# Project method: from a problem to a result, with fewer round trips

The review behind this repository, a first pass of 38 sources. It asks which steps written before the work starts are measured to cut rework, and what a finished job must leave for a second person to resume it.

- It holds 40 sources: 35 formal and 5 grey.
- Grey: 2 score 10 or more of 20 after a second rating: Schwaber 2020 at 10 and Chapman 2000 at 14.5.
- 2 grey sources score below it and are examples of practice only: Singer 2019 at 9 and Ubl 2020 at 9.5. 1 is located, not scored. None is a controlled study.
- Formal: 5 read in the text or the sections cited, 13 at abstract level, 1 through secondary summaries, 16 located with the text not opened.
- It is a first pass. Read the limits in [protocol](protocol.md) before relying on a number.

## Files

| File | Role |
|---|---|
| [frame](frame.md) | step 1: the problem in one sentence, the field's names beside the repository's, the four questions as sub-questions |
| [protocol](protocol.md) | why grey literature, every search string with its count, the stopping rule, selection, scoring, limits |
| [sources](sources.md) | the pool: how each source was found, what was read of it, its grade or score |
| [review](review.md) | step 2: the findings by strand, existing reviews first |
| [state of the art](state-of-the-art.md) | step 3: best evidence apart from most adopted practice, per question |
| [against](against.md) | the evidence against: contested figures, weak measurement, reversals |
| [position](position.md) | step 4: what is known, what is not found, what this repository can claim |
| [baseline](baseline.md) | step 5: the named baseline, B1, and how to compare against it |
| [bibliography](../bibliography.md) | every work cited, once, with a stable link |

## Claims

| Claim | Grade | Where |
|---|---|---|
| Written scope and objectives before building cut rework | convention, untested: no study isolates them | review.md Q1 |
| Avoidable rework is a large share of effort: 40 to 50 percent | expert report, not a measurement | review.md Q1; against.md |
| A defect found late costs 100 times more as a constant | not supported: 171 projects found no delayed-issue effect (secondary) | against.md |
| Reading the prior studies before a new one avoids waste | convention, untested for effect; the neglect is measured, descriptive (secondary) | review.md Q1 |
| A named comparison target is part of the process models | design science names it at the objectives and evaluation steps; no model has a review step | review.md Q1; position.md |
| Writing the plan as a topic changes the outcome | not tested; an outline raises writing quality in one experiment (secondary) | review.md Q2 |
| A fixed set of files lets a second person resume | convention, untested; practice guides agree, no study | review.md Q3 |
| Method ends where the genre starts: communication is the last activity | convention, in the process model | review.md Q4 |

## See also

[The front page](../../README.md); [Evidence](../README.md).