February 2026

Requirements Are Strategy: Stop Delivering the Wrong Thing Well If hard work alone guaranteed project success, far fewer projects would struggle. Yet time and again, well run teams miss the mark—not from poor execution, but from unclear and competing requirements. After years of working with project managers across industries and teaching these practices as a LinkedIn Learning instructor, it’s clear that clarity, not effort, is the real differentiator. When teams lack shared understanding of why a project exists, who it serves, and how success is defined, even the strongest delivery discipline can’t compensate. In the absence of clear, aligned requirements, organizations don’t miss delivery—they miss strategy, producing outcomes that are operationally sound but strategically misaligned. When we talk about requirements, we’re not talking about documentation for documentation’s sake. Requirements are the shared understanding that connects strategy to execution. They define why a project exists, who it is intended to serve, what outcomes matter, and the conditions under which success will be judged. Well defined requirements create alignment across sponsors, stakeholders, and delivery teams, turning strategy into actionable direction. Poorly defined requirements, on the other hand, leave teams making assumptions, filling gaps on their own, and optimizing locally instead of delivering organizational value. To create that alignment, requirements must be understood as a system—not a single list—spanning business intent, stakeholder needs, solution behavior, and the realities of change. At the highest level, this system starts with business requirements—the foundation for every project that follows. Business Requirements That system begins with business requirements, because every project exists to serve an organizational purpose before it ever delivers a solution. Business requirements articulate the outcomes the organization is trying to achieve and the value the project is expected to create. They frame the problem or opportunity in strategic terms—improving performance, meeting obligations, reducing risk, or enabling growth—without prescribing how the solution should be built. When business requirements are clear, they act as a compass for every decision that follows, allowing teams to evaluate scope, trade offs, and priorities through the lens of value rather than activity. When they are vague or missing, teams may still execute effectively, but they do so without a shared definition of success, increasing the likelihood that effort is expended on work that is operationally sound yet strategically disconnected. Stakeholder Requirements From there, stakeholder requirements add a critical layer of perspective to that system. While business requirements define organizational intent, stakeholder requirements capture how that intent is experienced by the people affected by the project. Different stakeholders often value different outcomes—customers may prioritize usability, finance may focus on accuracy and controls, and operations may be concerned with stability and continuity. Stakeholder requirements surface these needs and expectations explicitly, even when they compete. This is not a sign of misalignment; it is a reality of complex organizations. When stakeholder requirements are clearly understood and addressed, teams can balance trade offs deliberately and design solutions that are both viable and supported. When they are ignored or assumed, conflict doesn’t disappear—it simply emerges later as resistance, rework, or adoption failure, eroding value long after delivery is complete. Solution Requirements Once the “why” and the “who” are understood, attention turns to solution requirements—the point where strategy is translated into something that can actually be built and delivered. Solution requirements define what the solution must do to satisfy business and stakeholder needs, and just as importantly, how well it must do it. Some of these requirements are functional, describing specific capabilities, behaviors, or features the solution must provide. Others are nonfunctional, setting expectations for performance, reliability, security, usability, or scalability. These quality expectations are often underestimated, yet they are frequently the difference between a solution that technically works and one that people trust, adopt, and rely on. When solution requirements are clear and aligned, teams can design with intent and make informed trade offs. When they are vague or incomplete, teams are left to interpret intent on their own, increasing the risk of rework, dissatisfaction, and solutions that meet specifications but fall short of real needs. Transition Requirements Not all requirements are permanent. Transition requirements exist to ensure the organization can actually move from the current state to the future one the project is designed to achieve. While business, stakeholder, and solution requirements define what success looks like, transition requirements address the realities of change—how people, data, processes, and operations make the shift without disrupting the business. This includes activities such as data migration, user training, temporary parallel operations, and rollout support. These requirements are often overlooked because they don’t describe the end solution, yet they are frequently where projects succeed or fail. When transition requirements are clearly defined and planned, change is deliberate, adoption is smoother, and value is realized sooner. When they are treated as afterthoughts, even well designed solutions can stall at implementation, eroding confidence and delaying the outcomes the project was meant to deliver. Project Requirements In parallel, project and compliance requirements shape the boundaries within which all other requirements must be delivered. Project requirements define how the work itself must be executed, including constraints such as timelines, budgets, governance expectations, reporting standards, and mandated delivery approaches. While they don’t describe the solution, they heavily influence how teams plan, coordinate, and make decisions. