The Relevance Path Glossary

An A-Z list of terms you’ll see us use frequently and what they mean. We’ve also referenced where you can find it in the book.

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

A

Admitters (Chapter 3)

A subgroup of the middle-of-the-road player (motr) mentality type who are often present in customers and stakeholders who know little about the project or it’s trajectory for success and admit as much. They can benefit greatly from learning more about the project’s benefits.

After-Action Path Review (Chapter 8)

A review conducted with the project team and client at project completion, which encourages honest client and stakeholder feedback of the entire project process.This is performed so the project team can tweak items for customer satisfaction and ensure the project exceeds client expectations.  

Anchoring Effect (Chapter 7)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon, where people tend to cling to the initial information received above all else when making decisions. This is a phenomenon RELEVANCE works to overcome by asking what project knowledge our clients and stakeholders are already aware of. We identify client and stakeholder baseline reference points so the project team can craft and communicate strong solutions. 

Apparent Goal(s) (Chapter 4)

Goal(s) identified by the customer. They are what the customer believes needs to be completed to meet an objective.  

Apparent Need(s) (Chapter 4)

Need(s) identified by the customer, which the customer believes needs to happen to complete a given goal.  

Apparent Obstacle(s) (Chapter 4)

Obstacles identified by the customer, which the customer perceives to have played a role in preventing project objectives from being met.  

Asymmetric Information (Chapter 7)

A phenomenon that occurs when one party does not reveal information to another. This phenomenon is one that can (and does) occur easily in projects, and tolls such as the Communication Pathblasts Tracker ensure communication is two-way so all parties can be on the same page and are aware of project statuses and benefits.

C

Change Blindness (Chapter 6)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon where people are so unconscious of their surroundings that real changes in their environment often go completely unnoticed.

Communication Pathblasts Dialogue and Tracker (Chapter 7)

A document detailing how and when a project team will send communication blasts to an organization, thus dividing stakeholders within an organization according to value type, role in the organization, and value profiles. The document identifies the value and relevancy of the solution to the stakeholders, providing updates that describe why stakeholders need to know about an upcoming plan, why they need to care, and how it will benefit them in the long run. This allows for everyone to see the same project solution and why that solution path is the right path for the organization as a whole, as well as the specific needs of each party involved.  

Communication Pathmap (Chapter 3)

The Communication Pathmap outlines expectations for status updates (frequency, content) and is a critical foundation to build upon.   

D

Deniers (Chapter 3)

A subgroup of the middle-of-the-road player (motr) mentality type who are often present in customers and stakeholders who know little about the project or its trajectory for success but pretend or insist they know a lot. They can benefit greatly from learning more about the project’s benefits.

Disengaged Leaders (Chapter 3)

One of three mentality types often present in project customers and stakeholders, who are people, groups, managers, or entities who are simply checking project boxes; thus the message insinuated to the project team is the project’s outcome is not a high priority on their list.  

E

Effort Justification (Chapter 7)

A phenomenon where a person, team, or organization that expends effort accomplishing a task will place additional value in seeing that pursuit succeed. This is a phenomenon RELEVANCE ensures is not overlooked by ensuring a project team openly communicates and solicits input from clients and stakeholders to maximize project success.  

Embedding (Chapter 4)

A series of actions (shadowing, conducting enhancement dialogues, revisiting the successthreshold review) in the Enhance and Visualize phase of the Relevance Path, where the project team is afforded the opportunity to engage with customers and stakeholders and refine apparent and latent needs, obstacles and goals for project success. 

Engagement Dialogue (Chapter 3)

A series of questions the project team asks customers and stakeholders, beginning in the Engage phase of the Relevance Paththe Relevance Path, where all of the information from the dialogue will be captured in the Communication Pathmap. The intention of the engagement dialogue is to establish a relationship with customers and stakeholders and to ensure communication plans are tailored to each customer and stakeholder.  

Enhancement Dialogue (Chapter 4)

A series of questions the project team asks customers and stakeholders, beginning in the Enhance phase of the Relevance Paththe Relevance Path, where all of the information from the dialogue will be incorporated into proposed project solutions. The intention of the enhancement dialogue is to expand upon the project teams’ initial engagement dialogue with customers and stakeholders and to build upon the rapport the project team established with a stakeholder during the Engage and Listen step. This dialogue further refines the project team’s understanding of the products, atmospherics, dynamics of the project’s objectives, as well as the people and processes that surround it. 

