Introduction

Section Explanation. Click to expand.

The product requirements document (PRD) is a central document used to align all stakeholders (product management, engineering, QA, designers, and leadership) on how we will solve a specific problem with the proposed solution.

When creating the PRD, provide just as much information as needed and nothing more. If the document is too long and complex, it will quickly become outdated, and readers will lose interest.

In this latest iteration of the Unified Compliance PRD template, we changed the template to help raise visibility of how the proposed product (or feature set) adheres to Unified Compliance’s strategic plan including details on why this product proposal is important to Unified Compliance.

Strategic Planning and Decision Making

Section Explanation. Click to expand.

Vision and Goal Setting: articulates the vision alignment, problem being addressed, and goals of the product proposal describing what the product is, who it is for, and how it will benefit the users and the organization.
Decision-Making Framework: helps in making informed decisions throughout the product development process acting as a reference point for evaluating progress and making changes.
Performance Measurement: sets the criteria for measuring the success of the product through specified metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs) including potential financial impact.
Basis for Prioritization: helps in prioritizing features based on the product strategy, market needs, and resource constraints.

The Problem

What problem are we trying to solve?

We currently rely on a team of expert mappers to meticulously add content into the UCF. The process works well but is slow. With the advent of automation and AI, Unified Compliance risks attacks from competitors who will use technology to accelerate content acquisition.

We risk losing customers to other platforms if we fall behind on the extent of coverage.

We will also find it difficult to take on new market segments without automation.

High-level Approach

Briefly describe the approach you’re taking to solve this problem. Provide enough information for the reader to imagine possible solution directions and get a rough sense of the scope of this proposal.

The approach is to start with the “left-hand” side of the end-to-end content ingestion process focusing on compliance content through ETL for an identified list of four (4) compliance content providers.

For each content provider, Authority Documents will be identified, then Citations and Glossaries will be extracted from the Authority Documents, transformed into the Common Data Format specification, and loaded into the UC platform.

Automation tools and AI will be used to accelerate the end-to-end process with human assistance to review and approve critical steps in the process focusing on reviewing and updating AI suggestions.

Once the process is proven out, the intent is to extend the solution to many additional compliance content providers.

Goals

What does success look like? What metrics can we effect and why it is important to affect those metrics?

Goal

Metric

Why Important?

Reliably extract citations from Authority Documents

>= 80% accuracy where 20% of Citations need to be reworked (e.g., split, merged, rejected …)

If there is poor accuracy requiring extensive human correction, then there is little value.

Reliably extract glossaries from Authority Documents

>= 95% accuracy where only 5% of term-definition pairs need to be reworked. Glossaries are substantially easier to identify and extract than citations.

If there is poor accuracy requiring extensive human correction, then there is little value.

Reliably automate the end-to-end process of capturing, transforming, and loading STIG, NIST 800-53, FedRAMP, eCFR compliance content into the Unified Compliance platform.

100% of identified Authority Documents for all four compliance content contributor sources is loaded into the UCF.

All four Authority Documents sources are related to securing and hardening IT infrastructure for both the private and public sector.

To provide value to customers with Security Operation's requirements, UC needs to maximize the breadth of security coverage to ensure we can provide security guidance for as many IT assets as possible.

Scope and Features

Section Explanation. Click to expand.

The intent of this section is for the following:

Scope Definition: defines the scope of the proposed product (or features), including what will and will not be included helping manage expectations and focus development efforts.

Guideline for Development: provides detailed information on the product’s features, functionalities, user flow, and interface to guide the development team in building the product.

Features

Describe the product features that will bring value to customers and fulfill underserved need(s).

Feature	Use Case / Problem Solved
Automatic Citation and Glossary Extraction from Authority Documents	Out of all the ancillary information found in Authority Documents, specific passages containing Mandates (requirements) and related contextual information such as stubs, informational, and informational gathering are extracted from the Authority Documents.
Human-in-the-loop Training for Content Extraction AI Models	Expert mappers can validate and make changes about the correctness of the AI-driven Citation extraction helping train the AI model to produce increasingly better results.
Automated Compliance Content Ingestion into the Common Data Format	Authority Documents (initially targeted for STIGs, NIST 800-53, FedRAMP, and eCFR) are loaded into the UCF platform with minimal human intervention.
Monitoring and Logging	Administrators can make informed decisions and take action on the ingestion process based on meaningful information is collected throughout compliance content ingestion process.
Metadata and Data Change Detection	Compliance professionals are kept to up to date with changes made by compliance content providers.
Statistical Data Capture and Reporting	Product and engineering teams can review statistical results captured during the document ingestion process to help make objective data-driven decisions about the accuracy and effectiveness the process automation.

