Leadership & Management

In this series’ first article, Beyond Tools and Processes: Strategies for Successful Software Development Teams, we introduced the concept of reflective practices. Reflection aims to facilitate learning from experience. The essence of reflection is to actively engage in a process to gain perspective on one’s own actions and experiences. The aim of this process is to analyze those experiences rather than merely living through them. By cultivating curiosity and a willingness to explore our actions and experiences, we unlock the potential for intentional learning, not only as individuals but also as a team or even an organization. This learning stems not from books or experts but directly from our own work and lived experiences, successes, and failures.

Business Analysts (BAs) are pivotal in guiding organizations through a rapidly evolving landscape, leveraging new technologies and methodologies to address complex problems. In 2025, these ten trends will redefine the scope and capabilities of business analysis, enabling businesses to thrive in complex environments.  Here’s how individual analysts can prepare to take advantage of these opportunities.

Shared or informal accountability emerges from peers’ expectations and the software professionals’ intrinsic drive. While the former promotes a sense of collective accountability, where individuals feel compelled to reciprocate and demonstrate their accountability to their peers, the latter is innate and intrinsically grounded. When feeling intrinsically driven to achieve certain outcomes (e.g., code quality or meeting deadlines), software professionals manifest a self-driven accountability. This self-imposed answerability is rooted in a personal desire to excel or meet self-imposed standards, reflecting software professionals’ internal commitment and motivation to uphold and align the quality of their deliverable with their professional and personal values. Shared accountability is mainly reinforced by software engineering and development practices (i.e., testing and code review) and peers’ feedback.

Tools can amplify a software developer’s capability, but ineffective or inappropriate tool usage amplifies their shortcomings as well. Properly applied tools and practices can add great value to a project team by increasing quality and productivity, improving planning and collaboration, and bringing order out of chaos. But even the best tools won’t overcome weak processes, untrained team members, challenging change initiatives, or cultural issues in the organization. 

Fear is a powerful motivator. It often drives us to hold onto the familiar, resisting change, even when the change might bring progress. This fear—of the unknown, of disruption—feeds into status quo bias, a cognitive bias that compels individuals and organizations to stick with established systems, even when these systems are no longer effective. As business analysts, overcoming this bias is critical to fostering innovation and success in projects.

Psychological safety has been reported to result in increased knowledge sharing among software development team members. Studies found a positive correlation between social interaction, team psychological safety, and synergistic knowledge development. When team members feel safe and confident that the environment is free of blame and consequences, they are more inclined to share information. Synergistic knowledge development is observed when a group amalgamates the diverse perspectives of its individual members, thereby leveraging the collective knowledge of the group.

In the vast landscape of project management, few challenges loom as large and insidious as scope creep. It's the silent saboteur that can derail even the most meticulously planned projects, leading to missed deadlines, ballooning budgets, and frayed nerves. When it comes to Big Rock Projects—those monumental undertakings that hold significant strategic importance for an organization—the stakes are even higher. These projects are the bedrock upon which future success is built, and allowing them to veer off course due to uncontrolled scope expansion is not an option.

Psychological safety (PS) is the shared belief among team members that it is safe to take interpersonal risks in the workplace. PS is relevant to software development (SD) teams, particularly those using agile practices. Some practitioners even claim that “agile doesn’t work without psychological safety”. Effective collaboration, creativity, and collective problem solving are fundamental in everyday SD teams. PS fosters an atmosphere where team members feel free to share their views and opinions without fear of judgment or retaliation, thereby facilitating an environment conducive to effective collaboration. In a psychologically safe workplace, individuals are comfortable sharing their opinions, worries, or doubts, seeking support when required, and acknowledging errors without fear of being blamed or punished. In such an environment, teams and their members feel empowered to take ownership, innovate, take initiatives, and assume responsibility for their deliverables, resulting in better outcomes. The question, then, is how to achieve and sustain a psychologically safe workplace in the context of software development.

Every decision-making group should first decide how they will arrive at their conclusions by selecting appropriate decision rules.  Too often, when people begin to collaborate on some initiative, they don’t discuss how they’re going to work together. An important—and sometimes adversarial—aspect of collaboration is making high-impact decisions that influence the project’s direction. 

In complex environments, cognitive load (relating to tax complexity and multiple inputs that affect decision-making) can significantly hamper the quality and efficiency of project choices. High-performance business analysts can play an integral and important role to avoid this issue by advocating for the adoption of a decision-making compass to deliver insight to stakeholders about how well their objectives may be satisfied by potential alternative courses of action. The next time you’re embarking on a high-stakes project, make sure you have a decision-making compass ready to use, even if only informally defined. While there is no guarantee that applying it to project choices will completely eliminate the risk of mistakes, it will no doubt help move things in the right direction and maximize performance.

Okay, you believe you had a great day at work today; that you accomplished a lot. Maybe you did. Then again, maybe you didn't do as much as you might think. A lot of people believe just because they are a model of efficiency, they are being highly productive. This is simply not true. We have discussed the concept of productivity on more than one occasion in this column, but some trends in the business world have caused me to revisit it again.

The Unique Competing Space (UCS) is a macro-level strategy visualisation framework. It enables teams to understand the broader scope of customer needs, evaluate how well their offerings are meeting customer needs, and evaluate how well their competition is also meeting these needs.  The UCS can easily be one of the tools in a firm or team’s arsenal for probing and situating “…the firm’s strategic position in its greater competitive context”.

My single most important recommendation to anyone considering the use of outside consultants is simple: Get everything in writing! Clearly define the work assignment, get a signed agreement spelling out the terms of the assignment, and demand regular status reports.

I am always amazed how companies give consulting firms carte blanche to perform project work as they see fit. Abdicating total control to a consultant is not only irresponsible, it is highly suspicious and may represent collusion and kickbacks.

There is nothing magical in managing consultants. It requires nothing more than simple planning, organization, and control. If you are not willing to do this, then do not be surprised with the results produced. Failure to manage a consultant properly or to adequately inspect work in progress will produce inadequate results. So, do yourself (and your company) a favor, do your homework and create a win-win scenario for both the consultant and yourself.

As a business analyst, navigating groupthink is essential for delivering valuable insights and driving successful projects. By fostering a culture of inclusivity, promoting diverse perspectives, and encouraging critical thinking, business analysts can overcome the challenges of groupthink. Remember, effective negotiation of groupthink empowers teams to make informed decisions, enhances problem-solving capabilities, and ultimately contributes to improved project outcomes. Embrace these strategies, and you'll be well-equipped to lead your team towards successful and innovative solutions.

The following four attributes are really important for a leader (and for a parent)... You will see that parents who do all the above turn out to have decent children (more often than not) and leaders who do all the above turn out to be highly respected and admired leaders. You can pick your favorite leader you had in your life and you will notice they displayed these qualities.