Provide an overview of the trade being evaluated, including its objectives, scope, and motivation. Describe the context in which the tradeoffs are being considered and the decision-making process involved (i.e. will the decision be made through an autocratic or democratic process).
Identify the driving requirements that every design option must satisfy for it to be a valid solution. If these requirements are not already in the database, add them!
Identify the criteria that will be used to compare the different options against each other and how they will be weighed (e.g. using a scoring system or ranking). These may be qualitative or quantitative. Lower level trades should prioritize quantitative criteria over qualitative. Criteria might include factors such as cost, performance, mass, schedule, risk, and other relevant considerations.
Present a summary of the options being considered, along with their key characteristics and potential impacts. This might include information on costs, performance, schedule, risk, and other relevant factors.
Compare and contrast the different options, highlighting the tradeoffs and challenges associated with each one. Evaluate the tradeoffs qualitatively and/or quantitatively that are required in order to achieve the desired objectives, and consider using tables or graphs to visually compare the options. Data must be traceable to a source.
Provide recommendation(s) and next steps based on the findings of the tradeoff analysis. This might include a recommendation for a preferred option, and output requirements (to be added to the database).
Summarize the decision made along with its rationale after consultation with relevant stakeholders. Collect stamps of approval from representatives of each of the stakeholders in the database below:
Document any revelations or feedback that resulted in changes to the outcome of the trade.