HKSM

Key Points

• Prepared early to justify why the project should be funded and to compare alternatives.
• Owned by the sponsor or business owner; the project manager uses it but typically does not own it.
• Summarizes expected benefits, costs, risks, assumptions, constraints, and alignment to strategy.
• Includes option analysis and value measures such as NPV, IRR, payback, and nonfinancial benefits.
• Is a living document reviewed at stage gates to confirm the project still makes sense.
• Guides charter creation, prioritization, scope choices, and, if value erodes, termination decisions.

Purpose

• Provide a clear rationale for investment and link the initiative to strategic goals.
• Enable informed funding, selection, and prioritization decisions among competing proposals.
• Define expected benefits and success measures to support benefits realization planning.
• Communicate assumptions, uncertainties, and major risks that could affect value.

Source & Ownership

• Typically authored by the sponsor, business analyst, or portfolio team with input from subject matter experts.
• Approved by governance (e.g., steering committee, portfolio board) before funding is released.
• Owned and maintained by the sponsor or benefits owner; updated as conditions change.
• The project manager contributes data and analysis but does not unilaterally change the business case.

How to Use

• Use as an input to the project charter for problem statement, objectives, and high-level success criteria.
• Translate expected benefits into measurable objectives and KPIs for planning and tracking.
• Derive initial risks, assumptions, and constraints and feed them into the risk and planning baselines.
• Check proposed scope and changes against the value proposition to avoid gold plating and misalignment.
• Support gate reviews by comparing current forecasts to the business case to confirm continued justification.
• Inform transition and benefits realization plans for post-project ownership and measurement.

Example Usage

• Initiation: Sponsor presents the business case to governance to secure funding and authorization.
• Planning: Team derives measurable outcomes and benefits metrics and aligns scope to the value drivers.
• Execution: A cost increase triggers a review comparing updated forecasts to the business case targets.
• Closing: Benefits handover plan references the business case metrics for ongoing measurement by operations.

Caveats

• Do not confuse the business case with the project charter; the charter authorizes the project, while the business case justifies it.
• Keep it current; if expected value drops significantly, escalate for governance decision on continue, change, or stop.
• Challenge bias and optimism; use sensitivity and scenario analysis to test assumptions.
• Right-size the detail to the initiative’s complexity and risk; avoid excessive effort for low-value work.
• Maintain traceability from benefits in the business case to outcomes and operational metrics.

PMP Example Question

Midway through a project, a key assumption in the business case proves invalid, reducing expected benefits by 30%. What should the project manager do first?

1. Update the business case and resubmit it to governance.
2. Escalate to the sponsor to reassess the business case and determine whether to continue, change, or stop the project.
3. Fast-track remaining work to recover the lost benefits.
4. Wait until the next scheduled gate review to report the issue.

Correct Answer: B — Escalate to the sponsor to reassess the business case and determine whether to continue, change, or stop the project.

Explanation: The sponsor owns the business case and governance decides viability. The project manager provides analysis and recommendations but should not unilaterally change the business case.