Business analysts: why are there so many of you?

[munkee]

What if I told you that I've worked with a top gun BA or two. And then you get a sense that the problem is understood to the same depth needed to implement it properly. There are no logical gaps in the analysis. It makes sense. A good BA combines architectural knowledge, domain knowledge, analytical skills (classification and categorisation of masses of detailed information), ability to grasp business logic quickly, ability to get to the root of the matter and ask the right questions, good documenting skills (both content and document management)- this last one is often done poorly by ex-dev BA types.

We don't need an admin person- we need someone to fully understand the problem, if you are taking that responsibility from us you must do it fully. Anything else creates more work than doing the work ourselves in the first place- because we must go back to the business, analyse both your analysis and the real problem, to see what you have missed.

This is a non-trivial undertaking- that's why most BAs fail to do the proper job.

Back to my original post of the 90%.

[LondonManc]

Sounds like a dream to work with. I'd then have to just get on with designing a solution just once and not constantly reworking every time someone had another bright 'idea'.

That's Agile in a nutshell

[SueEllen]

That's Agile in a nutshell

That isn't agile it's fragile.

[VillageContractor]

That's Agile in a nutshell

Nope. That's poor requirements - not having an idea of what's coming next and continually changing requirements.

tulip requirements are a problem for both agile and waterfall.

[eek]

Nope. That's poor requirements - not having an idea of what's coming next and continually changing requirements.

tulip requirements are a problem for both agile and waterfall.

My favourite example of that was from last year - as some did exactly what was specified in the story explicitly ignoring the next story where the interface had to not just support the current story but 5 variations of it.

We started the second story and the first step the developer took was to bin the original just about working code and start again...

[VillageContractor]

My favourite example of that was from last year - as some did exactly what was specified in the story explicitly ignoring the next story where the interface had to not just support the current story but 5 variations of it.

We started the second story and the first step the developer took was to bin the original just about working code and start again...

That's a poor requirement, the first story should have had the variations as an acceptance criteria. You could probably also blame the planning

[munkee]

That's a poor requirement, the first story should have had the variations as an acceptance criteria.

[eek]

That's a poor requirement, the first story should have had the variations as an acceptance criteria. You could probably also blame the planning

Yep. I spent about the first 3 weeks saying stories need to look at the whole picture and not just this weeks panic. Strangely the project failed to be delivered on time and was passed on mass to TCS to finish.

The fact TCS were far further behind than the internal team wasn't mentioned by anyone due to the utter incompetency of the management.

[VillageContractor]

Yep. I spent about the first 3 weeks saying stories need to look at the whole picture and not just this weeks panic. Strangely the project failed to be delivered on time and was passed on mass to TCS to finish.

The fact TCS were far further behind than the internal team wasn't mentioned by anyone due to the utter incompetency of the management.

This happens a lot, management don't understand the problem and make bad decisions. A good Scrum Master should be shouting out saying the requirements aren't good enough and working with PO and BA to improve them.

[MrMarkyMark]

Yep. I spent about the first 3 weeks saying stories need to look at the whole picture and not just this weeks panic. Strangely the project failed to be delivered on time and was passed on mass to TCS to finish.

The fact TCS were far further behind than the internal team wasn't mentioned by anyone due to the utter incompetency of the management.

"Finish", being the operative word here