Skip to main content

Group Dynamics and Requirements Elicitation

Written by Richard Lannon on . Posted in Articles.

As an information technology professional, developing your business acumen is important. One of the skills you need is the ability to facilitate. In your case, it is all about “facilitation for elicitation of requirements” to solve business problems. In working with groups, there are a number of dynamics that the facilitator needs to be aware of. It is helpful if you consider the different group characters and how to deal with them.

The Isolator
This is that one person who remains outside the group or is thinking about previous topics. Consider spending time helping people get acquainted or have discussions using pairing and triads. Provide opportunities for debriefing or summarizing what was discussed. Get the participants involved.

The Monopolizer
We all know this person. They monopolize the time and focus of the group. Be clear on your expectations, use your body language to hurry the speaker or, when they take a breath, say “thank you” and ask for other comments. You can also use a parking lot to write their points down. It is best not to interrupt. However, it is OK to watch for the talkers to draw a breath, and then attempt to regain control by leaping into the instant of silence this creates. Move fast, but speak softly and gently.

The Facilitator as Expert
As the facilitator, you should never set yourself up as the expert. You are there to understand the requirements and help establish direction. Consider avoiding answering every question yourself by letting group members respond to each other. Do not feel obliged to comment on everything that everyone says. Reduce your own authority by sitting down with the group.

Group Sharply Divided
This is where the groups are together physically but not together in interests or point of view. Mix the group up and get people to move around the room. Put them in new requirement work teams and assign the groups a specific relevant task to complete.  Have team members present and then debrief. If a solution cannot be reached, get agreement to park it! Make sure you ask the group if they feel comfortable moving on even though the issue dividing them is not settled. Be prepared with several group exercises, tools and techniques. Most important; keep cool, detached, and unhurried. Use a light touch.

Antagonistic Duo
These are the two people exchanging negative vibes and making everyone uncomfortable. Confirm that the conflict is positive and ask them to continue their disagreement. Set the stage by moving them closer together, arrange other group members as observers, and establish a scribe. Most importantly make explicit ground rules for conflict. Ask group members for feedback. Get everyone involved by taking the issue away from the duo by saying, “You have highlighted an important issue for us.” Here is an exercise for the entire group to participate in that continues exploring these issues, but in a different way.

The Cozy Duo
Here two friends are choosing to give each other comfort. They are making side conversations. This is not alright. The best solution is change the teams and rearrange the seating locations at a break to split the cozy duo up. Position the change as an opportunity to get a different perspective.

Unresolved Members
People are not engaged. It happens. Sometimes people do not understand why they are participating; they never wanted to participate; they just do not care or maybe they are bored. Break time! Check the thermostat and drop the heat in the room. Maybe change things around. Consider a group exercise, a short controversial video on the topic, Have the group brainstorm on a new agenda and create consensus. Be brave and leave the room while they do it. The break may help you to refocus and help them to become more active.

Highly Defensive Group
In this case the group members have erected barriers to protect their personal or professional images. This is about self-preservation. You need to get people talking and sharing in a low threat way. Move slowly with no pressure. Focus on facts and intellectual work for a time, gradually introducing small amounts of selective attitude. Avoid role-playing. Be open to revealing more about yourself.  Sometimes this sets the stage for other people to reveal information.

The Big Group
If the group has many members and no sense of inter-relatedness, be prepared to use pairs, triads and work groups. Rearrange the group into round tables so they can see one-another. Get people discussing specific related topic. Make sure you walk around the room making contact with people. Establish “associate facilitators” to manage the different groups. The larger the group the more ground rules, definition of roles and leadership required. Avoid feeling and attitude work with large groups. Keep people on track.

The most important thing as a senior professional, business analyst, manager or leader in developing your facilitation skills is to have fun and enjoy the process. Find ways to enhance being a facilitator and applying requirements elicitation best practices. Develop your group dynamic skills along with the tools and techniques of requirements elicitation. Remember to leverage the group’s unique character and get the members engaged.

Richard Lannon is an international business and technology industry veteran turned corporate speaker, facilitator, trainer and advisor. He specializes in aligning the enterprise and technical skills to common business objectives. Richard helps organizations and professionals identify what’s important, establish direction and build skills that positively impact their bottom line. He provides the blueprint for your organization to be SET (Structured, Engaged and Trained). His clients call him the SETability Expert. He can be reached at [email protected] or 403-630-2808

A First Pass at Defining the BA/PM Position Family

Written by Cynthia Low on . Posted in Articles.

In the previous article I set forth and compared the skills profile of the Business Analyst and the Project Manager. That was a very high level comparison. In order to get down to the practice level proficiency, it is necessary to define the BA/PM Position Family. That is the intent of this article. Recognize that this is my opinion and has not been discussed with any of my business analyst or project manager colleagues.

The responses to the first three articles have been overwhelming. They have been both positive and negative. Being a change management advocate, I am pleased with your reactions. My hope is that we can continue the exchange. As always I welcome opposing positions and the opportunity to engage in public discussions. Your substantive comments are valuable. Criticism is fine and is expected but, in the spirit of agile project management, so are suggestions for improvement.