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Compliance requirements add an additional, often non negotiable layer—arising from laws, regulations, industry standards, or organizational policy—that establishes what must be adhered to regardless of preference or trade offs. Summary Taken together, these requirement types form an integrated system that connects strategy to execution. Business requirements define purpose and value. Stakeholder requirements ensure that purpose is understood and supported. Solution requirements translate intent into capability, while transition requirements make change achievable. Project and compliance requirements provide the structure and guardrails that keep delivery disciplined and responsible. When any part of this system is missing or misunderstood, teams may still deliver—but they do so without alignment, steadily eroding value. When requirements are treated as a strategic system rather than a documentation exercise, projects move beyond activity and outputs to deliver outcomes that matter. In the end, requirements are not a project artifact—they are the mechanism through which strategy becomes reality. If you’re leading projects, supporting them, or funding them, ask whether your requirements are driving real results—or simply filling documents—and start treating requirements as strategic conversations, not administrative tasks. If this resonates, it’s because many project managers are already doing business analysis—they just don’t always have the tools or language to do it intentionally. These skills are emphasized across PMI’s standards and tested on the CAPM® and PMP® exams because they are critical to delivering real business value. I see this firsthand in my work as a LinkedIn Learning instructor and practitioner, supporting project managers who are asked to drive outcomes, not just manage tasks. If you want to go deeper, follow along for more practical insights—or explore my LinkedIn Learning course, Business Analysis for Project Managers, where I show how PMs can apply BA skills across the full project lifecycle to improve alignment, reduce rework, and deliver outcomes that matter.

Leave a Comment / Business Analysis, Project Management /

If hard work alone guaranteed project success, far fewer projects would struggle. Yet time and again, well‑run teams miss the mark—not from poor execution, but from unclear and competing requirements.

Requirements Are Strategy: Stop Delivering the Wrong Thing Well If hard work alone guaranteed project success, far fewer projects would struggle. Yet time and again, well run teams miss the mark—not from poor execution, but from unclear and competing requirements. After years of working with project managers across industries and teaching these practices as a LinkedIn Learning instructor, it’s clear that clarity, not effort, is the real differentiator. When teams lack shared understanding of why a project exists, who it serves, and how success is defined, even the strongest delivery discipline can’t compensate. In the absence of clear, aligned requirements, organizations don’t miss delivery—they miss strategy, producing outcomes that are operationally sound but strategically misaligned. When we talk about requirements, we’re not talking about documentation for documentation’s sake. Requirements are the shared understanding that connects strategy to execution. They define why a project exists, who it is intended to serve, what outcomes matter, and the conditions under which success will be judged. Well defined requirements create alignment across sponsors, stakeholders, and delivery teams, turning strategy into actionable direction. Poorly defined requirements, on the other hand, leave teams making assumptions, filling gaps on their own, and optimizing locally instead of delivering organizational value. To create that alignment, requirements must be understood as a system—not a single list—spanning business intent, stakeholder needs, solution behavior, and the realities of change. At the highest level, this system starts with business requirements—the foundation for every project that follows. Business Requirements That system begins with business requirements, because every project exists to serve an organizational purpose before it ever delivers a solution. Business requirements articulate the outcomes the organization is trying to achieve and the value the project is expected to create. They frame the problem or opportunity in strategic terms—improving performance, meeting obligations, reducing risk, or enabling growth—without prescribing how the solution should be built. When business requirements are clear, they act as a compass for every decision that follows, allowing teams to evaluate scope, trade offs, and priorities through the lens of value rather than activity. When they are vague or missing, teams may still execute effectively, but they do so without a shared definition of success, increasing the likelihood that effort is expended on work that is operationally sound yet strategically disconnected. Stakeholder Requirements From there, stakeholder