Free Template · Word · Updated March 2026
Free Feasibility Study Template
Word Download
Before you commit budget and resources, find out whether your project is actually viable. This nine-section Word template walks you through technical, financial, operational and schedule feasibility — with options analysis, ROI and payback calculations, risk assessment and a clear recommendation section.
9 structured sections
From executive summary to approval — every section needed to objectively assess project viability.
Financial analysis fields
Pre-labelled fields for estimated cost, benefit, payback period, ROI and NPV — all six financial metrics.
3-option analysis
Do Nothing, Preferred Approach and Alternative — structured fields for objective comparison of all three.
Feasibility Study Template
Free Word template — instant download
Format
Word (.docx)
Sections
9 structured sections
Options analysis
3-option comparison
Financial metrics
ROI, NPV, Payback, IRR
Compatible
Word, Google Docs, LibreOffice
Price
Free — no signup needed
No email required. Instant Word download.
01 — Template Sections
What's in the Template — All 9 Sections
The template follows a structured feasibility assessment framework used across both public and private sector projects. Each section includes placeholder guidance explaining what a strong entry looks like — not just empty fields.
1
Executive Summary
A 2–3 paragraph overview: the problem or opportunity, the conclusion of the feasibility study and the recommendation. Written last — once the rest of the document is complete — so it accurately summarises the evidence.
2
Problem Statement / Opportunity
A quantified description of the business problem or opportunity. The template guidance prompts you to express the current situation in measurable terms — cost of the problem, revenue opportunity or regulatory requirement — not just a qualitative description.
3
Objectives and Success Criteria
What the project must achieve, expressed as measurable targets. Three objective fields with a KPI measure for each. Every objective should be testable — "reduce processing time from 4 days to 1 day" not "improve efficiency".
4
Scope
In-scope and out-of-scope bullet lists. Defining what is explicitly out of scope is as important as defining what is in — it prevents scope creep from being justified as "obviously included".
5
Options Analysis
Three structured option slots: Do Nothing (always required), Preferred Approach and Alternative. Each option is assessed on the same criteria so the comparison is objective, not advocacy for the preferred solution.
6
Financial Analysis
Six pre-labelled financial fields: Estimated Cost, Estimated Benefit, Payback Period, ROI, NPV (5-year) and IRR. Guidance prompts you to show your assumptions behind each figure — not just the totals.
7
Risk Assessment
Three risk entries with likelihood, impact and mitigation for each. Covers risks to feasibility itself — not just delivery risks. The guidance distinguishes between risks to the study's conclusions (e.g. cost assumptions may be unreliable) and risks to delivery if the project proceeds.
8
Conclusion and Recommendation
An explicit recommendation: proceed / do not proceed / proceed with modifications. The template guidance emphasises making the recommendation unambiguous and evidence-based — referencing the financial analysis and risk assessment, not just restating them.
9
Approval
Three signature fields: Prepared By, Reviewed By and Approved By — with name, role and date. Formal approval of the feasibility study is the trigger to proceed to the business case or project initiation phase.
02 — Types of Feasibility
The Five Types of Feasibility — What to Assess
A thorough feasibility study addresses all five dimensions. In practice, the weight given to each dimension depends on the project type — a technology project may require deep technical feasibility work; a regulatory compliance project may require more focus on legal feasibility.
01 — Technical
Technical Feasibility
Can the technology needed to deliver the solution actually be built or procured? Does the capability exist in the market? Does the organisation have or can it acquire the technical expertise needed?
"Can we build or buy this?"
02 — Financial
Financial Feasibility
Does the projected return justify the investment cost? Is the payback period acceptable? Is the ROI above the organisation's cost of capital? Can the funding actually be made available?
"Is it worth the money?"
03 — Operational
Operational Feasibility
Will the solution work within the organisation's existing processes, systems and culture? Do staff have the capacity to adopt and operate it? Is the change management risk manageable?
"Will it work in our organisation?"
04 — Schedule
Schedule Feasibility
Can it be delivered within the required timeframe? Are there regulatory or business deadlines driving the schedule? Are the dependencies and critical path realistic given available resources?
"Can we deliver in time?"
05 — Legal & Regulatory
Legal and Regulatory Feasibility
Are there any legal, regulatory or compliance barriers? Does the proposed solution require licences, approvals or regulatory sign-off that may be hard to obtain? Are there data protection, IP or contractual constraints that affect viability?
"Is it legally and regulatorily permissible?"
Not every type needs equal depth. For a straightforward internal process improvement project, financial and operational feasibility may dominate. For a new consumer product launch, technical and legal feasibility may be the critical uncertainties. Spend your feasibility effort where the real risks and unknowns lie — not equally across all five dimensions as a box-ticking exercise.
03 — Financial Analysis
The Financial Analysis Section — Six Metrics Explained
Section 6 of the template includes six financial fields. You do not need to complete all six for every project — choose the metrics that are most relevant to your organisation's investment criteria.
