Download to read offline
![About this period a boxer, well known in after years to Londoners,
young Cy. Davis, of Bristol, attracted much attention, and he was
thought in every respect an excellent match for Turner. Davis, as we
have said, was not only an object of considerable attraction at Bristol,
but had recently given the Londoners a specimen of his quality. A
match was therefore made, by Tom Belcher, on the part of his fellow
townsman, Davis, for 100 guineas a side; and Turner, from his well-
known tried qualities, did not want for friends to support him upon
this occasion. Davis stood so well with the sporting people that it was
even betting, the former for choice. Wallingham Common, in Surrey,
seventeen miles from London, was the spot selected for this combat
to take place, and the torrents of rain which prevailed for some hours
on Friday morning, June 18, 1819, did not in the least deter the
amateurs. Most of the fancy scorned even to sport an umbrella, and
it should seem that the recollection of the anniversary of the battle of
Waterloo gave them fresh vigour. At length all difficulties were at an
end, the rain ceased, the ring appeared in view, and preparation was
made for the combat to commence. Turner threw up his hat first in
the ring, attended by Cribb and Randall, when, after waiting a
considerable time, Davis was loudly called for by the Champion.
Some minutes elapsed, when Davis appeared with Tom Belcher and
Harmer, and repeated the token of defiance. At a quarter before two
the men set-to, the colours having been previously tied to the stakes;
the true blue was placed by Randall, and the original yellow-man
(which has ever since the period of the late Jem Belcher, out of
compliment to his pugilistic fame, been denominated “a Belcher”[158]
)
was tied over the blue by Tom Belcher. Even betting was about the
thing.
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—Davis looked in fine condition, and
appeared to be able to win it off hand; his opponent,
however, showed better than was expected. But the
contrast was great. Davis, from his fine and elegant
form, was the beau ideal of the ring-goers, while
Turner looked more like a weatherbeaten Greenwich
pensioner. It was thought the gay Bristol Boy would go
to work without ceremony, and nob Turner in style,](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/24027587-250510013516-c616c2ee/75/A-Guide-To-The-Business-Analysis-Body-Of-Knowledge-3rd-Edition-Iiba-59-2048.jpg)
![“Well! so I’ve floor’d these ‘fancy’ fighting cocks,
And finish’d them in style! Presumptuous fellows!
They chaff’d of science—and, forsooth, would box
With one whose ‘hits’ are sure to touch ‘the bellows!’
Conceited mortals! thus to ‘spar’ with Death!
The greatest champions that the world e’er saw
By turns have bow’d obedient to my law.
Look back at history’s page,
In every clime and every age,
You’ll find I ‘mill’d’ the mightiest of them all.
No matter how they sparr’d,
My blows were sure and hard,
And, when I threw them, fatal was their fall.
From Alexander down to Emperor Nap,
Whene’er I chose to give the rogues a slap,
Not one could parry off a single rap.
No, no! nor had they each a thousand lives,
Could they have stood against my rattling bunch of fives!”[159]
Turner’s remains were removed on Sunday, April 23, 1826,
between the hours of one and two, from the house of his cousin, Mr.
Baxter, hat maker, in East Smithfield, and deposited in a deep grave
in Aldgate Churchyard. The funeral was of the most respectable
description. The hearse was followed by two mourning coaches. In
the first coach were Mr. Turner (father of the deceased), Mr. Baxter
(a cousin of Ned’s), Mr. Leslie, Tom Owen, and Pierce Egan. In the
second mourning coach were Tom Cribb, Josh. Hudson, Jack
Randall, Harry Holt, Harry Harmer, and Mr. Price Morris.
“From an early hour in the morning,” says the report, “the house of
Mr. Baxter was surrounded by numbers of persons anxious to pay
respect to the remains of a man who once stood so high amongst the
admirers of the art of self-defence. The church and churchyard also
were crowded. We noticed many of the corps pugilistique. Scroggins,
for the feeling and respect he paid to the deceased, deserves the
highest praise. Forgetting all former differences; nay, more,
following the side of the hearse, and dropping a tear over the grave of
the man who had proved his conqueror, speaks a volume in his
favour, as a generous-minded English boxer. Every person present
appeared sorry for the loss of Turner. In all his battles he behaved
like an honest, honourable man; in fact, throughout his life he was
never known to have committed a dishonourable action—his conduct](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/24027587-250510013516-c616c2ee/75/A-Guide-To-The-Business-Analysis-Body-Of-Knowledge-3rd-Edition-Iiba-75-2048.jpg)
![CHAPTER VIII.
