A.15.11:5.1 - An optional report enters a portfolio decision

A team estimates six hours to add a chart to a weekly report. The existing report already supports the current staffing decision. Their planning sheet asks only how long the addition will take, so that estimate is taken as a reason to start implementation.

A planner adds one question beside the estimate: “Which decision becomes better with this addition, compared with the report we already use?” The linked instruction explains how to compare an attainable addition with the current arrangement. For this example, adding and using the question takes ten minutes.

For this staffing use, the team finds no improved decision and keeps the current report. Under the stated estimates, preparing and using the cue leaves five hours and fifty minutes available for other work compared with adding the chart. A different benefit of the chart would reopen the comparison.

For a different, one-off cue whose only possible benefit is saving at most two minutes, while preparation and explanation would take twenty minutes, the planner stops before creating or testing it. The known benefit does not justify that work.

Now change the report case: the new report is needed for an already accepted contractual obligation. The same optional-improvement question no longer settles whether to provide it. The team retains the obligation and compares ways to satisfy it. This contrast narrows the cue to optional additions and prevents an attractive cost comparison from silently changing the commitment.