Skip to main content

Author: Christina Lovelock

Christina is an experienced BA leader, has built BA teams ranging in size from 5 to 120 Business Analysts and champions entry level BA roles. She is active in the BA professional community, attending and regularly speaking at events. Christina is an examiner for the International Diploma in Business Analysis and is also a director of the UK BA Manager Forum. She has co-authored the 2019 book, Delivering Business Analysis: The BA Service Handbook, which shares insights and findings from research into Business Analysis, practical guidance for BA leaders, and case studies from across the professional community. https://www.linkedin.com/in/christina-lovelock
BATimes_Jan25_2023

Should I Stay Or Should I Go?

New year…new job?  Many professionals are grappling with this decision and it’s hard to bring objective assessment into such an emotional decision. So how do we know if it’s time to go?

 

Reasons To Go

People rarely leave their job for salary increase alone. Forbes reported in 2022 that company culture, low salary, poor management, lack of  work-life boundaries and remote working were the top reasons people gave for leaving. In reality it is a complex blend of these reasons and others.

Once the idea of a new job has taken root, its hard to displace. By understanding what is making us want to explore if the grass is greener elsewhere it is easier to make an informed decision.

 

Reasons To Stay

It would be easy to assume that the reasons people stay within organizations and roles are simply the opposite of why people leave (I want to stay vs. I want to leave). But there is a further dimension which is partially or sometimes completely outside the employees control (I have to stay). External factors such as market conditions, skills and perceived “employability” can make someone stay in a role. So reasons to stay can be both personal, (“I like the culture and people”) and environmental (“I won’t find another role at this level/salary etc.”).

We all have responsibilities that cannot be ignored and not everyone gets to do their dream job, but it is always worth exploring the role that fear and self-doubt are playing in our decision making.

 

The Wheel of Work

A spider chart is a great way to visualize the key factors at play in a decision and how we feel about each aspect. One commonly used by coaches with their clients is the Wheel of Life. Here, we will narrow in on one area and consider all the factors which contribute to the decision to move jobs or stay put.

 

Step 1: Select up to 10 key factors related to work – the things which are making you think about moving, and the things which make you want to stay. These will be different and personal to each of us and will also change at different periods of our life. Try to select the ones which are most relevant to you right now.

Factors which commonly impact decision making in this area include:

  • Autonomy
  • Bonus/ Pension etc.
  • Community
  • Culture and values
  • Flexibility of location/ability to work from home
  • Length/cost of commute
  • Level of responsibility
  • Level of stress
  • Life Balance
  • Meaning/impact of the work
  • Recognition
  • Relationship with manager
  • Progression opportunities
  • Salary
  • Security/stability
  • Support for professional development
  • Variety
  • Working relationships

 

(Listed alphabetically, so as not to imply importance as this is different for each of us).

These are fairly tangible considerations. There will also be emotions which are more difficult to quantify, such as levels of anxiety, fear, boredom, respect, appreciation etc. that could also be candidates for inclusion in the analysis.

 

BATimes_Jan25_2023

 

Step 2: Enter the selected aspects around the wheel. Evaluate your current job against each of these. Ask questions around each aspect to prompt deeper thinking.

For example if considering “working relationships” – questions might include:

  • Who are my closest colleagues?
  • How often do I get to work with them?
  • Have people I care about left?
  • Have we stayed in touch?
  • Is this the best team I have worked in?
  • What made other teams better/worse?

 

Plot the figures 1-5, 5 being ‘could not imagine better’ and 1 being ‘could not be worse’.

 

Advertisement

 

Step 3: Consider what this diagram is telling you. Is it surprising or confirming? Is it low in every aspect? Are there related highs or related lows? What’s the common thread? Is it just one aspect of the job you don’t like that is making everything feel worse?

 

Step 4: This creates a baseline. This can either be used to identify actions for improving your current situation, or as a basis for comparison for other opportunities. Once you have clarity on which aspects you are happy with and where things could improve – it is much easier to have a positive and constructive conversation with your boss. It demonstrates self-reflection and commitment to making your most effective contribution to the organization. Changing projects can sometimes feel the same as moving organizations – with new colleagues and fresh challenges.

There will be lots of ways to address the low-scoring areas identified.

 

Once you know what is important for you in a role, it can help your job search. It can also inform the questions you ask the recruiter/hiring manager. If you are in an organization with a strong and supportive community of practice for business analysts, it may be something which is important for potential new roles. Do they have one? If not are they open to establishing one?