Cost
Estimated Total Cost
CapEx + OpEx (Year 1–5)
Full lifecycle cost including capital investment and ongoing operating costs. Show the breakdown — not just a total. Assumptions should be documented alongside the figure.
Benefit
Estimated Annual Benefit
Revenue gain + cost saving
Annual financial benefit from Year 1 of operation. Separate financial benefits (cost savings, revenue) from non-financial benefits (risk reduction, compliance). Both are legitimate — but only financial ones feed the ROI calculation.
PBP
Payback Period
Total Cost ÷ Annual Benefit
How many months or years until cumulative benefits recover the investment. Simple and intuitive for non-financial audiences. Most organisations have a maximum acceptable payback period — typically 2–5 years for internal projects.
ROI
Return on Investment
(Benefit − Cost) ÷ Cost
The percentage return over the investment period. Expressed as a % over a defined timeframe (e.g. 5-year ROI = 140%). Always state the time period — ROI without a timeframe is meaningless.
NPV
Net Present Value
PV of benefits − PV of costs
The present value of all future cash flows, discounted at the organisation's cost of capital. Positive NPV means the project creates value. Preferred over simple ROI for long-duration investments where the time value of money is significant.
IRR
Internal Rate of Return
Discount rate where NPV = 0
The discount rate at which the project breaks even in NPV terms. If IRR exceeds your cost of capital, the project creates value. Used for comparing investments of different sizes — a project with 28% IRR is more capital-efficient than one with 18% IRR.
Which metrics to use: For most internal projects, Estimated Cost, Payback Period and ROI are sufficient. NPV and IRR add rigour for larger capital investments where the time value of money matters. Finance teams and investment committees often have preferred metrics — check what your organisation uses before spending time calculating all six. Use our Project Budget Calculator to model costs before completing this section.
04 — Context
Feasibility Study vs Business Case — When to Use Each
These two documents are related but serve different purposes at different stages of project initiation. Understanding when each is needed prevents duplication of effort.
This Template
Feasibility Study
Question: Can we do this and is it worth doing?
Stance: Objective — no predetermined answer
Timing: Before solution is chosen or funded
Output: Proceed / Do Not Proceed / Modify
When needed: High-cost, novel or high-risk proposals where viability is genuinely uncertain
Separate Document
Question: Should we invest in this specific solution?
Stance: Advocacy — argues for a specific option
Timing: After solution is identified, before funding
Output: Approve / Reject investment request
When needed: Almost all significant projects that require formal investment approval
The typical sequence is: Feasibility Study → Business Case → Project Charter → Project Initiation. Not every project needs a formal feasibility study — straightforward projects with well-understood solutions may go straight to a business case. The feasibility study adds most value when the organisation genuinely does not know whether a viable solution exists, or where the investment is large enough that a failed project would have material consequences.
PMP exam note: The PMI PMBOK 7th edition includes the feasibility study as a pre-project document that informs the business case, which in turn informs the project charter. PRINCE2 uses a Project Brief and Outline Business Case at initiation, followed by a full Business Case — the feasibility study typically precedes these. The PMP exam may test the sequence of these documents and what triggers each stage. Download our Business Case template to use once the feasibility study recommends proceeding.
05 — FAQ
Feasibility Study — 4 Common Questions
A feasibility study is a formal assessment of whether a proposed project is viable — technically, commercially, financially and operationally. It is conducted before the project is formally approved or funded. Unlike a business case (which argues for a specific solution), a feasibility study objectively evaluates whether any solution is viable, presents multiple options and lets the evidence determine the recommendation. It is particularly valuable for high-cost, novel or high-risk proposals where viability is genuinely uncertain.
A feasibility study asks "can we do this and is it worth doing?" — it is an objective assessment conducted before a solution is chosen. A business case argues "we should do this specific thing" — it advocates for a particular solution and requests investment approval. The feasibility study typically precedes the business case. Not all projects need a formal feasibility study — straightforward projects with well-understood solutions may go directly to a business case — but high-risk or large investments almost always benefit from one.
The five standard types are: (1) Technical — can the technology be built or procured? (2) Financial — does the projected return justify the cost? (3) Operational — will it work within the organisation's processes and capabilities? (4) Schedule — can it be delivered in time? (5) Legal and regulatory — are there compliance barriers? Most feasibility studies address all five, though the emphasis varies. Focus your effort on the dimensions where the real uncertainties lie — not equally across all five.
For a straightforward internal project, 1–2 weeks is typical. For a large capital investment, system implementation or business transformation, 4–12 weeks is common. For major infrastructure or public sector projects, feasibility studies can take 3–6 months and involve external consultants. The principle: the study should take long enough to gather reliable evidence for a sound recommendation — but not so long that it costs more than the value it provides. A good test: if the study costs more than 5% of the potential project budget, question whether its scope is proportionate.