Customize away as a BA! But not as a PM.

 

I recently caught myself falling into a bad work habit, and quickly took corrective action to stay out of trouble.  Later I reflected on the impulse that dragged me into this habit, which led me to an introspective look-back on my tenure as a business analyst prior to becoming a project manager.  When we work in a PMO, we are expected to adhere to standards and use the templates provided to demonstrate consistency to our stakeholders.  Yet when these standards and templates are lacking, the well-seasoned project manager will reach into his/her bag of tricks and pull out what worked from prior experience.  If templates are available via the PMO, it’s hard to resist the temptation to use what worked for us in the past, but we see the greater good of consistency that a PMO brings and use the templates.

Yet it’s hard for some of us to accept this, and let’s consider the possibility that our prior BA experience contributes to this hardship.  First of all, standards and commonly-used templates are newer developments in the BA world, whereas PMI standards have been around for decades.  Common BA artifacts like requirement and workflow templates either don’t exist in an organization or exist in such an abstract format that they have to be customized for every project.  The core value-add that a BA brings is not filling in headings in a template, but instead capturing disparate inputs and applying them into a framework that everybody understands, especially the sponsor who has to provide sign-off and the builder who has to create the solution.  The compelling need for this uniformity of understanding outweighs any benefits of standardization.  Hence the BA-turned-PM naturally gravitates towards a communication framework that caters to the uniqueness of the project, despite any deviation from corporate standards.  If there’s a framework that’s readily available from past experience vs. a one-size-fits-all template, which do you think the BA-turned-PM will feel compelled to use?

Moreover, BAs are superior at working independently to get the answers they need.  If the organization is lacking in communication and training protocols and/or lax in sharing common practices, proliferation is a natural tendency in the drive to deliver.  I’m sure many a BA has faced lack of documentation and abundant knowledge residing in an uncomfortably few number of busy heads.  Such BAs learn to “blood-hound” to get the answers needed to document the requirements, much like a trained dog with a keen sense of smell will hunt for evidence.  When the BA becomes a PM and is handed a loosely-defined project – scope not clear, some work started, roles a mystery, dates being tossed about – what is the natural tendency?   Ignore the templates, dig out the answers, apply a custom framework of understanding, communicate it and march forward! 

I truly believe that my prior BA experience has made me more effective as a project manager.  I would just caution anyone who has a similar career path to resist the urges I faced as above, which sometimes lead me to a sub-conscious dismissal of corporate standards.  This is not good for a project manager’s reputation, as I’ve personally experienced.  So savor your time as a BA, but recognize that as a PM it behooves you to adhere to standards and use the corporate templates.  By doing this you demonstrate the greater good of consistency to the organization, which far outweighs any customization needed from your BA days.