Without paying attention to what is important, it is hard to translate a general feeling of dissatisfaction or unhappiness into tangible actions – either a targeted effort to change aspects of your current role, or a clear understanding of what a new role would need to offer.

 

Staying or Stagnating?

Using the wheel of work can help us to understand what is truly important at this point in time. Staying does not have to mean stagnating. Making an active choice to stay in your current role is as important as deciding to make a change. Committing to your role and organisation, committing to your personal development and committing to do this job to the best of your ability are all incredibly positive and this is a valid career strategy. This strategy may well pay long term dividends.

 

Conclusion

It’s a big decision to make, as our jobs are inextricably linked with our health, wealth and happiness. The decision has a lot of factors, which are incredibly subjective and there is no simple right answer or formula that can be applied.

Ultimately, we all know when it’s time to move on.

 

Further reading
Job Crafting for BAs C Lovelock, Jul 2021
Are you Losing BAs? C Lovelock, February 2022

 

BATimes_Jan11_2023

Bad Bosses for BA’s

Our relationship with our manager has a massive impact on our work, health and happiness. What makes a good leader for BAs and what can we learn from bad bosses?

 

Project Managers

PMs are often attracted to their role because they are skilled at delivery. It is very difficult to balance the competing demands of meeting delivery milestones with nurturing and developing individual team members. Having the combined roles of line-manager and delivery-manager puts project managers in an unenviable position, and if the performance evaluation of the PM is primarily concerned with project delivery, it is clear which role will take precedence.

Some of the worst examples of PMs managing BAs include:

  • Treating the BA as deputy PM
  • Assuming the BA wants to become a PM
  • ‘Hoarding’ the BA on their project, despite requests to expand horizons and develop
  • Vetoing analysis tools and techniques the BA wants to apply
  • Preventing the BA from speaking/presenting to senior stakeholders, reducing the visibility of the BA and unintentionally (or intentionally) taking credit.

 

If the person doing these things is also your line manager – how can you address the behaviours or find appropriate support?

 

Learning points

Where a BA is line managed by their PM, there needs to be recognition that there are two different relationships at play. The ‘best’ outcome for the project (BA assigned 100% of the time, forever) is unlikely to be the best outcome for the individual BA. PMs will sometimes have to put the needs of the individual above the project, or risk losing them from the organization entirely.

BAs may want to partition meetings or request separate ‘line management catch-ups’ which have more emphasis on personal development and wellbeing and less on project delivery.

The PM/BA relationship works best when they are a professional partnership. The roles have different skills and approaches, but are working towards the same delivery goals. This can be severely compromised if the PM is the only ‘boss’ for the BA.

 

Product Specialists

Product managers and product owners sometimes find themselves managing BAs. They may also want to ‘hold on to’ their BA indefinitely. They often value product knowledge over the BA skillset and expect BAs to become subject matter experts. If the only training and development opportunities they can imagine for the BA is ‘more product knowledge’, then BAs are not getting the support and encouragement they need from their boss. They may not understand the breadth of the BA role and skill set, and subsequently only allow the BA to operate in a very narrow role with a constrained set of tools, techniques and relationships.

 

Learning points

Refer to job descriptions to keep both BA and boss focused on the wide remit of the role, not narrow product knowledge. The BA should build strong relationships with business stakeholders and relevant teams, so they have easy access to business knowledge, but don’t become the keeper of this knowledge. Encouraging regular discussion of succession planning and rotation and re-assignment normalises the idea that a BA will not stay with a particular product for the long term, and what we are providing is a business analysis skills-based service, not a product knowledge-based service.

 

The Absent Executive

Whilst it may be appealing on paper for a BA to report directly into a CIO or other senior executive, it comes at a price. It can be very difficult to get their time, leading to an inattentive and shallow line management relationship. The BA is often faced with the choice of a distant relationship, with irregular catch-ups and never knowing if something more important may overwrite one-to-one time OR attempting to become the right-hand-man of the exec, picking up a range of problems and projects, but is subject to rapidly changing priorities. Neither of these are particularly appealing situations and neither provides considerate and consistent line management support for the BA.

 

Advertisement

 

Learning Points

Reporting into a senior executive requires a high level of autonomy and independence. Some BAs enjoy working in this way so this can work well. However, everyone deserves to have a positive and supportive relationship with their boss and not see themselves as the lowest priority item on a very long to-do list. Investing in other meaningful relationships with more accessible colleagues may help to address the gap if a management void occurs. This could include a mentor, coach or trusted and supportive peer. Developing the community of business analysts helps to provide support and direction if there is an absence of management.

