Re: Functional Outcomes MUST cover all benefits OR must be duplicated

Jeanne and I are on vacation today but we’ll compare these suggestions with the documents we have tomorrow to see how they fit and write more back then.
On Sep 7, 2020, 9:01 AM -0400, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, wrote:
> Sticking my head up from the move for a minute...
>
> I agree with Jake: Functional Outcomes are "compound" goals, consisting of multiple unit tests.
>
> So, for (rudimentary) example:
>
> • Does the content convey a sense of hierarchy? (T/F)
> • Can users navigate content programmatically? (T/F)
> • Can users locate key information blocks? (T/F)
>
> I keep hearing in my head, over and over, "testable, measurable, repeatable".
>
> JF
>
>
> (Sent from my mobile, apologies for any spelling mistakes)
>
> > On Mon, Sep 7, 2020, 2:47 AM jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Just another issue we must have correct or discuss at least before publication I think.
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > As Guidelines are not normative but (Functional) Outcomes are, they must cover all benefits for all Functional Groups and Functional Needs we try to tackle.
> > >
> > > This means the "so... bla bla" statement should be broad enough to cover all benefits OR a bulleted list might be needed with the benefits (and are the benefits normative then?).
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > On the other hand, if we use bulleted lists for Benefits, then all methods and the scoring / tests MUST cover all benefits also otherwise they are not compatible (Charles Hall commented on this in the functional needs subgroup).
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > If this is not a "Catch All" for (Functional) Outcomes, we might need to split / duplicate Outcomes covering different Benefits (?!)
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > > EXAMPLE 1
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > "Provides semantic structure So can convey a sense of hierarchy"
> > >
> > > In this case the benefits of navigating or locating are not mentioned, also the Functional Needs are not covered as it's not in the normative text.
> > >
> > > Three options for this example:
> > >
> > > 1. (long sentence, covering all benefits)
> > >
> > > "Provides semantic structure So can convey a sense of hierarchy AND/OR users can navigate AND/OR users can locate"
> > >
> > > 2. (use of bulleted list)
> > >
> > > "Provides semantic structure
> > >
> > > • So can convey a sense of hierarchy
> > > • So users can navigate
> > > • So users can locate"
> > >
> > > 3. (split in 3 Functional Outcomes)
> > >
> > >
> > > "Provides semantic structure so can convey a sense of hierarchy"
> > > "Provides semantic structure so users can navigate"
> > > "Provides semantic structure so users can locate"
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > This is just an example of the challenge with the Functional Outcome texts being normative, more examples are not difficult to think of.
> > >
> > > Another option would be to separate the Benefits from the functional outcome and mention them as something like: " Benefits might be but not limited to: bla, bla and bla"
> > >
> > > --------------------
> > >
> > > At the moment I think the Functional Outcomes as we have now are to open to interpretation and probably will not make it as normative text to be tested and scored.
> > >
> > > Of course happy to illustrate of dsicus.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Jake
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >