Learning outcomes

  • Name the fields of the project application and say what belongs in each

  • Explain the difference between the application (Projektantrag) and the charter (Projektauftrag)

  • Explain what "frozen" means for the charter and why it is the yardstick

  • Use the German field names alongside the English terms

Two documents, two moments

Projektantrag / application Projektauftrag / charter

Moment

before the decision

after the decision

Purpose

propose: this is worth doing

commission: this is what we do

Changes later?

irrelevant — it is superseded

no — it is frozen

Signed by

the team

team and client

The same fields appear in both. The application argues; the charter commits.

The fields

Feld / Field What belongs in it

Projekttitel / project title

the result in one line, not the technology

Ausgangslage / initial situation

what exists today and why it is unsatisfactory — no solution

Untersuchungsanliegen / research objective

the open question the project answers

Zielsetzung / objectives

verifiable goals, each with its evidence

Geplantes Ergebnis / planned deliverable

what exists at the end, and how you recognise it is done

Meilensteine / milestones

dated, checkable results — not activities

Verantwortlich / responsible

one named person per work package

Aufwandsschätzung / effort estimate

hours, as a range, per work package

These are the fields of the diploma thesis application. You fill them for the first time now, in year three, so that in year five the form is familiar rather than new.

The field names are German because the form is German. That is why this course teaches governance vocabulary in both languages — under exam pressure you should not be translating "research objective" back into Untersuchungsanliegen.

Frozen — and why

The charter is frozen at approval. Everything after that happens against it:

frozen charter

Without a fixed point, a team can quietly adjust its goals to whatever got finished — and then every project is complete by definition. The difference between charter and result is not a failure; it is the subject of scope management, and it is only visible because one side does not move.

Decisions

  • The charter follows the field structure of the diploma thesis application, with bilingual field labels.

  • It is frozen at approval. Changes go through openspec/changes/ and are visible there, not through edits to the charter.

  • Effort estimates are ranges, never single numbers.

  • Every work package has exactly one responsible person — shared responsibility is none.

Pitfalls

  • Filling in the fields as prose without a single verifiable statement. The form is then complete and useless.

  • Writing the charter after building. It happens, it is visible in the git dates, and it removes the only yardstick you had.

  • Milestones that are activities ("work on the frontend"). A milestone is a result you can check on a date.

  • Editing the charter quietly when the plan changes. Then nobody can say what changed, and the archive of changes is the wrong place to look.

Terminology

Deutsch English

Projektantrag

project application / proposal

Projektauftrag

project charter

Untersuchungsanliegen

research objective

Geplantes Ergebnis

planned deliverable

Verantwortlich

responsible

Aufwandsschätzung

effort estimate

Further reading

  • templates/governance/projektantrag.adoc and projektauftrag.adoc

  • Module bridge-charter-to-specs — which openspec artefact carries which field