 

General Manager

There has been a rise in the belief that ‘a good manager can manage anything’. The problem is, this is not actually true and multiple studies spanning many sectors find that:

  • A manager who has skills and experience of a function leads to a higher performing function
  • People whose boss has skills in their discipline are happier and are better at their jobs!

 

A manager who does not understand or value business analysis is the worst possible boss for a BA.

 

Learning Points

BAs can help managers to understand the role and remit of business analysts and can champion the application of repeatable, rigorous analysis to aid decision making, understand customers, avoid risks, identify opportunities and improve services. It is always worth investing the effort to raise the profile and highlight the impact of good business analysis.

 

Organizations with sufficient numbers of BAs (5+) should be investing in a BA leadership role such as:

  • Head of Business Analysis
  • BA Manager
  • BA Team leader
  • BA Chapter lead
  • Head of profession for business analysis

 

Having individual BAs reporting to a range of roles and scattered throughout the organization does not allow the consistent application of business analysis, the opportunity to continuously improve or appropriate development and support of BAs.

Successful BA leaders are skilled and experienced in business analysis. They understand how to recruit and develop BAs and enable appropriate utilization and retention of BAs, saving the organization time, effort and money.

 

Conclusion

While there will be many examples of successful line management relationships from all of these roles, it is important to recognise the potential pitfalls and how they can be addressed. Not everyone is cut out to be a manager of people. Having a boss who cares about us as an individual, is interested in providing support and offering development and values the contribution we make should be the minimum we expect from our line managers.

Having a bad boss is bad for your health and career, so if you can’t change you manager, change your manager.

 

Further reading
Are you Losing BAs? C Lovelock, February 2022
BATimes_Nov16_2022

Recruitment Metrics for BA Teams

Being involved in BA recruitment is a big responsibility. It’s hard to recruit right now, and it’s easy to blame the competitive market and skills shortage. It’s tempting to leave measurement and metrics to HR teams, but there are a number of key concepts all those involved in BA recruitment need to understand.

 

Time To Fill

From the point we become aware that a new or replacement BA role is needed, a clock starts ticking. Whether someone has handed in their notice, or a new project has emerged, we now have a gap that needs to be filled. It is so important to understand our average time to fill (TTF) for each role on the BA career path, as this aids decision making, including the use of short term resources such as consultants, contractors and secondments.

Typically more senior roles take longer to fill, because the talent pool is smaller and the demand greater. Having internal talent pipelines reduces the TTF and creates internal progression routes and clear BA career pathways. Ensuring these are in place improves knowledge retention, employee loyalty and morale and serves as an attraction factor for BAs outside the organization.

TTF includes internal processes of gaining agreement and approvals, getting a role posted and engaging with recruiters. This is often a hidden time over-head, and usually an area where organizations can speed up their recruitment.

 

Time To Hire

This marks the time between making a role available for applications and having someone in post. It includes the interview process and the notice period of the candidate.

Recruiting managers often put pressure on candidates to try to reduce their notice period. This is unfair, when it is the only period of time in the whole process which is outside of the recruiting organizations’ control. If we want people in faster, we should look to improve our own processes! Sometimes organizations exclude notice periods from their time to hire metric, to stay focused on the elements within their control.

Knowing the average time to hire helps us keep stakeholders informed, and contributes to better planning and onboarding.

 

Advertisement

 

Conversion

At each stage of our recruitment process people drop out or are ruled out. This can be visualized as a recruitment funnel. Understanding the conversion rates between different steps in the process allow us to answer question such as:

  • How many applications do we typically need to find one appointable BA? [conversion rate from application to accepted offer].
  • How many candidates accept our offer? [conversion rate from interview to accepted offer].
  • What can we do to improve our conversion rates? (Faster processes? Better marketing of roles? Better communication with applicants?…)

 

If we understand where in the process we are losing people, and really consider the candidate experience, we increase the chances of a successful recruitment outcome, and save both time and money. Different organizations have different levels of formality, and may include more or less interview rounds and steps in the process. However formal or informal, it is valuable to understand the key conversion rates.

 

Attrition/Turnover

This is the rate which we lose BAs from the team over a given period. Not all attrition is bad, we need to support people to move to new and appropriate roles, and we need to allow BAs with new ideas and different experiences to join the team. Generally an attrition rate of less than 10% is considered healthy for team stability and business continuity.

