Tuesday, 01 February 2011 13:57

Agile Business Analysis in Flow: The Work of the Agile Analyst (Part 1)

Written by 
Rate this item
(1 Vote)

"Life is about not knowing, having to change, taking the moment and making the best of it without knowing what's going to happen next. Delicious ambiguity."
-Gilda Radner, actress and comedienne (1946-1989)

Agile is here, and it's coming soon to an organization near you-if it's not already there. As a business analyst, are you ready to make the transition to this value-centered development approach? How will your role change? What will you do differently? What will you actually do as part of an agile team? What agile analysis practices might you adapt if you're working on a traditional (waterfall-style) project?

In short, how can you make yourself more valuable to your agile team and organization using your business analysis skills and abilities?

It's about the work, not the role

Keep in mind my bias: it's not about the job role or title you have, it's about the work. So when I use the term "agile business analyst," I mean anyone who is doing the work of requirements (business) analysis on an agile team.

Some agile teams may not have a team member who is the designated business analyst, or they may have a business analyst whose only role is business analysis and requirements-related work. A variety of people who have the skills may do the work of analysis, and it may be shared among team members. That is common in small projects or when the team members have rich business domain expertise along with close, trusting relationships with their business customers.

So if you are (or will be) doing the work of agile analysis, keep reading to find out how your life will change.

With agile, value comes from the customer

On agile projects, the customer has the responsibility-and the burden-to decide which items the delivery team will build and when, and to define each item's "doneness criteria" (when it is acceptable for release). In essence, the customer is responsible for product profitability. By understanding the product's market or business need and advocating for the voice of the (end) customer, the customer embodies the core mantra of agile teams: deliver value.

For the project to succeed, the customer must conduct a mix of strategic and tactical activities. Strategic activities include analyzing the market and business case, defining the product vision and roadmap, developing requirements, adjusting the product backlog, and determining delivery plans. The customer also conducts tactical activities such as specifying the items to be delivered in each iteration, determining when each item is complete, analyzing dependencies between items, and helping the team analyze requirements stories.

To fulfill both strategic and tactical activities on an agile project, the business customer needs product development experience, along with deep domain and product knowledge. Understanding the underlying technology also helps when making "techno business" decisions throughout product development.

With all these responsibilities, in some organizations, the business customer needs help with day-to-day tactical decision making. That's where you, as an agile business analyst, come in. On some agile teams, a BA who has deep domain knowledge (and perhaps has served in a business role) serves as the tactical customer (or, in a Scrum project, the "product owner") or splits those responsibilities with the business customer. By serving as the tactical, iteration-level customer, you free the senior business customer to be the team's strategic customer. You leverage your analysis skills to help your team deliver value, one iteration at a time. You ensure each delivery aligns to the overall strategy and goals.

What will change when you're on an agile team?

Processes, products, and relationships change on an agile team. How you plan the work, deliver the product, represent requirements, share knowledge, interact with your team and customer, manage changing requirements, and document requirements will be quite different from traditional, waterfall-style projects.

In short, you will be part of a team of highly collaborative colleagues with a furious focus on delivering value, negotiating value delivery in short cycles, and helping your business partners understand what they really need-not only up front but also as the product unfolds in small, usable chunks.

Business analysts must relinquish control of the requirements, the customer relationship, and the usual requirements documentation. Why? It's because on your agile team, you deliver working, valuable software every few weeks. And you (and your team and customer) don't know exactly what the end product will be-not until you start to build it, deliver it, and get feedback on it. That's when you learn what the need really is.

Business analysts must relinquish control of the requirements, the customer relationship, and the usual requirements documentation. Why? It's because on your agile team, you deliver working, valuable software every few weeks. And you (and your team and customer) don't know exactly what the end product will be-not until you start to build it, deliver it, and get feedback on it. That's when you learn what the need really is.

That's why I like to quote Gilda Radner's phrase "delicious ambiguity." An agile project is all about suspending control for as long as possible.

Even team roles can be ambiguous. Specifics may vary, but an agile team collaborates to deliver to a committed set of requirements. Each team member is willing, even eager, to do whatever it takes to make that happen, no matter what the official job responsibilities dictate.

