Case 6 — Delivery Route Matrix

1. Problem

A city authority needs a passenger access control system for a funicular — a compact system with a single route, limited number of stations, and specialized equipment. Requirements are well-defined. No technical unknowns. The system fits a standard engineering profile.

The customer faces a choice between four delivery routes — and is not sure how the available routes differ under the same assumptions. Some scenarios require a fuller lifecycle with separate documentation artifacts. Others prioritize speed. One asks whether the prototype stage adds value here at all.

The question: how do the four available lifecycle configurations compare — in labor, duration, documentation completeness, and control horizons?

2. Choice

All four available configurations are calculated with the same team and the same project parameters.

TA→PP→TP→WP→IM

Choice #1 — Full cycle

TA→TP→WP→IM

Choice #2 — Without PP

TA→PP→TWP→IM

Choice #3 — TWP replaces TP+WP

TA→TWP→IM

Choice #4 — Minimum stages

3. Target Stage

Production Release Horizon H4 — all four choices

4. Mapping Note

For this project, 4 functions were selected via the Function Mapping Procedure (FMP). Full function composition is available inside the calculator.

Technical Complexity Hard Real-Time Constraints

Hardware Adaptation Proprietary Hardware Adaptation

Architectural Complexity Real-Time Interactive Experience

Innovation Evolutionary Innovation

Standard Software Reuse 20–40% — New module on existing platform

5. Report View — Delivery Route Matrix

Uniform engineering resource allocation across all choices: TA=2, PP=2, TP=2, WP/TWP=6, IM=2 | Annual working time: 235 days/year per FTE | Delivery model: Full Turnkey

	Choice #1 TA→PP→TP→WP→IM	Choice #2 TA→TP→WP→IM	Choice #3 TA→PP→TWP→IM	Choice #4 TA→TWP→IM
Total Labor	3 160 pd	3 160 pd	3 122 pd	3 084 pd
Total Duration	4.23 yrs	4.23 yrs	3.85 yrs	3.46 yrs
Difference vs C1	—	0 pd / 0 yrs	−38 pd / −0.38 yrs	−76 pd / −0.77 yrs
Horizons available	H0 H1 H2 H3 H4	H0 H2 H3 H4	H0 H1 H3 H4	H0 H3 H4
Documentation	Full	No PP	No TP/WP separately	Minimal
Control coverage	Full	Reduced	Reduced	Minimal

Key observation on Choice #1 vs #2: identical Total Labor and Duration — PP does not add labor in this project profile. The choice between them is purely about whether a Prototype artifact is required as a deliverable. If yes — Choice #1. If not — Choice #2 with the same labor and duration.

Horizon detail by choice

Horizon	Product Stage	C1	C2	C3	C4	Time (C1)
H0	Requirements Baseline	✓	✓	✓	✓	0.69 yrs
H1	Prototype	✓	—	✓	—	1.23 yrs
H2	MVP	✓	✓	—	—	1.76 yrs
H3	Release Candidate	✓	✓	✓	✓	3.01 yrs
H4	Production Release	✓	✓	✓	✓	4.23 yrs

6. Decision

Context	Calculated Route	Reason
Full documentation required (regulator, fixed public delivery requirement)	Choice #1	All artifacts, all horizons, full control coverage
PP not required, otherwise same as #1	Choice #2	Same labor and duration as #1, no Prototype artifact
Speed priority, experienced team, RC target	Choice #3	Balanced delivery route
Maximum speed, minimal artifacts acceptable	Choice #4	Fastest path, fewest control horizons

The difference between the most complete (Choice #1) and the fastest (Choice #4) route is 76 pd and 0.77 years. This is the measurable engineering difference introduced by the fuller lifecycle route with separate control horizons and documentation artifacts. The project sponsor evaluates whether that engineering difference is acceptable for the regulatory context — based on calculated numbers, not intuition.

7. Engineering Feasibility Analysis

Delivery Route Matrix

This case demonstrates the sixth and most important capability of Digital Polygraph: the calculator does not prescribe a single path — it compares all available paths and makes the labor and duration of each route visible.

The delivery route selection — fuller lifecycle route vs. speed, PP vs. no PP, TWP vs. separate TP+WP — is no longer a matter of judgment or negotiation. Each option has a number: labor, duration, horizons, artifacts.

For the project sponsor, the matrix answers the question that usually stays implicit: "What exactly is added when the longer route is selected?" The answer here is: 76 pd and 0.77 years. That is the calculated labor and duration added by the fuller lifecycle route with separate control horizons and documentation artifacts for this project. The project sponsor independently evaluates whether the calculated delivery route fits the project constraints.

This is what the transition from a labor calculator to a delivery route selection instrument looks like in practice.

Delivery model: Full Turnkey