- Home
- Products
- Services
- Support
- Getting Started
- Documentation
- System Governance Handbook
- Table of contents
- Chapter 1. Introduction
- 1.1. An overview of system governance
- 1.2. About this book
- 1.3. Uses of system governance
- 1.4. Principles of system governance
- Chapter 2. System governance roles and responsibilities
- 2.1. IT decision makers
- 2.2. System governance sponsor
- 2.3. System governance manager
- 2.4. System governance committee
- 2.5. Other roles
- Chapter 3. System governance tools and techniques
- 3.1. Metrici Advisor
- 3.2. Assessment
- 3.3. Validation
- 3.4. Analysis
- 3.5. Criterion maintenance
- Chapter 4. System governance processes
- 4.1. Process overview
- 4.2. Business case
- 4.3. Initiation
- 4.4. Roll out (waterfall)
- 4.5. Roll out (iterative)
- 4.6. Annual review
- 4.7. Interim review
- 4.8. Project review
- 4.9. System review
- 4.10. Comparison and evaluation
- 4.11. Compliance audit
- 4.12. Proof of concept
- Appendix A. System governance reports
- A.1. Terms of reference
- A.2. System portfolio review report
- A.3. Iterative review report
- A.4. System governance review report
- A.5. Interim review report
- A.6. Evaluation review report
- A.7. Compliance audit report
- Appendix B. Example reports
- B.1. Example terms of reference
- B.2. Example system portfolio review report
- Appendix C. System governance meetings
- C.1. Committee briefing
- C.2. Criteria development workshop
- C.3. Iterative review meeting
- C.4. System governance review workshop
- C.5. Interim review meeting
- C.6. Evaluation criteria development workshop
- Appendix D. System governance training
- D.1. System governance overview
- D.2. System governance with Metrici Advisor
- D.3. System governance alignment
- D.4. Comparison and evaluation
- Appendix E. Cross reference
- Index
- System governance: the missing link in IT governance
- System Governance Handbook
- Contact Support
- FAQs
- Customers
- Contact Us
- Sign On
3.3. Validation
Previous | Next | Up | Contents
Validation is a simple check that the textual responses of assessments meet the questions asked in the criteria, and that the grading reflects the textual response.
Validation is different from verification. Verification checks that the response is factually correct, and is part of the assessment activity. Validation does not check that the response is factually correct. It checks that the response fully answers the criterion and that gradings are justified by the answer.
To assist validation, each criterion has answer criteria. These state what the response must contain in order to be valid, and how the grades should be interpreted in order to be valid.
Validation simply involves reading the textual response, answer criteria and grading, and indicating that the response is valid or otherwise. Where responses are not valid, discuss them with the person who carried out assessment.
![]() |
Validation tips |
|---|---|
|
Validation is best carried out by someone other than the person who carried out the assessment. In a system governance team, think of validation as a peer review of assessments. If you are not sure if a response is valid, then it is not valid. The response may be needed later to argue the case for corrective action or more budget; it is better to clear up any ambiguity at the validation stage than have it undermine later stages. If you think something is not valid, note down your reasons in the response comment field in Metrici Advisor, so that they are easy to find when discussing the response with the assessor. |
Previous: 3.2. Assessment | Next: 3.4. Analysis | Up | Contents

![[Tip]](../sites/default/files/handbook/tip.png)