Out of Scope / Future Functionality

List the known features that are out of scope for this project or might be revisited at a later time.

As is case with the assumptions, it is important to list these out so that architects and engineers can plan accordingly for these later updates.

Feature	Comments
Tagging and Mapping of content to the Common Controls.	This project ends at the AD, Citation and Glossary extraction, transformation, and load. Follow-on projects will include the tagging and mapping.
Human-in-the-loop for content capture.	Later projects can include additional human validation. To limit scope of this project, steps such as metadata change detection can be reviewed and validated after the fact looking at logs and other information.
Human-in-the-loop for the AD cataloging.	Same as above
Human-in-the-loop for transformation into the common data format	Same as above
Human-in-the-loop for loading into the UCF	Same as above
Corpora Management and Administration	A non-production version of a corpora exists. Any work on the corpora is out of scope for this product.
Corpora Data Loads	The focus of this PRD is to load compliance content into the UCF 4.0 application for customer consumption over the API. Follow-on projects can tap into the pipeline and use the content for other purposes.
Fit-for-purpose frontend for each step in the content ingestion process.	UX/UI for any other aspect of the process outside of human review and approval of suggested citations and suggested term-definition pairs. Later product updates could include additional front-end steps for tasks throughout the process.

User Interaction and Design

Link to mockups, prototypes, or screenshots related to the requirements.

For this PRD, the focus of the user interaction is on the reviewing of suggested citations and term-definition pairs.

Process Flow Diagrams

Links to user journeys, process flow, or other diagrams related to the requirements.

Impacted Product Components

If this project is a component to other areas or an update to an existing product, specifically call out where this product will interact with other areas.

Open Questions

List any open questions that come to mind throughout the lifecycle of this initiative.

Question	Answer	Date Answered
What do we do with deprecated authority documents?
For STIGs, how do we identify which files are authority documents?
For NIST 800-53, how do we identify which files are authority documents?
For FedRAMP, how do we identify which files are authority documents?
For eCFRs, how do we identify which files are authority documents?
Specifically, what is required to catalog an AD?
In this first pass, what should constitute content changes? We don’t want to get too crazy and make this a massive project. Need to discuss.

Alternative Solutions

Provide a high-level evaluation criterion for alternative solutions (build, buy, partner) to evaluate different routes to success.

Milestones and Launch Checklist

Section Explanation. Click to expand.

The intent of this section is for the following:

Technical Risk Mitigation: Identifies potential technical risks and propose mitigation strategies.

Launch Readiness: launch checklist including high-level go-to-market plan to ensure cross-departmental alignment.

Technical Risk Mitigation

If applicable, identifies potential technical risks and propose mitigation strategies.

Risk	Mitigation Strategy
The eCFR content volume could cause multiple challenges including impact on API responses, searches, dominate other content sources …

Launch Readiness

Identify any relevant milestones that people should now about. Will we “eat it” ourselves first? Will this require a beta? and what is the target launch date?

Date	Milestone	Audience	Description
TBD	Dogfood 🐶	Internal employees only.	Testing internally
TBD	Beta 🎈	Early cohort of X customers.	Getting user feedback
TBD	Public Launch 🚀	Roll-out to all users.	Let’s do it!

Launch Checklist

This section is a reminder to the product team to make sure all relevant stakeholders are involved as necessary.

Area	Question	Answer (yes/no)	Instructions if "Yes” (or unsure)
Product	Are we introducing new functionality that requires changes to the pricing implementation.	Yes	The expectation is that these changes are part of the features in the PRD.
Customer Success	Will new training material be needed (or updates to existing classes)?	No	Talk to the Customer Success team.
Customer Success	Do we need a new or updated onboarding experience?	No	Talk to the Customer Success team.
Support	Will new FAQs be required (or updates to existing ones)? API documentation?	Yes	Talk to the Customer Support team.
Support	Will this functionality require new support processes like new HubSpot workflows or saved replies? Or training the support team on the product?	Yes	Talk to the Support team.
Growth & Data	Do we need additional tracking in order to measure success and impact on user behavior for the new feature? Will UserFlow be used? Do we need a new Power BI report?	Yes	Review within our Product Team
Growth & Data	Could this impact CTAs? Or new-user-experience (NUX)?	Yes	Review within our Product Team
Growth & Data	Are we turning this product or feature on for everyone immediately or are we going to use feature flags for a slow roll-out?	Everyone	Not applicable yet until feature flags are ready to go
Product	Are we running a Beta for this?	No	Review within our Product Team
Marketing	Are we introducing functionality where we will want to update or create new web pages? New/updated CTAs?	Yes	Talk with Marketing