I realize that I have taken a controversial position and I do so intentionally. At least I have your attention whether you agree with my position or not.

Professional Development of the BA/PM
In the previous article I offered a first pass at defining the BA/PM position family. I see that family as consisting of the following six positions:

  • BA/PM Team Member
  • BA/PM Task Manager
  • BA/PM Associate Manager
  • BA/PM Senior Manager
  • BA/PM Program Manager
  • BA/PM Director

Let me offer the next level of detail for each of these positions. Years ago I had the opportunity to consult with the British Computer Society on the development and implementation of their Professional Development Program. A few years later I had the occasion to develop an internet-based decision support system for IT career development for one of my clients. That system was called CareerAgent. In this article I have integrated that model into the earlier work for the British Computer Society. Much of what I define below takes advantage of the deliverables from both of those engagements. The result is the graphic shown below.

Firstpass1_450x337.png
Figure 1: The Project Manager and Business Analyst Landscape


Figure 1 is interpreted as follows. The extreme left and right vertical sectors identify those professionals who are either pure project managers (PM) or pure business analysts (BA) with the accompanying skills and competencies needed for their positions. All of the sectors in between are professionals having some combination of project management and business analyst skills and competencies. For example, as you move from the PM to the PM/ba sector you identify professionals who have pure project manager skills and competencies plus some business analyst skills and competencies. Most project managers would have some business analyst skills and competencies. Project management remains the primary focus of their position. The same interpretation holds for the BA/pm sector. The primary focus of their position is business analysis and many business analysts have some project management skills and competencies. In the middle sectors are the PM/BA and BA/PM professionals. These are the professionals that I have been referring to in all the preceding articles. They are fully qualified to manage projects and manage business analysis engagements. Their skill and competency profiles are equivalent. Their primary orientation is either as a project manager (PM/BA) or as a business analyst (BA/PM). I believe that the major career opportunities are for the PM/BA or BA/PM professionals.

The rows of this landscape refer to the six levels in the position family. At the staff level there are two positions. At the entry level are the Team Members. These professionals will have an entry level skill and competency profile that qualifies them to be a team member in a project (PM) or business analysis (BA) effort. As they gain experience they will move up to the Task Manager level where they will be qualified to supervise the work of a task, perhaps with the support of other team members. At the professional level there are two positions. The lower of the two is the Associate Manager. These positions are qualified to manage small, simple projects. Through experience they progress to the Senior Manager level. They are now qualified to manage even the most complex projects. The Director level positions are of two types. One is the Program Manager. This position is both a consultant-type position as well as a manager of project managers working on a program – a collection of projects having some relationship with one another. The other position is the Director position. These are people management positions. They are the highest level of the six position family. 

Using the Landscape for Professional Development
Each cell in the landscape will have a minimum skill and competency profile defined for all positions in that cell. In order for an individual to be in this cell, they must possess the minimum skill and competency profile for the cell that they occupy, or would like to occupy. For professional development planning, the individual will be in some particular cell and have career aspirations to move to another position in the same cell, or to a position in another cell (usually this will be an adjoining cell). The skill and competency profile of the current and desired positions or cells can be compared and the differences will identify the skill and competency gaps. The training and experience needed to remove that gap and be qualified to move to a position in the desired cell can be defined. The implications to the training department planning are obvious, as are the applications to human resource management.

What Might a Professional Development Program Look Like?
This is a big topic. By way of introduction I think that a good professional development program should consist of the four parts briefly defined below

  • Experience Acquisition
    Further experience mastering the skills and competencies needed in the current position
  • On the job training
    Training to increase the proficiency of skills and competencies needed in the current position
  • Off the job training
    Training to increase the proficiency of skills and competencies needed in the desired position
  • Professional activities
    A combination of reading, professional society involvement, conference attendance and networking with other professionals

Every position in every cell will have a minimum skill and competency profile required for the position. To qualify for a specific position the individual must first define the skill and competency gap between their current and desired position and then build a professional development program using the above four components to remove that gap. That would position the individual to move to the desired position when a vacancy arises. Each individual should have a mentor assigned to them to help with plan development and other career advice.

Putting It All Together
Obviously this is a work in progress. It has been done for the IT profession but not for the BA/PM professional (or PM/BA if you prefer). Much remains to be done. I would certainly like to hear your thoughts on the BA/PM professional or PM/BA professional, if you prefer. I’m sure we could have a lively discussion. I promise to respond personally to every email and to incorporate your thoughts in succeeding articles. You may reach me directly at [email protected].

 

Robert K. Wysocki, Ph.D., has over 40 years experience as a project management consultant and trainer, information systems manager, systems and management consultant, author, training developer and provider. He has written fourteen books on project management and information systems management. One of his books, Effective Project Management: Traditional, Adaptive, Extreme,3rd Edition, has been a best seller and is recommended by the Project Management Institute for the library of every project manager. He has over 30 publications in professional and trade journals and has made more than 100 presentations at professional and trade conferences and meetings. He has developed more than 20 project management courses and trained over 10,000 project managers.

