Marcos Ferrer, CBAP has over 20 years experience in the practice of business analysis and the application of Information Technology for process improvement. Following graduation in 1983 from the University of Chicago, Mr. Ferrer joined IBM in Chicago, where he worked on requirements and systems implementations in diverse industries. His recent projects include working requirements for the Veteran's Administration, introducing BA practices at the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, and creating bowling industry models for NRG Bowl LLC. In November 2006, Marcos Ferrer is one of the first CBAPs certified by the IIBA. He has served as an elected member of the DC-Metro chapter of the IIBA, most recently as President, and assisted in the writing of the BOK 2.0 test. 
The first great challenge I listed last month was:
- Will the society at large empower BAs to operate at the level of professionalism required of (say) accountants (transparency, completeness, accuracy)?
Why might we want this? Would it really make things better for project outcomes? Would it help our professional success? Watch me contradict myself!
Let's brainstorm a little. Don't accountants "ruin projects" in their own way? Sure they do. How about:
-
Enron's creative accounting, with the knowledge of the CFO (Fastow)
-
The failure of Baring's investment bank, due to a one month long, 29 billion dollar speculative binge by a single young trader (responsible accountant's name unknown).
-
Which accountants were overseeing the enormous investments being made in sub-prime mortgages?
What these all have in common is that certain members of each firm, who happened NOT to be accountants (except for Fastow, who clearly was in a position to know better), used their power to bypass accounting standards, intimidate and manipulate the accountants (aren't you on our team?), and to invent new, unsustainable pyramid schemes, commonly known as no-brainer market opportunities (this stuff is only illegal for small operators like you or me).
This is similar to what happens in some projects: A PM, or executive sponsor uses their power to bypass the business investigation, analysis and due diligence performed by some BA. The outcomes vary from unnecessary extra costs to complete project failure, sometimes even in the billions of dollars.
The difference is that the responsible accountants in the financial projects tend to go to jail.
Hmmm, maybe we don't want this - can you imagine yielding to some PM's pressure to stretch the rules, and ending up in jail when things go wrong? You think maybe we wouldn't like this?
THEN WHY DO WE DO IT TO ACCOUNTANTS? What is different?
The answer to this question tells us how to change challenge #1.
Mere certification cannot resolve these issues, AND it is a good start. If you believe, like I do, that BA must rise in our society, please contact me with your ideas - we must lead, or continue to follow, and I for one am tired of being an armchair quarterback.
Thanks for being my reader, if this inspired you at all, please make a comment, so BA Times can know that we care.
Have fun!
written by Naomi L Barrett, July 15, 2008
-
- +1
-
-
written by Steven A Jones, August 18, 2008
Projects should not be undertaken without some measure of due-diligence about the cost, possible solutions... and not every solution is going to be technology driven - sometimes the most effective solution is not brought about by technology but by analyzing the existing processes.
Why do we continually operate in reverse - project is given to us with the budget and delivery date already defined before the real problem is even identified. Yes, this is a great reason projects fail because someone didn't bother to figure out what the real problem was that needed to have a software solution for.
It isn't the certification that’s important, its the project process.
-
- +0
-
-