Retention is the opposite measurement to attrition. This is the percentage of the team that stay during a given period. Focusing on ‘increasing retention’ is a more positive framing of the issues than ‘reducing attrition’. Recruitment is expensive, the cost of replacing BAs is far more than the cost of investing in appropriate initiatives which retain talented BAs in the organization. By asking and listening to what individual team members want from their role and employer we can increase retention rates (money will be a key factor, but not the only one!).

 

Tenure

This means understanding how long people stay with us and can be considered  at different levels:

  • Average length of time in each role/grade within the BA structure
  • How long people stay within the BA team
  • Total amount of time spent within the organization.

 

This is helpful to understand the rates of progression within the team. If we have entry level/development roles within the team, how long before people typically progress to a practitioner role? It allows trends and patterns to be explored. If we find people either stay less than 1 year or more than 10 years, what insights can be gained? What does that tell us about our recruitment and retention processes?

With further analysis we can understand the push and pull factors which keep BAs within the team or encourage them to look elsewhere. It also allows us to consider what internal development routes we offer into related professional disciplines.

 

Conclusion

In this competitive market, with increased demand for business analysis skills and the ‘great resignation’ making people consider their options, BA teams need to fully understand our own processes and look for improvements. A greater focus is needed on recruitment and retention, and we can no longer rely on ‘recruiting as we always’ have to make great appointments and grow our teams.

 

Further reading
Are you Losing BAs? C Lovelock, February 2022
Job Crafting for BAs C Lovelock, July 2021
BATimes_May19_2022

Don’t. Step. Back.

‘We need to take a step back’ is a common phrase amongst BAs, and while the intention is understandable, this entreaty simply isn’t helping.

You know the feeling.

  • The project is already running away with itself.
  • Stakeholders have identified a solution before articulating the problem.
  • This great new idea does not align to strategy or objectives.
  • The CEO wants to implement a system they’ve seen work elsewhere without understanding our context and challenges.

 

You know we need to calm down, think logically, act rationally. In every meeting, you want to say things like:

  • We need to slow down
  • What about the bigger picture?
  • Let’s go back a step.

But no one wants to hear that.

The start of initiatives are about energy, motivation and enthusiasm. BAs can be seen as blockers. What we think is pragmatism can be interpreted as negativity.

 

Restraining Language

When BAs are constantly using language which is perceived as holding back progress, stakeholders begin to avoid us, work around us, and don’t include us in discussions where we could offer a valuable perspective. BAs then become increasingly worried and frustrated, and our warnings become more dire and more persistent.

It can look like our input is focused on restraining the initiative and identifying additional work.

Is it possible deliver the same information in a more impactful way?

Advertisement


Examine Our Role

BAs often feel we are the conscience of a project, and our job is to protect stakeholders and the organization from poor decisions. Is that a reasonable expectation to set for ourselves?

Trying to reign-in a project which has senior backing, forward momentum and is moving at pace is perhaps not the best way to expend our energy. It’s OK to be on board with an idea and to be enthusiastic. We don’t have to ensure every ‘lesson is learned’. It’s more important that the project benefits from an engaged BA that is consulted at the appropriate time and is seen as someone who is contributing to moving the initiative forward.

 

Enabling Language

Swapping our restraining language for forward-focused language may not be as difficult as we think.

Instead of “We need to take a step back” we can say “We need to be clear on the best next step”.

Instead of using “Yes, but….” to list off all the problems, we can use “Yes, and…” to keep our contribution constructive.

We can use language that says I’m onboard with this project, I want to see it progress and my contribution helps move us forward.

BAs can sometimes see positivity as naivety. It is possible to be positive and well informed. We can use our experience to help projects avoid potential pitfalls, without insisting on a backwards step.

 

Conclusion

BA don’t need to single-handedly restrain projects. In fact the best way to influence projects and products in the right direction is to demonstrate that we are invested and enthusiastic about the outcome.

Language matters. Swapping restraining language for enabling language shows our stakeholders we care, we understand and want a positive outcome. There may still be difficult messages to deliver, but  we can frame these as future-facing hurdles to overcome rather than backwards-facing steps to make.

Goldilocks And The Three BAs

Once upon a time, there were three BAs, they all wanted their analysis to be “just right”, but what does that actually mean?