JACK MARTIN (THE “MASTER OF THE ROLLS”)—1813‒
1828.[160]
Jack Martin, on whom the ring reporters conferred the punning
title of “Master of the Rolls,” from his calling as a baker, was born on
the 10th of July, 1796, near Kennington Church.
“Boxiana” contains the usual preliminary narrative of a “big coal-
heaver,” “a sheriff’s officer, a well-known good man,” “a butcher,”
etc., whom Martin disposed of while “a boy.” We shall pass these,
and come to young Doughey’s first reported battle, which was with
Tom Oliver’s brother George, at Ilford, in Essex, for 20 guineas, on
Thursday, July 18, 1816, in a twenty-four feet ring, after the fight
between Ford and Harry Lancaster. George Oliver was seconded by
his brother Tom and Jack Clark, Martin by Harry Harmer and Bill
Richmond. Five to four on Oliver.
THE FIGHT.
Round 1.—The attitude of Martin was free and good;
it spoke more of the sparring school than that of his
opponent, which was by no means that of a scientific
boxer. Martin immediately went to work and nobbed
his opponent without ceremony, till they got into a
close, when, after hugging and pummelling each other
for a few seconds, they broke away, and some hits were
exchanged at arm’s length. They again closed and a
violent struggle took place against the ropes, when they
both went down. This round occupied one minute and
a half.
2.—Both full of activity, but the flurried manner of
Oliver was evident to every one, and his fists crossed](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/24027587-250510013516-c616c2ee/75/A-Guide-To-The-Business-Analysis-Body-Of-Knowledge-3rd-Edition-Iiba-77-2048.jpg)
A Guide To The Business Analysis Body Of Knowledge 3rd Edition Iiba
- 1. A Guide ToThe Business Analysis Body Of Knowledge 3rd Edition Iiba download https://ebookbell.com/product/a-guide-to-the-business-analysis- body-of-knowledge-3rd-edition-iiba-48055174 Explore and download more ebooks at ebookbell.com
- 2. Here are somerecommended products that we believe you will be interested in. You can click the link to download. A Guide To The Business Analysis Body Of Knowledge 2nd Iiba https://ebookbell.com/product/a-guide-to-the-business-analysis-body- of-knowledge-2nd-iiba-2197264 A Guide To The Business Analysis Body Of Knowledge Babok Guide 30 Iiba https://ebookbell.com/product/a-guide-to-the-business-analysis-body- of-knowledge-babok-guide-30-iiba-6573012 Babok V3 A Guide To The Business Analysis Body Of Knowledge Iiba https://ebookbell.com/product/babok-v3-a-guide-to-the-business- analysis-body-of-knowledge-iiba-50948072 A Managers Guide To Financial Analysis Powerful Tools For Analyzing The Numbers And Making The Best Decisions For Your Business Sixth Edition Eliot H Sherman https://ebookbell.com/product/a-managers-guide-to-financial-analysis- powerful-tools-for-analyzing-the-numbers-and-making-the-best- decisions-for-your-business-sixth-edition-eliot-h-sherman-6837238
- 3. Uml For TheIt Business Analyst A Practical Guide To Objectoriented Requirements Gathering 1st Edition Howard Podeswa https://ebookbell.com/product/uml-for-the-it-business-analyst-a- practical-guide-to-objectoriented-requirements-gathering-1st-edition- howard-podeswa-2156988 A Users Guide To Business Analytics Basu Ayanendranath Basu https://ebookbell.com/product/a-users-guide-to-business-analytics- basu-ayanendranath-basu-10820576 Analytics For Retail A Stepbystep Guide To The Statistics Behind A Successful Retail Business Rhoda Okunev https://ebookbell.com/product/analytics-for-retail-a-stepbystep-guide- to-the-statistics-behind-a-successful-retail-business-rhoda- okunev-43679022 Analytics For Retail A Stepbystep Guide To The Statistics Behind A Successful Retail Business Rhoda Okunev https://ebookbell.com/product/analytics-for-retail-a-stepbystep-guide- to-the-statistics-behind-a-successful-retail-business-rhoda- okunev-46969596 Analytics The Right Way A Business Leaders Guide To Putting Data To Productive Use Tim Wilson Joe Sutherland https://ebookbell.com/product/analytics-the-right-way-a-business- leaders-guide-to-putting-data-to-productive-use-tim-wilson-joe- sutherland-230461324
- 5. A G UI D E T O T H E B U S I N E S S A N A LY S I S B O DY O F K N O W L E D G E ® v3
- 7. BABOK ® v3 A GUIDE TOTHE BUSINESS ANALYSIS BODY OF KNOWLEDGE®