Enhancement Trends or Unique Responses (E-ToURspectives) Review (Chapter 4)

An internal process review that plots all responses from the enhancement dialogues and shadowing sessions in order to identify trends (questions multiple stakeholders answered the same) and unique responses that merit further review, as well as the implications of those trends and unique responses.  The ToURspectives review enables a visual representation of the trends identified by specific stakeholders. It also identifies latent needs, obstacles, and goals that weren’t known previously, but were able to be discerned from reviewing enhancement dialogues from a critical mass perspective.

Download the E-ToURspectives artifact here.

G

When the project team creates plots of screen designs, processes, workflows, layouts, and formats, (as well as whatever visual aids are needed to reach a project’s objectives) and invites customers, stakeholders, and end users to view and comment on the plots.  

A review conducted by the project team (very similar to the Q-ToURspectives and E-ToURspectives reviews in the Visualize and Analyze phases of RELEVANCE) that allows the project team to identify trends (comments posted by multiple stakeholders) and unique responses that merit further review, as well as the implications of those trends and unique responses, resulting from a gallery walk or user session with stakeholders.

I

Information Seekers (Chapter 3)

One of three mentality types often present in project customers and stakeholders, defined as detailed-oriented individuals, groups, or entities who want to learn from the process and will be an active presence throughout the project.  

IKEA Effect (Chapter 8)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon Inspired by IKEA, the Swedish “do-it-yourself” furniture company, that shows how humans tend to overvalue products that they have labored over and completed.  RELEVANCE strives to overcome this phenomenon by conducting an internal Relevance Review that ensures the project team doesn’t overvalue its efforts, thus maximizing client satisfaction.  

L

Latent Goal(s) (Chapter 3)

Hidden goal(s) (end state requirements) identified by discovering real end goals; such unearthed goals are only revealed by investing time with the customer to understand the customer’s true situation and needed solution.  

Latent Need(s) (Chapter 4)

Hidden need requirements identified by discovering real end goals; such hidden needs and goals are only revealed by investing time with the customer to understand the customer’s true situation and needed solution.  

Latent Obstacle(s) (Chapter 4)

Hidden obstacles that will prevent a client from meeting the latent project needs and latent project goals discovered through the Enhancement process.  

Loss Aversion (Chapter 6)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon where people tend to focus on a loss versus a gain, irrespective of an overall event outcome.

M

Master User Requirements Tracker (MURT) (Chapter 8)

A list the project team compiles, based upon an evaluation using surveys and questionnaires, to collect timely feedback and report metrics on whether the project is meeting the client and project team’s critical needs and goals.  

Mentality Types (Chapter 3)

Culture-based evaluations that gauge how vested customers and stakeholders are in the project’s outcomes and successes; such evaluations enable the project team to understand the approach and amount of effort needed to successfully communicate and work with each customer and stakeholder. There are three macro mentality types: information seekers, disengaged leaders, middle of-the-road (motr) players.

Middle-of-the-Road (motr) Players (Chapter 2)

One of three mentality types often present during a who fall into two motr subgroups: those who know little about the project or its trajectory for success and admit as much (admitters) or those that know little about the project or its trajectory for success but pretend or insist they know a lot (deniers).  

N

Not-Invented-Here (NIH) Syndrome (Chapter 8)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon where organizations tend to value objects created internally more than items that have been created externally. RELEVANCE strives to overcome this phenomenon by conducting an internal Relevance Review, thus ensuring the project team doesn’t overvalue its internal project creations and to maximize client satisfaction.  

P

Primary Stakeholder (Chapter 3)

A key player (person, entity, or group) in the project’s outcome, where the project’s outcome is largely impacted by the stakeholder from a financial, process, resource, supply, or influence standpoint.  

Project Pathmap (Chapter 1)

A standardized RELEVANCE framework that manages the required work (reviews, control gates, and deliverables accomplished during each phase of RELEVANCE) in order to achieve the customer’s goal(s) or objective(s). The project pathmap guides the project team toward meeting the customer’s tolerance threshold and eliminating the relevance gap. Because the RELEVANCE paththe Relevance Path can be used for any project regardless of discipline, the project pathmap is broadly generic. Any project team can add on and customize the framework based upon the project discipline (including software design documents, creating user manuals, and service level agreements for a software development project).  

