In project governance, well-written requirements double as an evaluation checklist at the end of development. They are often referred to as what?

Introduction / Context:
Requirements define what success looks like. At project closeout, teams and stakeholders measure delivered functionality and quality against those same statements. When phrased as outcomes and measurable criteria, these requirements operate as “success factors.”

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Requirements are clear, testable, and traceable.
• Acceptance criteria link requirements to verification and validation steps.
• Governance expects evidence that success factors were met.

Concept / Approach:
Success factors articulate the conditions that must be satisfied for the project to be considered successful—e.g., “Generate monthly billing in under X minutes with less than Y error rate.” These factors become the basis for user acceptance tests and post-implementation reviews.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Recognize that SDLC, CASE tools, and conversion strategies are unrelated to evaluation checklists.Identify the option that captures outcome-oriented evaluation language: success factors.Select “Success factors.”

Verification / Alternative check:
Project charters and closure reports typically enumerate critical success factors and show evidence (tests, metrics) demonstrating they were achieved.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
SDLC is a lifecycle model. CASE tools are software that assist development. Phased Conversion is an implementation strategy. “None” is incorrect because a suitable term—success factors—exists.

Common Pitfalls:
Writing vague requirements without measurable acceptance criteria; this undermines their use as a closeout checklist.

Final Answer:
Success factors