- 8. International Institute ofBusiness Analysis, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. ©2005, 2006, 2008, 2009, 2015 International Institute of Business Analysis. All rights reserved. Version 1.0 and 1.4 published 2005. Version 1.6 Draft published 2006. Version 1.6 Final published 2008. Version 2.0 published 2009. Version 3.0 published 2015. ISBN-13: 97978-1-927584-03-3 This document is provided to the business analysis community for educational purposes. IIBA® does not warrant that it is suitable for any other purpose and makes no expressed or implied warranty of any kind and assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. No liability is assumed for incidental or consequential damages in connection with or arising out of the use of the information contained herein. IIBA® , the IIBA® logo, BABOK® and Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® are registered trademarks owned by International Institute of Business Analysis. CBAP® is a registered certification mark owned by International Institute of Business Analysis. Certified Business Analysis Professional, EEP and the EEP logo are trademarks owned by International Institute of Business Analysis. Archimate® is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the US and other countries. Business Model Canvas is copyrighted by BusinessModelGeneration.com and released under Creative Commons license. CMMI® is a registered trademark of Carnegie Mellon University. COBIT® is a trademark of the Information Systems Audit and Control Association and the IT Governance Institute. Mind Map® is a registered trademark of the Buzan Organization. Scaled Agile Framework® and SAFe™ are trademarks of Scaled Agile, Inc. TOGAF® is a registered trademark of The Open Group in the US and other countries. Unified Modelling Language™ and UML® are trademarks of the Object Management Group. Zachman Framework for Enterprise Architecture is a trademark of the Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement. No challenge to the status or ownership of these or any other trademarked terms contained herein is intended by the International Institute of Business Analysis. Any inquiries regarding this publication, requests for usage rights for the material included herein, or corrections should be sent by email to bok@iiba.org.
- 9. i Table of Contents Chapter1: Introduction 1.1 Purpose of the BABOK® Guide 1 1.2 What is Business Analysis? 2 1.3 Who is a Business Analyst? 2 1.4 Structure of the BABOK® Guide 3 Chapter 2: Business Analysis Key Concepts 2.1 The Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ 12 2.2 Key Terms 14 2.3 Requirements Classification Schema 16 2.4 Stakeholders 16 2.5 Requirements and Designs 19 Chapter 3: Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 3.1 Plan Business Analysis Approach 24 3.2 Plan Stakeholder Engagement 31 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance 37 3.4 Plan Business Analysis Information Management 42 3.5 Identify Business Analysis Performance Improvements 47
- 10. Table of Contents ii Chapter4: Elicitation and Collaboration 4.1 Prepare for Elicitation 56 4.2 Conduct Elicitation 61 4.3 Confirm Elicitation Results 65 4.4 Communicate Business Analysis Information 67 4.5 Manage Stakeholder Collaboration 71 Chapter 5: Requirements Life Cycle Management 5.1 Trace Requirements 79 5.2 Maintain Requirements 83 5.3 Prioritize Requirements 86 5.4 Assess Requirements Changes 91 5.5 Approve Requirements 95 Chapter 6: Strategy Analysis 6.1 Analyze Current State 103 6.2 Define Future State 110 6.3 Assess Risks 120 6.4 Define Change Strategy 124 Chapter 7: Requirements Analysis and Design Definition 7.1 Specify and Model Requirements 136 7.2 Verify Requirements 141 7.3 Validate Requirements 144 7.4 Define Requirements Architecture 148 7.5 Define Design Options 152 7.6 Analyze Potential Value and Recommend Solution 157 Chapter 8: Solution Evaluation 8.1 Measure Solution Performance 166 8.2 Analyze Performance Measures 170 8.3 Assess Solution Limitations 173 8.4 Assess Enterprise Limitations 177 8.5 Recommend Actions to Increase Solution Value 182 Chapter 9: Underlying Competencies 9.1 Analytical Thinking and Problem Solving 188