The Business Case: Is It the Next Agile?

Written by Terry Longo on . Posted in Articles.

In earlier blog entries I discussed the notion that not requirements but the business case should be the center of the BA’s existence, and that the business case must somehow account for the costs and risks of the components comprising the intended solution.

The notion of agility is one of the primary tenets for dealing with change. But how can there be so much discussion about Agile Development, Agile PM, and Agile BA without also discussing “Agile Business Case Management”? After all, software development, PM and requirements activities are driven by and exist within the context of the business case. Before continuing, I want to acknowledge absolutely that, from a level-of-effort point of view, the specific activities around requirements management are the most demanding aspect of BA. But as requirements exist within a context of constant change from within (project dynamics) and from the outside (business dynamics), when focusing on the requirements themselves, how do we know when the business case needs to be revised and reconsidered due to those changes?

Anecdotally, in bringing up this question with my audiences at the Seattle and Denver BA Symposiums, there was general acknowledgement that requirements management is currently the main focus of Bas, and that the business case frequently falls by the wayside, once solution development commences.

Is this the case for you? What are your best practices regarding business case management to ensure that it continues to be revisited in light of development, operational, and/or business changes? When your business cases are created, do you specify boundaries (cost, risk benefit, etc.) beyond which their relative value is lost?

Five Critical Issues that will Define the BA Profession in the Next 10 Years

Written by Marcos Ferrer on . Posted in Articles.

Well, loyal readers, John Dean didn’t set me off with his recent column (insufficiently fascist, entirely too rational), AND I want to think about what he said before deciding to respond.  This means we can take our discussion about BA and Identity Systems back to the highest level, before we diving for the next drill down (I know, I promised a drill down, AND this is more fun). 

In this case, the highest level issue that comes to mind regarding Identity Systems has to do with “executive sponsorship” for a national consensus on the requirements for such systems.

The ONLY source of executive sponsorship powerful enough for BAs to succeed in Identitying System Requirements are the people themselves, and yet the people (as a whole) rarely rally to a transparent process for the common good, which is exactly what we are proposing.  When the people do rally, the effect is immense.

Let’s face it – half the time, a BA can’t even get quality requirements on projects where the stakes are much smaller than for a National Identity System.  Commonly accepted “project failure” symptoms, such as Failure of user acceptance, Failure to deliver mission critical function, Missed deadlines, Over budget, Poor requirements documentation, Scope creep, etc. sound like Project Management problems to outsiders and executives. 

Most BAs know that these failures are really due to organizational resistance (including stakeholders and IT people) to the BA process.  As the famous joke goes:

Q:  How hard is it to deliver on time and under budget?

A:  It’s easy, how much must I spend by when?

Time and money are very important, but not if the what you are building gets lost in opaque, non-transparent petty politics.  The root problems tend to be deeply human ones, revolving around self respect, conflict avoidance, territoriality, work avoidance, organizational tribalism (silos and secrecy), fear of change, lack of trust and much more. 

To these deeply human issues, let us not forget simple corruption, which is less emotional and more premeditated, and cringes in the light that BA practice can bring.

This suggests the Five Great Challenges to our profession.  These are the issues that will define our profession, and will decide if BA can make a difference.  We believe that we can increase project success and reduce the overwhelming waste and failure rate that is currently an accepted part of the world of projects.  Will everyone else?

Will the society at large empower BAs to operate at the level of professionalism required of (say) accountants (transparency, completeness, accuracy)?

  1. Given the importance of the what in a project, will PMI agree that BA must precede projects, and BAs must be at least peers with PMPs, instead of answering to their time and budget needs first?
  2. Will the earliest CBAPs actually be a credit to the profession?  Will they generate successes, and word of mouth, to help boost the profession, or will they have the same outcomes as everyone else?
  3.  Can the society at large understand the BA process well enough to understand why they want to support it?
  4. What, if any, are the rules for public disclosure of private malfeasance?  There are such standards for lawyers, doctors, accountants, etc.  What will ours be?
  5. What, if any, are the rules for public disclosure of private malfeasance?  There are such standards for lawyers, doctors, accountants, etc.  What will ours be?

Mere certification cannot resolve these issues, but 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!

What are your favorite BA-related books? Why?

Written by Terry Longo on . Posted in Articles. 1 Comment on What are your favorite BA-related books? Why?

OK, so we’ve all heard of the Business Analysis Book of Knowledge, and some of us have read part or all of it. But there’s got to be more to reading about business analysis than the BA Bible. And I want to find out what I should be adding to my BA library. 

What are your favorite business analysis books (besides the BABOK, that is)?  Are there books you would tell others to avoid?  Why?  Have any made a real difference in the way you work?  In the way your organization works?

I, and I’m sure others, look forward to your recommendations.