Business Analysts and Software Developers

-
Of all the relationships within a software development organization, the one that seems to cause the most friction is the one between the business analyst and the software developer. I find this is often caused by a lack of understanding about who is responsible for what.

A BA where I'm currently working spelled it out best in a meeting a while back (Brian D). In our organization, the business analysts own the "who, what, why, where, and when" and the developers own the "how".

Not sure how this maps into other people's organizations, but it seems to be a good starting point. Very often I read requirements with a lot of "how" in them.

Examples of this sort of thing include:

  • Create a web service to enable validation of item information

  • Build a screen with 4 fields (create date, last modified date, historical cost, deleted flag



What I would expect, as a developer is something more like:

  • We need to be able to run the mainframe part validation routines against part data submitted from third parties

  • We need to display item information to our sales users... critical information they need to understand includes when the item was created, when it was last modified, what it cost before the last modification, and an indication if the item is currently able to be sold in our retail outlets



These examples are a little more verbose (thought they don't need to be), but also decouple the implementation (how) from the problem (why) and free the development team to explore alternative solutions. Perhaps instead of SOAP/WSDL web service, posting XML via HTTP is better... or maybe just FTPing a file is best... In the second example, perhaps it's best to just show an iconic indicator of if the item is active or not (versus a boolean flag). In addition, instead of simply naming the fields that should be displayed, the intent (why) and audience (who) of the page is better explained.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Please use ANSI-92 SQL Join Syntax

-
Image
Way back in 1992, a standard was published for SQL. In it, the syntax for specifying joins in SQL Database was finally standardized. This was a good thing because (for folks who've been doing this a while), trying to decode the vagaries of how various Databases handled outer joins could drive you bonkers yielding different results depending on the parse order of things in the from and where clauses. Unfortunately, some DBMS vendors took a while to adopt this standard (Oracle didn't support it until 2001), but at this point if you're using a major RDBMS and NOT using it, you're probably mired in a tradition or habit that bears changing. As an example of what I'm describing, here are some examples of what I mean. Old School (no standard syntax + implementation and evaluation of predicates varied by vendor [and query]): select * from customer, order where customer.customer = order.customerid ANSI way (agreed to standard, predicate evaluation has some rules
Read more

the myth of asynchronous JDBC

-
Image
I keep seeing people (especially in the scala/typesafe world) posting about async jdbc libraries. STOP IT! Under the current APIs, async JDBC belongs in a realm with Unicorns, Tiger Squirrels, and 8' spiders. While you might be able to move the blocking operations and queue requests and keep your "main" worker threads from blocking, jdbc is synchronous. At some point, somewhere, there's going to be a thread blocking waiting for a response. It's frustrating to see so many folks hyping this and muddying the waters. Unless you write your own client for a dbms and have a dbms that can multiplex calls over a single connection (or using some other strategy to enable this capability) db access is going to block. It's not impossible to make the calls completely async, but nobody's built it yet. Yes, I know ajdbc is taking a stab at this capability, but even IT uses a thread pool for the blocking calls (be default). Someday we'll have async databa
Read more

The difference between Scalability, Performance, Efficiency, and Concurrency explained

-
I thought I'd give some explanation of the difference between scalability, performance, Efficiency, and concurrency. To make things more accessible (and because I'm watching a cooking show on TV) I'm going to use a baking metaphor to help explain the differences. In our case, the system in question is baking cookies for consumers. Scalability, is how well something responds to adding more resources. If we can double our capacity by doubling the number of resources, we've got linear scalability. In our baking example, if we add more ingredients, we can scale to a larger number of cookies. To contrast with our other metrics, this doesn't actually increase the performance of creating a single cookie (they still take 10 minutes to bake), and the efficiency is the same (we just have more capacity). We also cannot bake more cookies in a fixed time period, but over a larger time period we can produce more cookies. Performance is how fast something can get done, u
Read more