Nothing to disagree with in this article, but it does rehash age-old concepts that those of us "of a certain age" would recognise as: Full Requirements Elicitation and Analysis, Stakeholder Map, and Communications Plan, with a nod toward Risk Analysis. These factors should have headed off this eventuality and prevented this adverse situation from happening.
Done properly Options for Change within the project would have been presented to all stakeholders, your diagram in section 4. However, what is missing from that diagram are the risk categories that must include the business reputational risk, which this article encounters. Obviously, the project's cost risk is a factor, but is of less importance than the BAU risks encountered. The Project Sponsor, in my opinion, is the least qualified to make this sort of a decision. They are looking short-term at project delivery and cost management, with a view to moving onto the next "shiny thing". Yes, they have decision-making capabilities, but of a limited nature. Big decisions like this are not theirs to make.
So, actually, there are more issues illuminated in this example than the simple wrong decision made. There is a Project Governance problem to address.
Vaughan, first I want to warn you that if you don't like articles that "rehash age-old concepts", you should probably just skip any article I write :-).
No doubt that in any case of business change, even those fully adopting the all these IIBA-compatible frameworks you describe, there will be plenty of issues to deal with.
So many projects tick all the boxes you mention and still fail precisely because, like you said, they weren't "done properly." On the other hand, I've been in many projects that didn't follow most of these "best practices" and were great successes simply because they used some effective strategies, such as a good repertoire of questions to ask, checklists of things to think about when formulating the problem and the optimal
solution, and yes, mental models like having a decision-making compass.
I write articles like this in hopes they'll help someone improve their success rate even in the absence of a robust project governance that the typical BA will have little authority/influence to establish.
Nothing to disagree with in this article, but it does rehash age-old concepts that those of us "of a certain age" would recognise as: Full Requirements Elicitation and Analysis, Stakeholder Map, and Communications Plan, with a nod toward Risk Analysis. These factors should have headed off this eventuality and prevented this adverse situation from happening.
Done properly Options for Change within the project would have been presented to all stakeholders, your diagram in section 4. However, what is missing from that diagram are the risk categories that must include the business reputational risk, which this article encounters. Obviously, the project's cost risk is a factor, but is of less importance than the BAU risks encountered. The Project Sponsor, in my opinion, is the least qualified to make this sort of a decision. They are looking short-term at project delivery and cost management, with a view to moving onto the next "shiny thing". Yes, they have decision-making capabilities, but of a limited nature. Big decisions like this are not theirs to make.
So, actually, there are more issues illuminated in this example than the simple wrong decision made. There is a Project Governance problem to address.
Vaughan, first I want to warn you that if you don't like articles that "rehash age-old concepts", you should probably just skip any article I write :-).
No doubt that in any case of business change, even those fully adopting the all these IIBA-compatible frameworks you describe, there will be plenty of issues to deal with.
So many projects tick all the boxes you mention and still fail precisely because, like you said, they weren't "done properly." On the other hand, I've been in many projects that didn't follow most of these "best practices" and were great successes simply because they used some effective strategies, such as a good repertoire of questions to ask, checklists of things to think about when formulating the problem and the optimal
solution, and yes, mental models like having a decision-making compass.
I write articles like this in hopes they'll help someone improve their success rate even in the absence of a robust project governance that the typical BA will have little authority/influence to establish.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!