Saturday, October 11, 2008

Business Analyst Forums & Systems Analyst Forums

Community


AddThis Feed Button

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Forums
 
  Modern Analyst Forums  Business and Sy...  Requirements  Moving to Agile
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
New Post 6/19/2008 4:10 AM
User is offline craigwbrown
328 posts
www.betterprojects.net
5th Level Poster




Re: Moving to Agile 

 larimar wrote

Lastly, projects involving multiple stakeholders (which occurs in many government projects) with disparite interests almost demands a more traditional approach. 

Larimar

I guess there are everak quite substantial and complex projects that have been successfully deliverred via agile methods now, so it's not true to say it can't be done.

The question is what are the right circumstances for picking structured analysis and design up front (eg waterfall) versus requirements discovery as you go (eg agile.)  I think the answer is based in organisational culture and the market you are operating in, but I am open to other opinions.

Craig

 
New Post 6/19/2008 4:13 AM
User is offline craigwbrown
328 posts
www.betterprojects.net
5th Level Poster




Re: Moving to Agile 

 ajmarkos wrote

And if BA's are charged with doing such reengineering, shouldn't they be most focused on as-is modeling, instead of jumping right into to-be modeling, as is typically the case with Use Cases?

Tony

I agree that an understanding of the current state is useful.  Surely you could use use cases to model the current state if you wanted to? (Anyone else got an opinion on this?)

 
New Post 6/19/2008 3:19 PM
User is offline adrian
446 posts
5th Level Poster




Re: Moving to Agile 
Modified By adrian  on 6/19/2008 5:20:26 PM)

 craigwbrown wrote

 ajmarkos wrote

 

And if BA's are charged with doing such reengineering, shouldn't they be most focused on as-is modeling, instead of jumping right into to-be modeling, as is typically the case with Use Cases?

 

Tony

I agree that an understanding of the current state is useful.  Surely you could use use cases to model the current state if you wanted to? (Anyone else got an opinion on this?)

Unless a very detailed "AS-IS" is needed, I would use something like:

  • Business Entity Model - one class diagram showing the key "things" in the business domain
  • High level Business Process Flow(s) - to show the key business processes which might be affected
  • Context Diagram and lower level Data Flow Diagrams as needed to show external entities (systems, services, etc).

- Adrian


Adrian Marchis
Publisher - ModernAnalyst.com
Random Thoughts of an Analysis Manager
 
New Post 6/20/2008 5:50 AM
User is offline ajmarkos
86 posts
7th Level Poster


Re: Moving to Agile 

Adrian

For larger scale efforts - and maybe even not so large scale efforts - use cases are a poor as-is modeling technique.  Can you imagine trying to do  something really as-is-intensive like business process reengineering using use cases?  We are talking largely about process discovery, and, as a process is defined by its data inputs and data outputs, unless we use a technque which formally identifies these,  the result is going to be unsatiafactory.   And only data flow diagrams rigorously capture these inputs and outputs (see my comments to Craig about Method H). 

Also, imagine trying to scope a large scale system using a data model (ERD or class model).  As a data model is, compared to strong functional modeling technique, inert (i.e., it is not going to prod the analyst through discovery), functional analysis should lead entity modeling. 

Tony

 
New Post 6/20/2008 6:25 AM
User is offline ajmarkos
86 posts
7th Level Poster


Re: Moving to Agile 

All:

This is an addendum to my above post.   On another forum, Craig Brown asked about using Method H for modeling processes with respect to inputs and outputs.  I can not locate that posting, so here is my response.

In  Method H, the inputs often come into the process from outerspace and go from the process back out to outerspace.    Where is the lithmus test of accuracy?   How, for example, do I konw that I have ID'd all inputs - not just some of a processes inputs.  Answer: I don't.  It is only by hooking the processes together via inputs and outputs that we can flow thing through systematically and thereby insure completedness.  Only by  flowing the flow of a data package through its string of processes can we ensure that we have discovered all essential processing on that data.

The project I am currently on tried something almost exactly like Method H.     I have taken things over.   When looking at a given process in isolation things kind of look OK.   However, in trying to integrate the processes together, I found that the models where so disjointed that I basically have been starting from scratch with data flow diagrams.   A false allusion of precision can be dangerous.

Tony

 
Previous Previous
 
Next Next
  Modern Analyst Forums  Business and Sy...  Requirements  Moving to Agile
Syndicate  
Latest Posts



Privacy Statement  |  Terms Of Use
Copyright 2006-2008 by Modern Analyst Media LLC