It
is sad that the business analyst has been typecast as solely a definer of
requirements and to run interference with the business community. I tend to buy
into the business analysts name - someone who analyzes the business to solve
business problems.
There
are two approaches depending on the business analyst's stance. A deductive or
tactical business analyst responds to stated problems from the business. From
that perspective, the business analyst would not be involved until someone
identifies a problem - the difference between the current situation and what
that someone perceives the current situation should be. Then the business
analyst steps in to solve the problem and might in the course of defining the
solution document some requirements for change.
In
the second approach, the business analyst reviews the business process and
identifies improvements or problems that could be solved to improve the process
without being told there is a business problem to solve. For example, in the
situation of a mechanic using a web site to help diagnose a problem with a vehicle
(actual situation), the business analyst might suggest reorganizing the web
site so that it reflects the natural way the mechanic uses the information
instead of the logical flow of data that would be normally defined by a systems
analyst or data base designer. The business analyst observes the way the mechanic uses the website
and suggest improvements not in the mechanic's process but in the way the computer
system on the web site supports that process. Once the inductive business
analyst's suggestion for improvement is adopted, the deductive business analyst
(same guy, different hat) steps in to define the solution in a set of
requirements that are implemented to improve the process.
Both
business analysis approaches are valid and necessary to add value to the organization.
No comments:
Post a Comment