It's likely that you will not be the only one to elicit, analyze, and specify requirements. The team is focused on delivering "shippable" software in short cycles (iterations), so your tasks may cross over to other activities that call on your skills, capacity, and interest. For example, you are likely to identify-if not also create and execute-user acceptance tests: hands-on validation. Your soft skills and understanding of requirements dependencies make you a good candidate to facilitate planning workshops to define the product roadmap and release plans.

As an agile business analyst, you're no longer shackled to large, complex requirements documentation and templates. Instead, you will influence your business partners and teams to rethink what kind of (and how much) documentation is needed. You may deliver documentation in small chunks, along with the small, useful chunks of requirements your team delivers in each iteration (often in the form of user stories). You might pitch in to develop lightweight product, user, or support documentation.

Your work is both tactical and strategic: you need to grasp the big view (the product vision, roadmap, and release plans) while maintaining a firm footing in the now (the current iteration). Thus you need the discipline and flexibility to operate in multiple modes (the "now" of the current iteration and the "later" of upcoming iterations).

Your work will be transparent. You will get better at estimating and working with your cross-functional teammates to reliably predict how much software your team can deliver in each iteration. The visibility of iteration planning, end-of-iteration demonstrations, and retrospectives permit no hiding. You will find greater mastery by being openly accountable to your customer, the team, and yourself.

Until next time

In the second part of this article, we'll take a close look at specific business analyst activities that differ in agile projects. We'll frame these tasks in the context of traditional requirements engineering, which involves setting the stage; developing (eliciting, analyzing, specifying and validating) requirements; and managing requirements (Gottesdiener, 2005).

There's never been a more exciting time to be a business analyst. Are you open to the challenge? Can you adapt your skills to your agile team's steady beat of short, value-driven cycles? Can you influence your traditional team to alter your analysis practices? Stay tuned.

Thanks!

The author would like to thank Phil Abernathy, Susan Block, Mary Gorman, Kamal Singh, Norman Stang, and Stephanie Weiss for their helpful review and feedback on a draft of this article.

(This article first appeared in Modern Analyst, May 2009)

Don't forget to leave your comments below.


Ellen Gottesdiener is the Principal Consultant and Founder of EBG Consulting, Inc.  She helps business and technical teams collaborate to define and deliver the product customers value and need. Author of two acclaimed books Requirements by Collaboration and The Software Requirements Memory Jogger, Ellen works with global clients and speaks at industry conferences. As an agile coach, trainer, and contributor to the agile IIBA BABOKTM agile extension, Ellen is passionate about sharing the value of agile practices for analysis, and the discipline of analysis for agile value delivery. Learn more from her articles, tweets and blog, free eNewsletter and find variety of useful practitioner resources on EBG's web site.