Balancing Act

‘Just-enough’ and’ just-in-time’ sound like straightforward concepts, but how much is enough? This very much depends on the context and the needs and preferences of your Goldilocks. We always want our business analysis outputs to be accurate, but we also need them to be proportionate and appropriate to the situation.

So ‘enough’ business analysis means: establishing clear expectations and exclusions, sufficient breadth and depth of investigation, engagement with representative stakeholders, utilization of suitable analysis techniques, and a focus on creating analysis outputs and assets that meet a specific purpose.

We can look at the characteristics of ‘over-analysis’ and ‘under-analysis’ to help test the balance, and ensure our analysis efforts and outputs are just right.

 

The First BA: Over-Analysis

This BA finds it difficult to know when their analysis is ‘finished’.

We can always speak to one more stakeholder or hold one more workshop! It is easier to frame analysis outputs as ‘sufficient to meet the purpose’ (which may be to inform further activities, share knowledge, facilitate agreement, enable decisions, etc.) rather than ‘finished’. We must also remind ourselves that new information will always emerge, this does not mean our analysis was wrong but reflected what was understood at that point in time. The purpose of the analysis is to increase knowledge and test assumptions. Some assumptions will be proven wrong, and new perspectives will emerge.

The characteristics of over-analysis:

  • Feeling overwhelmed and experiencing Analysis Paralysis
  • Too much detail, no summary or high-level routes into the detailed analysis
  • Endless meetings/discussions/workshops with no progress
  • Number of requirements out of control
  • Too much focus on edge cases
  • No prioritization of analysis effort
  • Repository of unread documents
  • Total reliance on BA to navigate the analysis, opaque to others
  • Regularly finding duplication of requirements or analysis assets
  • Audience for analysis outputs unclear
  • Being ‘90% done’ for weeks or months.

 

The Second BA: Under-Analysis

This BA does not challenge assumptions or apply analytical thinking.

Stakeholders may have low expectations of this BA, treating them like an order-taker or scribe. When we accept a very narrow role or are told we cannot deploy the full range of analytical techniques required for the situation, the quality and veracity of the resulting analysis will be compromised.

The characteristics of under-analysis:

  • Always engaging the same small group of stakeholders
  • No stakeholder analysis
  • Solution pre-defined
  • No clear problem definition
  • Applying a very limited range of analysis techniques
  • Only creating user stories
  • No consideration of edge cases
  • No templates or reuse, always starting from scratch
  • No peer-review by other BAs
  • Process-view only, no consideration of data
  • Technology view only, no consideration of business
  • Opinion over evidence, deference to HiPPOs (Highest Paid Person’s Opinions)
  • No challenge of ideas/assumptions/processes
  • Undocumented assumptions
  • Writing things down with no critical thinking or analysis.

 

The Third BA: Just Right

This BA understands the audience and purpose of the analysis and is confident in the business analysis skills and techniques which will achieve the required outcome.

A key aspect of creating analysis outputs that are accurate, appropriate, and proportionate is agreeing on who will use the analysis and for what purpose. It then entails considering possible routes to achieving that purpose, how the analysis will be carried out, and getting further agreement on that approach.

A ‘definition of done’ for the analysis deliverables is very valuable, and creates a shared understanding and agreed set of expectations from all stakeholders.

Questions for getting analysis just-right:

  • WHY am I doing this? What is the purpose of the analysis?
  • WHO am I engaging with? Who is missing? Are the stakeholders representative and proportionate? Are they appropriate for this stage? Who will use what I produce?
  • WHAT am I creating? What format, what length, what systems will I use?
  • HOW will I approach the analysis? What business analysis techniques will I apply? How will I select techniques that are appropriate to the audience, timescale, and other constraints? How will I ensure I am producing analysis and not simply documentation? How will I achieve validation and approval of the analysis deliverables?
  • WHEN is the analysis needed? What can be achieved in that timeframe, what cannot be achieved? What constraints does that place on the engagement and investigation? What dependencies exist?
  • WHERE will the analysis be shared and stored? How can I ensure transparency and increase engagement?

 

Conclusion

The first BA is drowning in the detail and doesn’t know where to stop. The second BA is doing what they are told, and not bringing analytical tools and thinking to the situation. The third BA is asking a lot of questions, and quite possibly annoying people who think they should ‘just get on with it’, but certainly has the most chance of producing analysis outputs that are useful and valued.

The recipe for getting business analysis just right is to be aware of the characteristics of over and under analysis, to apply a suitable range of analysis techniques which explore multiple perspectives and to understand the expectations of Goldilocks.