Tony,

My point was (As David has picked up) that it is the resistance we meet from people we do analysis with that I was talking about...however, as a trainer I have actually also come across this emotional repsonse with student BAs a lot as well! I expect we are all familiar with (and in my case guilty of) ego based analysis: where I think I know the answer and anyone who disgarees is attacking me so I don't like them because I don't like people who attack me (don't ask me why: too busy to rationalise it!)!

I totally agree with your point that "most BA's do not like to do analysis.   I further believe that this is the big reason why there is so much confusion about what the heck a BA is supposed to do" - although maybe I would replace "most BAs" with a lot of BAs... There is a lot of confusion about what we are supposed to do and a lot of mumbo jumbo peddled about how to do it. Analysis is the key and the problem is (as you say) a lot of BAs don't like that so they buy (metophorically and sometimes with money) any mehod or approach that promises to do away with it (erm...RAD, JAD, Lean, Agile?).

Funnily enough the first method I learnt was Yourdon too and had the same experience with DFDs: I won a prize of Tom DeMarco's book for my DFDs on a course! I still use the Level 0, Level 1 construct these days and it is useful. Below level 1 I use event driven process modelling (such as BPMN).

So you and I are right, so I like you, and I don't like anyone who thinks we are wrong! (Just joking, mostly!)

Guy

Guy & crew

Here is something to ponder.

As an analyst I am interesting in understanding the client' problem and defining it in a way that firstly, narrows down the slution options to a handful of options.  I then want to work through those options with my client and identify the right one given the contraints of goals, time, cost, reward, quality and the environment the solution is to land in.  THEN I want to redefine the problem in a way that provides as few contraints to the solutions team as possible (and manage them through to production.)

As a consultant I want my client to have confidence in the work I am doing, to yield positive outcomes from working with me and to learn from the experience so they can do better in the future (with or without me.)  I want the client to walk away from the engagement feeling good about the hire.

These two streams run parallell in my head all the time.  the forst is about the logical and facts, the second is about the emotional and the people.

The two interweavd are more effective than one without the other - a natural outcome given the onion-lke nature of the work we do.