Leadership & Management

This article explores practical techniques that BAs can apply in large projects: how to prioritize backlogs when competing domains fight for attention, how to bridge Agile with Waterfall governance, how to contribute meaningfully in scaled frameworks, and how to use story mapping to ensure incremental delivery of real business value.

This article presents a novel methodology that synergizes user stories with JTBD for complex projects. A thorough literature review is conducted, carefully highlighting the strengths, limitations, and overall benefits of each approach. Next, an integrated framework is introduced, featuring diagrams, examples, and a comparative table. A concise case example demonstrates practical application. In conclusion, implications, limitations, and future research directions are discussed, aiming to enhance requirement clarity and alignment in complex software development.

The breathless pronouncements surrounding Artificial Intelligence often paint a picture of wholesale disruption, a technological tidal wave poised to obliterate established business practices. Yet the truth is more nuanced: AI does not replace strategy; it replaces bad strategy. In the absence of a coherent, adaptive, and intentional strategic framework, AI does not generate value, it magnifies inefficiency.

I measure the success of my 50+ year career in IT by the positive feedback I’ve received from colleagues, stakeholders, students, and readers. I started as a Cobol programmer, progressed to software analyst/designer, and for the last 30 years have performed the role of business analyst. Interspersed in those years I’ve shared what I’d learned through writing, teaching, presenting, and mentoring. This article discusses the top seven “Takeaway Points” from the over-30 BA resources I’ve produced related to requirements for information systems.

Tariffs are not just economic instruments—they’re strategic signals. For business analysts, Trump's latest trade measures are more than policy—they’re a masterclass in navigating disruption, identifying leverage, and transforming systemic friction into strategic insight.

Musical Chairs Reflection represents an alternative to traditional reflective practices. By incorporating movement, spontaneity, and structured dialogue, this activity disrupts routine interactions and fosters an environment where diverse perspectives and creative solutions can flourish. The activity can increase engagement, enhance collaboration, and provide actionable insights to foster continuous improvement in software teams. This method aligns with agile principles and supports a culture of continuous learning and growth. As teams continue to evolve, embracing innovative reflective practices will remain a key strategy for navigating uncertainty and fostering a growth mindset.

In this series’ first article, Beyond Tools and Processes: Strategies for Successful Software Development Teams, we introduced the concept of reflective practices. Reflection aims to facilitate learning from experience. The essence of reflection is to actively engage in a process to gain perspective on one’s own actions and experiences. The aim of this process is to analyze those experiences rather than merely living through them. By cultivating curiosity and a willingness to explore our actions and experiences, we unlock the potential for intentional learning, not only as individuals but also as a team or even an organization. This learning stems not from books or experts but directly from our own work and lived experiences, successes, and failures.

Business Analysts (BAs) are pivotal in guiding organizations through a rapidly evolving landscape, leveraging new technologies and methodologies to address complex problems. In 2025, these ten trends will redefine the scope and capabilities of business analysis, enabling businesses to thrive in complex environments.  Here’s how individual analysts can prepare to take advantage of these opportunities.

Shared or informal accountability emerges from peers’ expectations and the software professionals’ intrinsic drive. While the former promotes a sense of collective accountability, where individuals feel compelled to reciprocate and demonstrate their accountability to their peers, the latter is innate and intrinsically grounded. When feeling intrinsically driven to achieve certain outcomes (e.g., code quality or meeting deadlines), software professionals manifest a self-driven accountability. This self-imposed answerability is rooted in a personal desire to excel or meet self-imposed standards, reflecting software professionals’ internal commitment and motivation to uphold and align the quality of their deliverable with their professional and personal values. Shared accountability is mainly reinforced by software engineering and development practices (i.e., testing and code review) and peers’ feedback.

Tools can amplify a software developer’s capability, but ineffective or inappropriate tool usage amplifies their shortcomings as well. Properly applied tools and practices can add great value to a project team by increasing quality and productivity, improving planning and collaboration, and bringing order out of chaos. But even the best tools won’t overcome weak processes, untrained team members, challenging change initiatives, or cultural issues in the organization. 

Fear is a powerful motivator. It often drives us to hold onto the familiar, resisting change, even when the change might bring progress. This fear—of the unknown, of disruption—feeds into status quo bias, a cognitive bias that compels individuals and organizations to stick with established systems, even when these systems are no longer effective. As business analysts, overcoming this bias is critical to fostering innovation and success in projects.

Psychological safety has been reported to result in increased knowledge sharing among software development team members. Studies found a positive correlation between social interaction, team psychological safety, and synergistic knowledge development. When team members feel safe and confident that the environment is free of blame and consequences, they are more inclined to share information. Synergistic knowledge development is observed when a group amalgamates the diverse perspectives of its individual members, thereby leveraging the collective knowledge of the group.

In the vast landscape of project management, few challenges loom as large and insidious as scope creep. It's the silent saboteur that can derail even the most meticulously planned projects, leading to missed deadlines, ballooning budgets, and frayed nerves. When it comes to Big Rock Projects—those monumental undertakings that hold significant strategic importance for an organization—the stakes are even higher. These projects are the bedrock upon which future success is built, and allowing them to veer off course due to uncontrolled scope expansion is not an option.

Psychological safety (PS) is the shared belief among team members that it is safe to take interpersonal risks in the workplace. PS is relevant to software development (SD) teams, particularly those using agile practices. Some practitioners even claim that “agile doesn’t work without psychological safety”. Effective collaboration, creativity, and collective problem solving are fundamental in everyday SD teams. PS fosters an atmosphere where team members feel free to share their views and opinions without fear of judgment or retaliation, thereby facilitating an environment conducive to effective collaboration. In a psychologically safe workplace, individuals are comfortable sharing their opinions, worries, or doubts, seeking support when required, and acknowledging errors without fear of being blamed or punished. In such an environment, teams and their members feel empowered to take ownership, innovate, take initiatives, and assume responsibility for their deliverables, resulting in better outcomes. The question, then, is how to achieve and sustain a psychologically safe workplace in the context of software development.

Every decision-making group should first decide how they will arrive at their conclusions by selecting appropriate decision rules.  Too often, when people begin to collaborate on some initiative, they don’t discuss how they’re going to work together. An important—and sometimes adversarial—aspect of collaboration is making high-impact decisions that influence the project’s direction.