Read 13305 times Last modified on Tuesday, 03 April 2012 12:44

Comments  

 
0 # Rodolfo Meda 2011-02-15 03:18
Ellen, it is a crystal clear article about new perspectives on business analysis discipline under agile approach. I totally agree with you on those points related to tactical and strategic vision, required for Agile Business Analyst due to agile project dynamics.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Smitha 2011-02-16 05:20
Nice perspective...i t felt like i was reading the tasks/responsib ilities from a checklist to make sure nothing is getting lost in the whole Agile process.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Ellen Gottesdiener 2011-02-16 12:18
Thanks Rodolfo and Smitha for your feedback. ~ ellen
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # David Wright 2011-02-16 13:27
"It's about the work, not the role" Actually, it's neither, it's the deliverable, " On agile projects, the customer has the responsibility- and the burden-to decide which items the delivery team will build ..." That is true of any well-run project. Desire exceeds time plus resources, so prioritize, prioritize, prioritize... "...the customer must conduct a mix of strategic and tactical activities. Strategic activities include analyzing the market and business case, defining the product vision and roadmap, developing requirements, adjusting the product backlog, and determining delivery plans. The customer also conducts tactical activities such as specifying the items to be delivered in each iteration, determining when each item is complete, analyzing dependencies between items, and helping the team analyze requirements stories". --> What kind of customer are you talking about? The kind that works on s/w projects all the time? Business departments get new s/w less often than people buy new cars. This paragraph pretty much sums up what BAs do for and with their customers, who by the time they would figure out how to do this all, the project is over. Being a customer is not a continuous state, they have actual work to do, profits to make.. "Busine ss analysts must relinquish control of the requirements, the customer relationship, and the usual requirements documentation". I don't control them, I just make sure they are produced and that they are complete, correct, clear, and usable. Talented BAs move to the next project before this one is finished. Yeah, I know, that means you have no skin in the game and all that; forget it, you can move to the next project, but unless you disappear completely, people will contact when they need you. I'm sorry Ellen, I may be out-of-step with Agile, but being so does not repudiate good Requirements Discovery and Management practice. You make it sound like a BA not being "agile" should feel guilty about what they do. This is usually when I start with my first question for Agile" where does the Backlog come from?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Andrew Kidd 2011-02-21 04:12
At the risk of incurring the wrath of the Agile zealots, I'm also fed up with being beaten with the agile 'stick' whenever I try to promote any form of requirements management or project planning. I believe agility is a philosophy in service of achieving an alignment of thinking for everyone concerned with the project. The artefacts of a project are the ash of combustion from the thought processes, the heat of understanding should warm everyone involved, otherwise the point is missed, and we again must rely upon prescriptive methods. As for planning, the practice of 'enoughism' becomes the ongoing 'doneness' test here. Agility does not mean an absence of planning, and if this is doubted at all, I'll gladly eat my words if you can introduce me to a CFO willing to write a blank cheque for your next engineering job. Budgets, value and due diligence at the very least demand that 'enough' planning takes place. This is where backlogs spring from. What is really called for in true agile adoption, is trust. Here I would recommend reading Ellen's great book, "Requirements by Collaboration" and the 3 types of trust Ellen illustrates - Contractual (roles & responsibilitie s), Communication (transparent, open, honest, and frequent), and Competence (respect for each other's skills, recognition of interdependence ). Documentation is never a substitute for trust. Finally , to take Goldratt’s theory of constraints and the application of this to the software production process, requirements become analogous to inventory which, as any plant manager or accountant will advise, should be kept to a minimum. To me at least, the agile movement has realigned the software industry away from construction and towards manufacturing processes and models which, if our clients are getting value and return on their investment, can't be a bad thing.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Michael Hugos 2011-02-28 06:30
Hi Ellen, This is a great article about the role of the BA in an agile environment. Agile is happening. How else are businesses going to cope with the fast pace of events and their unpredictable nature? BAs are needed in agile projects. They bring a whole set of customer facing skills and as you point out, they can act as the day-to-day customer advocate and free up the business executive for more strategic thinking. Which is a better use of everybody's time and better way to deliver value. I also like Andrew Kidd's comment above. He makes a good point that agile actually requires more planning, not less, but that the planning and requirements need to be more closely tied to short deliverables instead of accumulating in a huge requirement document. Agile is indeed adopting the methods of lean manufacturing and excess requirements collected before they are needed are like excess inventory - they will be come obsolete before they get used. Love the Gilda Radner quote too. How true.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Ellen Gottesdiener 2011-03-08 07:08