- 11. Table of Contents iii 9.2Behavioural Characteristics 194 9.3 Business Knowledge 199 9.4 Communication Skills 203 9.5 Interaction Skills 207 9.6 Tools and Technology 211 Chapter 10: Techniques 10.1 Acceptance and Evaluation Criteria 217 10.2 Backlog Management 220 10.3 Balanced Scorecard 223 10.4 Benchmarking and Market Analysis 226 10.5 Brainstorming 227 10.6 Business Capability Analysis 230 10.7 Business Cases 234 10.8 Business Model Canvas 236 10.9 Business Rules Analysis 240 10.10 Collaborative Games 243 10.11 Concept Modelling 245 10.12 Data Dictionary 247 10.13 Data Flow Diagrams 250 10.14 Data Mining 253 10.15 Data Modelling 256 10.16 Decision Analysis 261 10.17 Decision Modelling 265 10.18 Document Analysis 269 10.19 Estimation 271 10.20 Financial Analysis 274 10.21 Focus Groups 279 10.22 Functional Decomposition 283 10.23 Glossary 286 10.24 Interface Analysis 287 10.25 Interviews 290 10.26 Item Tracking 294 10.27 Lessons Learned 296 10.28 Metrics and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) 297 10.29 Mind Mapping 299 10.30 Non-Functional Requirements Analysis 302 10.31 Observation 305 10.32 Organizational Modelling 308
- 12. Table of Contents iv 10.33Prioritization 311 10.34 Process Analysis 314 10.35 Process Modelling 318 10.36 Prototyping 323 10.37 Reviews 326 10.38 Risk Analysis and Management 329 10.39 Roles and Permissions Matrix 333 10.40 Root Cause Analysis 335 10.41 Scope Modelling 338 10.42 Sequence Diagrams 341 10.43 Stakeholder List, Map, or Personas 344 10.44 State Modelling 348 10.45 Survey or Questionnaire 350 10.46 SWOT Analysis 353 10.47 Use Cases and Scenarios 356 10.48 User Stories 359 10.49 Vendor Assessment 361 10.50 Workshops 363 Chapter 11: Perspectives 11.1 The Agile Perspective 368 11.2 The Business Intelligence Perspective 381 11.3 The Information Technology Perspective 394 11.4 The Business Architecture Perspective 408 11.5 The Business Process Management Perspective 424 Appendix A: Glossary 441 Appendix B: Techniques to Task Mapping 457 Appendix C: Contributors 473 Appendix D: Summary of Changes from BABOK® Guide v 2.0 483
- 13. v Preface IIBA® was foundedin Toronto, Canada in October of 2003 to support the business analysis community by: • creating and developing awareness and recognition of the value and contribution of the business analyst, • defining the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® ), • providing a forum for knowledge sharing and contribution to the business analysis profession, and • publicly recognizing and certifying qualified practitioners through an internationally acknowledged certification program. The Body of Knowledge Committee was formed in October of 2004 to define and draft a global standard for the practice of business analysis. In January of 2005, IIBA released version 1.0 of A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) for feedback and comment. That version included an outline of the proposed content and some key definitions. Version 1.4 was released in October of 2005, with draft content in some knowledge areas. Version 1.6, which included detailed information regarding most of the knowledge areas, was published in draft form in June of 2006 and updated to incorporate errata in October of 2008. The Body of Knowledge Committee developed version 2.0 of A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) with the guidance of expert writing teams, and feedback garnered from expert, practitioner, and public reviews. Version 2.0 introduced such concepts as the Requirements Classification Schema and the Input/Output models. Version 2.0 was published in 2009 and became the globally recognized standard for the practice of business analysis. Following the publication of version 2.0, IIBA sought out a number of recognized experts in business analysis and related fields and solicited their feedback on the content of that edition. The Body of Knowledge Committee used these comments to plan the vision and scope of this revision. The Body of Knowledge Committee worked with teams of expert writers to revise and update the content. The revised draft of A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) was reviewed by teams of both expert and practitioner reviewers. The Body of Knowledge Committee used the feedback provided to further enhance and refine the text and then made the content available to the business analysis community for review in 2014. The thousands of items of feedback from this public review were used to further revise the text to form A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) version 3.0. The goal of this revision was to: • incorporate new concepts and practices in use since the last revision, • address the broadening and evolving scope of the profession, • incorporate lessons learned from practitioners who have worked with the current version, • improve the readability and usability of the guide, • improve the consistency and quality of text and illustrations, and • improve consistency with other generally accepted standards relating to the practice of business analysis.
