|
Member 7799927 wrote: You get better end results when the people writing the code are deeply involved in understanding the business needs.
You summed it up perfectly, with this one sentence.
|
|
|
|
|
While BA's can be useful, they should be used appropriately as an adjunct help to the developers.
I wrote this about 1-1/2 years ago, and still believe this is true - from years of experience, having done it, and having seen it in action. The trick is finding the experienced engineers capable of project management and technology management with sufficient people and business skills. There are those out there who can, and within that population, those who will. I have seen on several occasions how non-technical management makes a mess out of technical projects. Some just take longer, cost more, and result in mediocrity at best; some were complete failures.
Soup to Nuts[^]
As for Agile...
Agile Principles from a Traditional American View/[^]
Rethinking the Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC)[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Great articles in your links.
|
|
|
|
|
|
I feel like you're describing an FA instead of a BA.
BA's basically mess around by "identifying" abstract business objects of value, typically for internal reporting to a board or a director. Then they make requests for implementing a business layer that respects and reports on those objects.
This is done to give the board members a false sense of security.
In reality, however, business objects are figments of someone's imagination made concrete, for no clear reason other than to show graphs or metrics. This in itself can create value if your brand narrative relies on fancy graphs and is mostly B2B oriented.. but the exact same result can often be achieved by measuring actual objects, so I fail to see the point of mucking up a code base for imaginary points of interest.
|
|
|
|
|
I certainly would not tell you how to feel. You are entitled to your opinions and feelings, and I respect that.
But in looking back over 40 years in software engineering in several vertical markets, and still being active and full time, so in fact and in theory, I was not describing a Functional Analyst.
At the core of modern software architecture is creating abstract entities (e.g. classes) that may or may not describe real, concrete entities. So your run into business objects being figments of one's imagination does not logically follow.
Business analysts that have little or no domain experience and do not understand how software is actually made are a waste of time. A senior-level software engineer can learn the BA aspects of the SDLC and manage the direct involvement with the business side (both process and people) much easier than a BA can learn the technical side. In my career, for example, I learned the business side and customer-relations side of software engineering quite easily, and breezed through getting an MBA.
My point is that BAs and PMs that do not have the technical expertise and experience in software engineering are a net negative to successfully completing a software project with quality, reliability, sustainability, extensibility, with good performance, on time and on budget. Too often, in my experience and IMHO, the BAs and PMs are the bane of a developer's existence and a barrier to making a good product that developers must waste time trying to overcome.
That said, the best BAs and PMs I have known are those that fall into at least one of these categories:
1 - Recognize their limitations and rely on the senior software engineer(s) to turn their business ideas into software ideas at the requirements and design level, and do not try to manage the architecture, design, development, quality assurance, and deployment aspects of the SDLC.
2 - Are willing to learn, put their ego aside, and take the time to learn about the much more complex world of software engineering.
|
|
|
|
|
While I do understand your take on the matter, and don't mean to undercut it in an unrespectful manner, I am gonna challenge the notion that classes could be based on either real or abstract entities.
I'm 20 years deep in OO-design and the major problems I keep coming across with class-based designs, all originate from classes being based on non-concrete entities. As an iron rule within my own team, I demand that all classes are directly based on either concrete entities or the pre-defined abstraction layers we've all agreed upon (so services and data models are OK, helper classes or business objects are not OK). Over the years, this has been the magic sauce that made my team come out on top with regards to velocity and code quality.
I'm playing with the idea of writing something on the topic eventually, because I think it's a relatively novel POV within our sector. I do like to use a quote from the matrix to highlight the underlying sentiment:
When it comes to abstractions, "The problem is choice".
|
|
|
|
|
This goes back to the 90's.
"My" BA would tell me what he got from the user; then he would ask me to explain it back to him.
I quit that company for lack of a bigger picture.
BA's, in effect, think and act like you work for them.
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Hard no.
Allocating resources to BA's is a mistake. They do not add value for the end user and they increase the technical cost, while reducing the individual ownership for everyone involved. I've seen enterprises run successfully with and without BA's, and without them there is less churn, more individual responsibility and less sunken costs in reports and metrics for internal use only.
They do not add value and they do not contribute to getting the work done, so why waste the resources. Hire more support and customer training positions instead for a much better ROI.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. Totally agree. 
|
|
|
|
|
Furface hassled me for 45 minutes this morning - "I want out!", "I want out now!"
But Herself has a rule - if you can't see the fence it's too dark for a black cat to be outside.
Finally I can see the fence so I slide the back door open and fit the portable cat flap. He pokes his head out, gives me a filthy look and stalks off to bed upstairs with disdain because it is raining really hard with a "I'm not going out in that and you can't force me to" kind of stalk.
Why does he spend all that time looking through the window at the rain and hassling me just to decide he doesn't want to get wet? 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Indoors/Outdoors cats are invariably like that 
GCS d--(d-) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
And your point is? 
|
|
|
|
|
"If you give the user exactly what they have been demanding, it'll still be wrong ..."
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
An apt description of my professional life since 2008.
Software Zen: delete this;
|
|
|
|
|
Dogs have owners cats have staff
"I didn't mention the bats - he'd see them soon enough" - Hunter S Thompson - RIP
|
|
|
|
|
Got one like that.
The other carries on a treat until you open the door. Then he just sits there (on the inside) pretending to be an outdoor cat. Occasionally he'll dash out, catch a leaf and brings it straight back in & then carries on a treat again wanting praise for being such a good hunter.
// TODO: Insert something here Top ten reasons why I'm lazy
1.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: Why does he spend all that time looking through the window at the rain and hassling me just to decide he doesn't want to get wet?
Because he can!
The less you need, the more you have.
Even a blind squirrel gets a nut...occasionally.
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
He wanted out, put him out. He'll remember.
That's how my old cat learned.
They are like kids - at one point you'll realize they are trying to see how far they can push you.
|
|
|
|
|
Publicity stunt near NFL stadium gave stark message to the unvaccinated[^]
Quote: A truck claiming to be from a funeral home was emblazoned with a blunt message Sunday while driving around Bank of America Stadium, where the Charlotte Panthers were playing the New Orleans Saints: “Don’t get vaccinated.” It remains unclear who might be behind the scare tactic urging people to finally get vaccinated against COVID-19.
The website for the “Wilmore Funeral Home” on the truck takes people to a site that simply says, “Get vaccinated now. If not, see you soon.”
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
|
Is that a warning or a threat? 
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Is that a warning or a threat
Neither. It was a tongue-in-the-cheek statement not to be taken too seriously. 
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
modified 28-Sep-21 8:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
So was mine
|
|
|
|
|
A threat is technically a warning. And everybody knows technically correct is the best kind of correct.
GCS d--(d-) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
I mentioned this in another thread, a friend of mine and his kids and his parents all got Covid recently and they were ALL fully vaccinated.
Covid vaccinations can help, yes, that is obvious. But you and most other people need to stop acting like this vaccine is the best thing ever and is critical to the survival of the human race. It just isn't that good. Take it if you want and then who cares if other people get it or not. You're protected.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