Q

Quick Wins (Chapter 5)

High-return, low-risk mini-solutions that get a project out of a rut and begin to build momentum. 

Quick Wins Risk Analysis (Chapter 5)

The identification of potential risks associated with each possible quick-win solution. These include the type of risk (whether it’s related to policy, system, personnel, political/office dynamics), the actual project risk, the consequences of that risk (what events will happen if that risk occurs), or the risk associated with each solution set. The goal is to identify the best course of action to minimize any risk and implement a mitigation strategy as well as identify quick wins that are low-risk, low-cost, and high return on investment.

Quick Wins Trends and Unique Responses (a.k.a. Q-ToURspectives) Review (Chapter 5)

A review conducted to identify, discuss, and implement quick-wins and review the effectiveness of these quick wins (from an overall trend or unique perspective) in order to help identify both latent and real needs, obstacles, and goals as well as identify if there are any new needs, obstacles, or goals that have arisen since we implemented the quick wins.  

Download the Q-ToURspectives Review here.

R

Refinement Dialogue (Chapter 4)

A conversation between the project team and each primary stakeholder that highlights observations, trends, and unique responses (as well as the implications) gleaned while shadowing stakeholders. Using a series of open and closed questions, the project team confirms with the primary stakeholders the apparent needs and goals, broaches the subject of the latent needs and goals discovered while shadowing, and confirms the priority needs, obstacles, and goals to address for project success.  

RELEVANCE (AKA the Relevance Path)

A framework to ensure projects succeed beyond anticipated expectations. We identify real project needs, obstacles, and goals, using a phased project approach (Review, Engage, Listen, Enhance, Visualize, Analyze, Numerate, Communicate, and Execute phases). It’s a guide that employs human interaction (empathetics), psychology, and behavioral economics in order to discover and execute on apparent and potentially unrealized customer needs. We align project needs with results, ensure project-end satisfaction, save time and money, and establish stronger relationships for continual benefits and implement project efficiencies and productivity. 

Relevance Review (Chapter 8)

An internal review to determine that no cognitive biases are present (such as the IKEA effect or Not-Invented-Here syndrome). The project team conducts this review prior to formal project rollout. This ensures the project will exceed a customer’s  loftiest expectatins.  

Relevance Gap (Chapter 2)

A phenomenon that presents itself as a gap between what a project team knows about an end-state objective’s subject matter and what the customer knows and/or believes s/he understands about the subject matter needed to meet project goals. The relevance gap is a directly proportional phenomenon; as time increases, the relevance gap increases as customers lose their inherent ability to understand or identify the most efficient solutions for their desired objectives.  

Relevant Solutions Pathmaps (Chapter 6)

Visual solution sets that highlight important information from the Solutions Valuation Review and reveal such information to clients and stakeholders in a clear way (including showing project value) in order to overcome any cognitive biases that may exist among an individual, team, or organization. 

Relevant Solutions Pathmaps Dialogue and Tracker (Chapter 7)

A document tracking results from when a project team briefs the primary stakeholders on the relevant solutions pathmaps prepared in the Numerate step This ensures project solutions align perfectly with stakeholder values. The customer’s preferred solution set is solicited (as well as the other primary and secondary stakeholders) and describes why one solution is preferred over another. It is then catalogued, so the project team can revisit with stakeholders who don’t get their preferred solution; the project team can then communicate how the chosen solution will meet their particular needs and value profile. 

S

Secondary Stakeholder (Chapter 3)

A person, entity, or group whose role directly impacts the project outcome less than that of a primary (key) stakeholder.

Signaling Mechanism (Chapter 7)

A phenomenon where a party signals to another a certain interest, characteristic, or quality. In RELEVANCE, strong communication serves as a signaling mechanism that the project team is invested in the client’s goals. 

Solutions Concept Review (Chapter 4)

A review focused on the project writ-large, which matrixes potential solution sets and their associated risk levels, and analyzes the real needs, obstacles, and goals that each new solution addresses, to visually see which solutions address most of the real needs, obstacles, and goals for each of the primary, secondary, and tertiary stakeholders, as well as which real needs, obstacles, and goals aren’t addressed.

