Business Analysis Skill
Patterns for requirements elicitation, BRDs, process analysis, and stakeholder alignment.
Business Analysis Deliverables
| Deliverable |
Purpose |
Audience |
| Business Case |
Justify investment |
Executives, sponsors |
| BRD |
Document requirements |
All stakeholders |
| Functional Spec |
Detail system behavior |
Dev team, testers |
| Use Cases |
Describe user interactions |
Designers, developers |
| Process Maps |
Visualize workflows |
Process owners, analysts |
| Data Dictionary |
Define data elements |
Technical team |
Requirements Hierarchy
Business Requirements (WHY)
└── Stakeholder Requirements (WHO needs WHAT)
└── Solution Requirements
├── Functional (WHAT it does)
└── Non-Functional (HOW WELL it does it)
└── Transition Requirements (HOW we get there)
BRD Structure
Standard Sections
- Executive Summary — One-page overview for executives
- Business Objectives — Measurable goals (SMART)
- Scope — In scope, out of scope, boundaries
- Stakeholders — Who's involved, their interests
- Current State — As-is process, pain points
- Future State — To-be vision, benefits
- Functional Requirements — What the solution must do
- Non-Functional Requirements — Quality attributes
- Assumptions & Constraints — Known limitations
- Dependencies — External factors
- Risks — What could go wrong
- Glossary — Term definitions
Requirements Writing
SMART Criteria
| Letter |
Meaning |
Test |
| S |
Specific |
Is it clear what's needed? |
| M |
Measurable |
Can we verify it's done? |
| A |
Achievable |
Is it realistic? |
| R |
Relevant |
Does it support objectives? |
| T |
Time-bound |
Is there a deadline? |
Good vs. Bad Requirements
| Bad |
Problem |
Better |
| "System should be fast" |
Not measurable |
"Page load < 2 seconds" |
| "Easy to use" |
Subjective |
"Complete task in < 3 clicks" |
| "Handle all cases" |
Unbounded |
"Support cases A, B, C" |
| "Similar to competitor" |
Vague |
"[Specific features listed]" |
| "Should probably..." |
Uncertain |
"Must" or "Should" (MoSCoW) |
Requirement Attributes
| Attribute |
Purpose |
| ID |
Unique identifier (REQ-001) |
| Description |
What is required |
| Priority |
MoSCoW or numeric |
| Source |
Who requested it |
| Rationale |
Why it's needed |
| Acceptance Criteria |
How to verify |
| Dependencies |
Related requirements |
| Status |
Draft/Approved/Implemented |
Elicitation Techniques
Technique Selection
| Technique |
Best For |
Effort |
| Interviews |
Deep understanding, complex topics |
High |
| Workshops |
Consensus, group decisions |
Medium |
| Surveys |
Broad input, quantitative data |
Low |
| Observation |
Understanding real workflows |
High |
| Document Analysis |
Existing systems, regulations |
Low |
| Prototyping |
Validating concepts, UI |
Medium |
| Focus Groups |
User perspectives, reactions |
Medium |
Interview Best Practices
- Prepare questions in advance
- Start broad, then specific
- Use open-ended questions
- Listen more than talk (80/20)
- Probe with "Why?" and "How?"
- Summarize and confirm understanding
- Document immediately after
Workshop Facilitation
| Phase |
Activities |
| Open |
Objectives, agenda, ground rules |
| Diverge |
Brainstorm, generate options |
| Converge |
Prioritize, decide |
| Close |
Summarize, next steps, thank |
Use Case Development
Use Case Template
Use Case: [UC-001] [Name]
Actor: [Primary actor]
Precondition: [What must be true before]
Trigger: [What initiates the use case]
Main Flow:
1. Actor does X
2. System responds with Y
3. ...
Alternative Flows:
2a. If condition, then...
Exception Flows:
2b. If error, then...
Postcondition: [What is true after]
Business Rules: [Applicable rules]
Use Case Levels
| Level |
Scope |
Example |
| Summary |
Multiple sessions |
"Manage Customer Account" |
| User Goal |
One sitting |
"Place Order" |
| Subfunction |
Part of a step |
"Validate Address" |
Process Analysis
Current State Analysis
- Map as-is process (BPMN, swimlane)
- Identify pain points
- Measure current performance
- Find root causes
- Quantify improvement opportunity
Process Mapping Notations
| Notation |
Best For |
| BPMN |
Detailed, technical processes |
| Swimlane |
Cross-functional workflows |
| Value Stream |
Lean analysis |
| SIPOC |
High-level overview |
SIPOC Template
| S |
I |
P |
O |
C |
| Suppliers |
Inputs |
Process |
Outputs |
Customers |
| Who provides? |
What's needed? |
High-level steps |
What's produced? |
Who receives? |
Gap Analysis
Gap Analysis Framework
Current State → Gap → Future State
│ │ │
▼ ▼ ▼
As-Is What needs To-Be
Process to change Vision
Gap Categories
| Type |
Examples |
| Process |
Missing steps, manual work |
| Technology |
System limitations |
| People |
Skills, capacity |
| Data |
Quality, availability |
| Policy |
Rules, compliance |
Acceptance Criteria
Gherkin Format
Given [precondition]
When [action]
Then [expected result]
And [additional result]
Acceptance Criteria Checklist
Traceability
Traceability Matrix
| Req ID |
Business Objective |
Design |
Test Case |
Status |
| REQ-001 |
OBJ-01 |
DES-005 |
TC-012 |
Passed |
Traceability Benefits
- Ensure all requirements implemented
- Impact analysis for changes
- Test coverage verification
- Audit compliance evidence
Prioritization Techniques
MoSCoW
| Priority |
Meaning |
Guidance |
| Must |
Critical for success |
~60% of effort |
| Should |
Important, not critical |
~20% of effort |
| Could |
Nice to have |
~20% of effort |
| Won't |
Out of scope (this release) |
Documented |
Value vs. Effort Matrix
High Value │ Quick Wins │ Major Projects │
│ (Do first) │ (Plan carefully)│
Low Value │ Fill-ins │ Avoid │
│ (If time) │ (Don't do) │
└────────────┴─────────────────┘
Low Effort High Effort
Kano Model
| Type |
If Present |
If Absent |
| Basic |
Expected, no delight |
Dissatisfied |
| Performance |
More is better |
Less is worse |
| Delighter |
Unexpected joy |
Not missed |
Common BA Pitfalls
| Pitfall |
Prevention |
| Solution jumping |
Ask "why" before "how" |
| Missing stakeholders |
Stakeholder analysis early |
| Gold plating |
Tie everything to objectives |
| Assumption blindness |
Document and validate assumptions |
| Scope creep |
Change control process |
| Analysis paralysis |
Timeboxed analysis, iterate |
Synapses
High-Strength Connections
- [project-management] (High, Informs, Forward) — "Requirements feed project scope"
- [change-management] (High, Receives, Backward) — "Change impact on requirements"
Medium-Strength Connections
- [root-cause-analysis] (Medium, Uses, Forward) — "Problem analysis for requirements"
- [testing-strategies] (Medium, Enables, Forward) — "Requirements enable test design"
Supporting Connections
- [architecture-refinement] (Low, Informs, Forward) — "Requirements shape architecture"
- [writing-publication] (Low, Uses, Forward) — "Clear documentation writing"