Comments on: Stakeholders who change their mind

By: david

david — Wed, 28 May 2008 09:54:36 +0000

I would like to build a friendly relationship with any of the business analyst from any environment, i am actually in financial nevironment in south africa.

By: Mandy

Mandy — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:29:51 +0000

I think that it’s important to understand the “why” behind the requirements change. Is it due to legitimate changing business drivers? Or, is it for some other non-business critical reason (i.e inattention on the part of the stakeholder?) If the changes are due to a legitimate business driver then we, as business analysts and developers, need to understand that the stakeholders and users are not changing the requirements just to make life difficult for us. Instead, more often than not, the requirements change because business conditions have changed – maybe there’s a new regulatory requirement or a new product offering by a competitor. We need to work with the business to adapt to provide the best value for their money and work with them on the best available solution.

By: Ganesh

Ganesh — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:05:52 +0000

My few thoughts to the list: When the requirements keep changing, it’s always better to set a right expectations between you and your ’so called’ stakeholder. Tell them that, we will be ready to take the changes, but let’s try and freeze on the initial requirements so that we can have a vinilla version of the application or the product that has been planned to build. And if your company adopts Agile Iterative method then it will be possible to track and manage the requirements that keep changing. Thanks, Ganesh

By: Craig

Craig — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 11:58:20 +0000

Another tip is to provide tangible things to help people understand what your requirements mean in the real (virtual) world.

Agile proposes iterations. Other development models recommend prototypes.

By: Kerber

Kerber — Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:25:59 +0000

Great question, maybe "the question" about this subject, and great answer too. What do you think about a strategy of "record and charge"? – Record every change to base your arguments on facts, not feelings. – Charge the stakeholder for the changes, I'm not talking about money, but something else. You can't be the only one who gets hurt when requirements are changed. In my point of view, constant changes mean lack of interest and attention to what is being made. Nothing better to get attention than to bring some pain. If you don't treat it conscientiously you'll do it sub-consciously, and it can be really bad, bringing relationship issues. Of course, this strategy should be developed along with the PM.