requirements add a critical layer of perspective to that system. While business requirements define organizational intent, stakeholder requirements capture how that intent is experienced by the people affected by the project. Different stakeholders often value different outcomes—customers may prioritize usability, finance may focus on accuracy and controls, and operations may be concerned with stability and continuity. Stakeholder requirements surface these needs and expectations explicitly, even when they compete. This is not a sign of misalignment; it is a reality of complex organizations. When stakeholder requirements are clearly understood and addressed, teams can balance trade offs deliberately and design solutions that are both viable and supported. When they are ignored or assumed, conflict doesn’t disappear—it simply emerges later as resistance, rework, or adoption failure, eroding value long after delivery is complete. Solution Requirements Once the “why” and the “who” are understood, attention turns to solution requirements—the point where strategy is translated into something that can actually be built and delivered. Solution requirements define what the solution must do to satisfy business and stakeholder needs, and just as importantly, how well it must do it. Some of these requirements are functional, describing specific capabilities, behaviors, or features the solution must provide. Others are nonfunctional, setting expectations for performance, reliability, security, usability, or scalability. These quality expectations are often underestimated, yet they are frequently the difference between a solution that technically works and one that people trust, adopt, and rely on. When solution requirements are clear and aligned, teams can design with intent and make informed trade offs. When they are vague or incomplete, teams are left to interpret intent on their own, increasing the risk of rework, dissatisfaction, and solutions that meet specifications but fall short of real needs. Transition Requirements Not all requirements are permanent. Transition requirements exist to ensure the organization can actually move from the current state to the future one the project is designed to achieve. While business, stakeholder, and solution requirements define what success looks like, transition requirements address the realities of change—how people, data, processes, and operations make the shift without disrupting the business. This includes activities such as data migration, user training, temporary parallel operations, and rollout support. These requirements are often overlooked because they don’t describe the end solution, yet they are frequently where projects succeed or fail. When transition requirements are clearly defined and planned, change is deliberate, adoption is smoother, and value is realized sooner. When they are treated as afterthoughts, even well designed solutions can stall at implementation, eroding confidence and delaying the outcomes the project was meant to deliver. Project Requirements In parallel, project and compliance requirements shape the boundaries within which all other requirements must be delivered. Project requirements define how the work itself must be executed, including constraints such as timelines, budgets, governance expectations, reporting standards, and mandated delivery approaches. While they don’t describe the solution, they heavily influence how teams plan, coordinate, and make decisions. Regulatory and Compliance Requirements Compliance requirements add an additional, often non negotiable layer—arising from laws, regulations, industry standards, or organizational policy—that establishes what must be adhered to regardless of preference or trade offs. Summary Taken together, these requirement types form an integrated system that connects strategy to execution. Business requirements define purpose and value. Stakeholder requirements ensure that purpose is understood and supported. Solution requirements translate intent into capability, while transition requirements make change achievable. Project and compliance requirements provide the structure and guardrails that keep delivery disciplined and responsible. When any part of this system is missing or misunderstood, teams may still deliver—but they do so without alignment, steadily eroding value. When requirements are treated as a strategic system rather than a documentation exercise, projects move beyond activity and outputs to deliver outcomes that matter. In the end, requirements are not a project artifact—they are the mechanism through which strategy becomes reality. If you’re leading projects, supporting them, or funding them, ask whether your requirements are driving real results—or simply filling documents—and start treating requirements as strategic conversations, not administrative tasks. If this resonates, it’s because many project managers are already doing business analysis—they just don’t always have the tools or language to do it intentionally. These skills are emphasized across PMI’s standards and tested on the CAPM® and PMP® exams because they are critical to delivering real business value. I see this firsthand in my work as a LinkedIn Learning instructor and practitioner, supporting project managers who are asked to drive outcomes, not just manage tasks. If you want to go deeper, follow along for more practical insights—or explore my LinkedIn Learning course, Business Analysis for Project Managers, where I show how PMs can apply BA skills across the full project lifecycle to improve alignment, reduce rework, and deliver outcomes that matter. Read More »