requirements, etc.).
• Agile Best Practices for Requirements – Don Wells website on XP Don Wells websites on Agile.

Prerequisites

• Ensure all uncommon terms in preceding sections are captured here. As you write the PRD, maintain a list of terms/acronyms that a newcomer might not understand.
• Verify definitions with subject matter experts if needed (e.g., confirm the phrasing of what SOX means with the compliance officer, ensure technical definitions are correct per official docs).
• Gather any documents or links referenced. If linking to external sites or internal Sharepoint Environment, ensure the reader will have access (or mention where they can find it).
• Decide on the level of detail: don’t define common English words or ubiquitous terms, but err on the side of clarifying anything that could be misunderstood.
• Update the glossary if new terms come up during the project.

Standards/Best Practices

Including a glossary is recommended in many documentation standards to avoid confusion. It is especially helpful in cross-functional projects where business and technical terms mix. For example, IEEE standards often have a “Definitions” section. Keep definitions concise and objective. For references, providing sources adds credibility and allows interested readers (like auditors or new team members) to dig deeper into certain topics. Ensure that any standard or framework mentioned in the document is cited here (we cited COSO, COBIT, etc., so we listed them). This also demonstrates that the team used established frameworks and materials – a sign of due diligence. If there are too many acronyms, consider also including a quick acronym list at the very top of the document for convenience. Since this PRD might be used over years, having references means future readers can contextually place decisions (e.g., knowing which version of a policy or standard was relevant at the time of writing). Always prefer linking to official documentation or widely recognized sources for definitions (for instance, linking to Microsoft or standard bodies) to ensure accuracy.

14. Approvals & Revision History

Purpose

Record the approval of this requirements document by key stakeholders and track any revisions made to it. Approval indicates that stakeholders (business and technical) have reviewed the requirements and agree that they are accurate and complete. Revision history ensures that changes to the document are logged, maintaining an audit trail of how requirements evolved (important for governance and traceability).

Instructions

Include a table or list of who needs to approve this PRD and a place for their sign-off (could be an electronic approval or a signature if on paper, depending on your process). Typical approvers might include:

• Business Process Owner (BPO) – confirming the requirements meet business needs and controls (especially for SOX compliance).
• Product Owner / Project Sponsor – representing the business side sponsorship, agreeing to proceed with what’s described.
• IT Lead/Architect – confirming the technical feasibility and alignment with IT standards.
• QA or Testing Lead (optional) – acknowledging that requirements are testable and clear.
• Compliance/Security Officer (if required) – confirming that compliance requirements (SOX, security) are correctly captured.
  You can have a sign-off line for each, with name, role, date, and maybe a signature. If the approval is captured in a system (like an ALM tool or document management system), you can note that instead of physical signature.

Also include a Revision History table that lists versions of the document, date, author, and summary of changes. This is useful if the PRD is iteratively refined (which in agile, it might be updated as things change). Example entries:

• Version 0.1 – Draft – Jan 5, 2025 – Initial draft by [Author Name], under review.
• Version 0.2 – Jan 20, 2025 – Updated scope and added SOX compliance section after review with BPO.
• Version 1.0 – Feb 1, 2025 – Baseline approved version for development start (approved by BPO, IT, etc.).
• Version 1.1 – Mar 15, 2025 – Revised after UAT feedback (minor changes in requirements X and Y), approved by stakeholders for final.
  Each entry should have just enough detail to know what changed. If this document is maintained, any future changes (like adding Phase 2 requirements) would also be recorded.

Example – Approvals:

Example – Revision History:

(The above is illustrative; actual entries would reflect your project’s change events.)

Prerequisites

• Decide on the required approvers per your organization’s governance. (Perhaps check a PMO or QA checklist; highly regulated environments often have mandated approvers for requirements).
• Get commitment from those approvers to review the document by a certain date. Possibly hold a walkthrough meeting to get everyone on the same page before they sign.
• For revision history, ensure version numbering is agreed (some use 0.x for drafts, then 1.0 for first approval, etc.). Use a consistent format (date, names, etc.).
• If the document is living, establish where updates will be stored and how re-approvals will be handled (some organizations require re-approval for significant changes, others for any change, etc.).
• Ensure the final approved PRD is stored in a repository accessible to the team and auditors (e.g., SharePoint or a project folder), with version control.

Standards/Best Practices

Having formal sign-off is critical in many processes, especially when compliance is involved. It ensures accountability – for example, stakeholder review and approval is explicitly recommended as part of a good PRD process - perforce.com. It’s also mirrored in best practice lists - savioglobal.com that emphasize validation and approval by key stakeholders before development. The revision history is part of good documentation practice (ISO/IEEE documentation standards include a revision history at the start or end). This not only helps in audits (proving that changes were controlled) but also helps the team itself track changes. In agile contexts, you might think continual changes conflict with sign-off, but even agile teams often “baseline” certain documents and then manage changes via backlog grooming. Treat the PRD similarly – baseline it, then handle changes through a controlled process (could be as simple as documented consent via email for minor tweaks, or formal re-sign for major scope changes). Recording those changes keeps everyone aligned and provides a narrative of the project’s evolution. Auditors and future maintainers will appreciate seeing that, for instance, “version 1.1 included UAT feedback changes” – it shows that the team was responsive and methodical. Conforming to any internal QMS (Quality Management System) or PMO requirements for documentation approvals will likely require this section, so it’s included to meet those standards.