Solutions Relevance Review (Chapter 5)

∫A review that focuses on the project writ large and creates a matrix of potential solution sets and their associated risk levels while analyzing the real needs, obstacles, and goals that each new solution addresses. This helps clients visually see which solutions address most of the real needs, obstacles, and goals for each of the primary, secondary, and tertiary stakeholders, as well as which real needs, obstacles, and goals aren’t addressed. 

Solutions Valuation Review (Chapter 6)

A review conducted to gauge the value of each solution set, based upon the value profiles that the customer and stakeholders perceive. The key is to review customer responses to the questions posed in the Enhance phase about what the client knows or likes about the envisioned project outcome, among other questions from the Enhancement Dialogues.  

Download the Solutions Valuation Review here.

Stakeholder (Chapter 3)

People, entities, or groups who play a role in the project and its outcomes. There are 3 types of stakeholders: primary, secondary, and tertiary.

Stakeholder Pathmap (Chapter 4)

A visual identification of the stakeholders, their stakeholder types (primary, secondary, or tertiary), and the relationships between all stakeholders. This helps identify the type of relationship (financial, information, procedural, influential, approver, etc) in play on a project as well as interdependencies between stakeholders.

Status Quo Bias (Chapter 6)

A cognitive bias/phenomenon where individuals, teams, or organizations perceive anything outside of the status quo as a loss; change is always considered a negative and is an irrational preference to one’s current situation. 

Stereotype Bias (Chapter 5)

A phenomenon that is the tendency, as humans, to be swayed by people who appear authoritative on topics that individuals, teams, or organizations are not familiar with, resulting in readily accepting concepts presented on new topics that an individual, team, or organization knows little about, whether those concepts are accurate or not.

Stuckocation (Chapter 5)

That point in a project when an individual, team, or organization feels so stuck that events begin to feel suffocating, often the result of an overwhelming number of problems, issues, or projects that a client is working. Inefficient processes lead to unimpressive results or inept technologies that are “supposed” to help people, but in reality they don’t. “Stuck” plus “suffocation,” equals “stuckocation.” 

Success Threshold (Chapter 2)

A customer’s most basic requirements that translate the minimum goals required to successfully complete a job. 

Sunshine Policy (Chapter 7)

A phenomenon that supports transparency and open communication, which helps prevent dishonesty and encourage that all parties are on the same page regarding a topic.

T

Tailored User Requirements Tracker (TURT) (Chapter 8)

A version of the Master User Requirements Tracker (MURT) tailored and presented to the client and primary stakeholders, to ensure the project stays relevant, avoids any relevance gaps and validates the project’s progress to the client, stakeholders, and project team.  Metrics are shared with the client, and the project team tweaks any requirements or goals deemed necessary for project success. 

Tertiary Stakeholder (Chapter 3)

A person, entity, or group whose role only indirectly or tangentially affects the project’s outcome. A tertiary stakeholder also exists when a project’s outcome only has a minor or indirect impact on the person, entity, or group’s end goals, finances, resources, or processes.

Tolerance Threshold (Chapter 1)

The customer’s most basic requirements that translate the minimum goals required to sufficiently complete a job. Once a team knows the minimum goals, the team can build upon those goals. With RELEVANCE, the focus always comes back to the customer’s needs, which enables the team to exceed the customer’s base expectations and transcend the tolerance threshold.

Trends or Unique Responses (ToURspectives) Visuals (Chapter 4)

A  visual representation of impactful statistics and results of the ToURspectives review combined with visually identifying ToURspectives implications and latent needs, obstacles, and goals. The ToURspectives visuals incorporate calculated percentages of how stakeholders feel about a topic and provide the information in a quick, digestive way to stakeholders.  

V

Value (Chapter 5)

How a project stakeholder defines the term “value”, which is directly related to a customer’ business, mission objectives and culture.

Value Profiles (Chapter 5)

Compiling a customer or stakeholder’s project preferences by understanding the value types customized for each customer or stakeholder.  

Value Types (Chapter 6)

The identification of customer and stakeholder perceptions of project value, in order to pinpoint how customers or stakeholders perceive project success, usually in one or both of the following value types: 1) enabling efficient resources (time, money, manpower, quality, productivity) or 2) boosting organizational morale (simplicity of comprehension, ease of communication, consumer satisfaction, team cohesion, sense of purpose).