Techniques BABOK Guide v3, 10.1
Acceptance and Evaluation Criteria
In short Acceptance criteria state the conditions a solution must meet before key stakeholders will accept it (pass or fail). Evaluation criteria are the measures you use to rank and choose between several options. Both turn vague expectations into something you can check.
Based on: IIBA, BABOK® Guide v3, technique 10.1 “Acceptance and Evaluation Criteria”.
On this page
What it is#
The BABOK® Guide treats these two kinds of criteria as one technique because they are built from the same raw material: value attributes. A value attribute is a characteristic of a solution that makes it valuable to stakeholders, for example:
- the ability to provide certain information or perform certain actions;
- performance and responsiveness;
- fit for a particular context of use;
- usability, security, scalability and reliability.
Breaking expected value into such attributes, and agreeing on them, is the core of the technique. You then use them in one of two ways:
- Acceptance criteria apply to one solution. Each criterion is a statement that is either true or false. If all are true, the solution (or a requirement, or a story) is accepted. They are usually checked in user acceptance testing (UAT).
- Evaluation criteria apply to several options. Each criterion has a metric on a continuous or discrete scale (cost, response time, a usability score) so you can compare and rank. Values come from benchmarking, demonstrations or expert judgment.
The same attribute can play both roles. When choosing between products, the cheaper or faster option scores higher. Once a product is chosen and a contract is signed, the same attribute becomes a minimum or maximum the supplier must meet.
When to use it#
- Before building or buying, so everyone knows what “done” and “good enough” mean.
- In agile work, where every requirement or story should be expressed in testable form.
- In contracts and supplier agreements, where acceptance must be objective.
- When choosing between solution options, vendors or designs.
- When estimating value and setting priorities, because criteria make benefits concrete.
When not to use it, or what to add: do not write detailed acceptance criteria for ideas that may never be built; keep them for items about to be worked on. If the choice involves complex trade-offs and uncertainty, combine evaluation criteria with Decision Analysis. For quality attributes, use Non-Functional Requirements Analysis to find them first.
How to do it#
- Decide which question you are answering. “Is this one solution acceptable?” needs acceptance criteria. “Which option is best?” needs evaluation criteria. Often you need both, in that order: evaluate options, then define acceptance for the chosen one.
- Elicit value attributes from the stakeholders who will accept or choose. Ask what would make them reject the solution, and what would make one option clearly better than another.
- Write acceptance criteria as true/false statements. Split compound requirements into atomic parts so each can become a test. Name who checks each criterion and how.
- Define evaluation metrics. For each attribute, set a scale, a way to measure it, and a weight that reflects its importance. Agree on any mandatory thresholds that knock an option out.
- Review and agree the criteria with stakeholders before any building, testing or scoring starts. Record who approved them.
- Apply the criteria. Run acceptance tests, or score options, and record the evidence for each result.
- Handle changes deliberately. If criteria must change, especially in a contract, follow the agreed change procedure rather than reinterpreting them.
Example#
The Workshop (a fictional chain of 12 bike-repair shops) is choosing an online booking service and will then accept the configured solution.
Evaluation criteria for two candidate services:
| Attribute | Weight | Scale | Option A | Option B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monthly cost for 12 locations | 3 | 1 (high) to 5 (low) | 4 | 3 |
| Can send status updates by text and email | 5 | 1 to 5 | 2 | 5 |
| Front-desk ease of use (demo with staff) | 4 | 1 to 5 | 4 | 4 |
| Can share bookings with the parts system | 3 | 1 to 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Weighted total | 47 | 62 |
Acceptance criteria for one user story, “As a customer, I want to book a repair slot online”:
- Given a workshop with a free slot, when the customer selects it and confirms, then the booking appears in that workshop’s calendar.
- The customer receives a confirmation message with the date, time and workshop address.
- A slot booked by one customer can no longer be selected by another.
- Front-desk staff can move or cancel the booking, and the customer is informed.
Common mistakes#
- Vague criteria such as “fast” or “user-friendly” → state a measurable condition and how it will be checked.
- Mixing the two kinds → keep pass/fail acceptance separate from comparative scoring.
- Writing criteria after the build → agree them before work starts, or they will describe what was built rather than what was needed.
- Criteria from one group only → include those who will use, support and pay for the solution; agreement across varied stakeholders is hard, so start early.
- Rigid contract criteria → expect legal or political resistance to later changes, and agree a change procedure up front.
- Many unweighted criteria → limit the list and weight what matters most.
Checklist#
- It is clear whether we are accepting one solution, ranking options, or both.
- Value attributes are agreed with the stakeholders who decide.
- Every acceptance criterion is a true/false statement with a named checker.
- Compound requirements are split so that each part can be tested.
- Every evaluation criterion has a scale, a measurement method and a weight.
- Knock-out thresholds are stated.
- Criteria were approved before work or scoring began.
- Results are recorded with evidence.
Sources and further reading#
- IIBA. A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK® Guide), version 3. International Institute of Business Analysis, 2015. Technique 10.1 “Acceptance and Evaluation Criteria”.