Thanks for your comments, folks! David, i always enjoy your comments. to me, it's not about the (requirements document) deliverable, but the outcomes (e.g. outcomes, not outputs). so maybe that's what you meant, as i do: partnering to gain a shared understanding of product needs, driven by vision and goals. the deliverable in the final end is the solution set (which usually includes documentation). it's my hope that we in the BA community will not so much focus on document production -- whether you use agile practices or not -- and focus more on solving the right problem or addressing the most important needs, and then delivering to that. yes, i find that 'customers' often need to partner with people with great analysis skills to help them explore and evaluate product needs (after clarifying stakeholder goals). I'm thinking we're more on the same page than not. and importantly: discovery is continuous and a shared activity (not just BA working with the business, or alone, but the entire project community). in my experience on agile projects, analysis and planning interweave. Using short delivery cycles with clear acceptance criteria means those with talent in analysis skills don't 'go away' and wait to be called back to answer questions about a document they wrote months ago. The knowledge and learning from analysis is a shared experience. i appreciate your comments, Andrew and Michael as well. oh, yes, trust is the engine for positive and productive collaboration (on any type of project). all the best, ~ ellen
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Abdoulaye Bah 2011-03-16 05:51
Ellen, as always, excellent article! My slogan when it comes to agile environment is 'Do it Right, The First Time, The Right Time!" As a lead business analyst, I think David made good points as well. Anyhow, you both are saying the same thing!
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Sanjay Dugar 2011-03-23 23:29
Great information. Very often people have a concern on how the BA would adapt to agile environment. V ery well described. Had to repost this ... :)
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Elizabeth Larson 2011-03-29 06:48
Ellen, I enjoy your articles, which I find to be well-written and logically sound. I want to address the idea of the business analyst being the customer/produc t owner. There are some compelling reasons to keep them separate, too numerous to list in a comment. The main reason is that we really need our product owners to be business decision-makers , and we really need the BA to “recommend solutions that enable an organization to achieve its goals” (BABOK Introduction). BAs are management consultants who advise. We need someone with the authority (positional power) to make business decisions and make them quickly. For best results, that person needs to a business person, not someone who “acts as a liaison among stakeholders” (BABOK Introduction). If we do not separate the role of the product owner and BA, we run the risk of ending up as we have on traditional projects with the BA owning the solution/produc t and all the resulting issues.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Ellen Gottesdiener 2011-03-29 13:25
@elizabeth: thanks for your comments. i agree! and yes: it comes down to decision making when we want to talk about the "role" of the PO. the decisions are complex and benefit from a partnership among business and technical people. to 'recommend solutions' - as you site form the BABoK - well, that is actually something the entire team is ideally engaged in. if they have the fortune to have folks with BA skills, they have a leg up on this work. it's about the WORK of analysis, less so the role. some of the agile teams we work with don't have a "BA" role, and the work of analysis is shared across the team and business. other teams have that role, and the title as far a HR remains (for now). skilled and coveted agile BAs have a lovely ability to mix strategic thinking (e.g. enterprise analysis), tactical thinking so product pieces get done in short delivery cycles, a tester mindset to encapsulate verification and validation with elicitation, facilitation skills, and an astute ability to synthesize planning with analysis. thanks again for your comments, and for yours too @sanjay and @Abdoulaye . all the best, ~ ellen
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # Randy O'Neal 2011-03-31 07:00
Thanks for the article, Ellen. It is dead on. I believe one of the issues we face as BA's in the Agile arena - as you pointed out to me the other day - is how more traditional aspects of the business deal with our titles... such as H/R for example. While many of us feel comfortable with the concept of "it's about the work, not the role", one cannot help but be a bit concerned with our perceived roles as traditional business looks into our Agile teams "from the outside". This is perhaps more important as one seeks to move from company to company, but can also come into play within a larger company as you move from one group to another. A possible solution is an abstract H/R title which carries some association with bands and/or levels, while leaving the Agile/Scrum titles to us within the team. So one could be a Sr. Software Engineer from the business perspective, but an ABA or BA or BSA or ABSA (or pick your role) within the team... as adapted/adopted by your immediate organization. Any thoughts on this?
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 
 
0 # David Wright 2011-04-05 15:56
Ah, the "document\". When discovering Requirements, the document is just a container of the artefacts needed to drive a project: Process Definition, Functional Requirements, Non-Functional Requirements, Information Requirements, Business Rules.... those are the "deliverable" of which I speak. And if I work my (something) off to get them by working with SME's, and it is months later when someone uses them, I have a big problem with that project plan. To murder a quote from George Patton, "Requirements are like eggs...the fresher the better." Anyho w, I must sound like I am ranting all the time on this and similar topics. I am not anti-Agile, I am pro-anything that works for you. I just get annoyed by any attitude that denigrates other approaches. OK, I am giving a gentleman, name of Prasad Kamath, a real hard time elsewhere on this site for saying UML can be used for Business Analysis; that is one place I draw the line. But I am actually a strong believer in effective Requirements Discovery, done in one to two weeks, as a precursor to agile development. It does what some people are calling Iteration Zero in Agile, and more. So, there you go, people should give it a try, they might like it.
Reply | Reply with quote | Quote
 

Add comment