- 14. vi The major changesin this release include: • the inclusion of the Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ (BACCM™), • the expanded scope of the role of business analysis in creating better business outcomes, • the inclusion of Perspectives which describe specialized ways in which business analysis professionals provide unique value to the enterprise, • new and expanded Underlying Competencies to better reflect the diverse skill sets of the business analyst, and • new techniques that have emerged in the practice of business analysis. This publication supersedes A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) version 2.0. The BABOK® Guide contains a description of generally accepted practices in the field of business analysis. The content included in this release has been verified through reviews by practitioners, surveys of the business analysis community, and consultations with recognized experts in the field. The data available to IIBA demonstrates that the tasks and techniques described in this publication are in use by a majority of business analysis practitioners. As a result, we can have confidence that the tasks and techniques described in the BABOK® Guide should be applicable in most contexts where business analysis is performed, most of the time. The BABOK® Guide should not be construed to mandate that the practices described in this publication should be followed under all circumstances. Any set of practices must be tailored to the specific conditions under which business analysis is being performed. In addition, practices which are not generally accepted by the business analysis community at the time of publication may be equally effective, or more effective, than the practices described in the BABOK® Guide. As such practices become generally accepted, and as data is collected to verify their effectiveness, they will be incorporated into future editions of this publication. IIBA encourages all practitioners of business analysis to be open to new approaches and new ideas, and wishes to encourage innovation in the practice of business analysis. IIBA would like to extend its thanks and the thanks of the business analysis community to all those who volunteered their time and effort to the development of this revision, as well as those who provided informal feedback to us in other ways.
- 15. 1 1 Introduction A Guideto the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide) is the globally recognized standard for the practice of business analysis. The BABOK® Guide describes business analysis knowledge areas, tasks, underlying competencies, techniques and perspectives on how to approach business analysis. 1.1 Purpose of the BABOK® Guide The primary purpose of the BABOK® Guide is to define the profession of business analysis and provide a set of commonly accepted practices. It helps practitioners discuss and define the skills necessary to effectively perform business analysis work. The BABOK® Guide also helps people who work with and employ business analysts to understand the skills and knowledge they should expect from a skilled practitioner. Business analysis is a broad profession in which business analysts might perform work for many different types of initiatives across an enterprise. Practitioners may employ different competencies, knowledge, skills, terminology, and attitudes that they use when performing business analysis tasks. The BABOK® Guide is a common framework for all perspectives, describing business analysis tasks that are performed to properly analyze a change or evaluate the necessity for a change. Tasks may vary in form, order, or importance for individual business analysts or for various initiatives. The six knowledge areas of the BABOK® Guide (Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring, Elicitation and Collaboration, Requirements Life Cycle Management, Strategy Analysis, Requirements Analysis and Design Definition (RADD), and
- 16. What is BusinessAnalysis? Introduction 2 Solution Evaluation) describe the practice of business analysis as it is applied within the boundaries of a project or throughout enterprise evolution and continuous improvement. The following image shows how three of the knowledge areas support the delivery of business value before, during, and after the life cycle of a project. Figure 1.1.1: Business Analysis Beyond Projects 1.2 What is Business Analysis? Business analysis is the practice of enabling change in an enterprise by defining needs and recommending solutions that deliver value to stakeholders. Business analysis enables an enterprise to articulate needs and the rationale for change, and to design and describe solutions that can deliver value. Business analysis is performed on a variety of initiatives within an enterprise. Initiatives may be strategic, tactical, or operational. Business analysis may be performed within the boundaries of a project or throughout enterprise evolution and continuous improvement. It can be used to understand the current state, to define the future state, and to determine the activities required to move from the current to the future state. Business analysis can be performed from a diverse array of perspectives. The BABOK® Guide describes several of these perspectives: agile, business intelligence, information technology, business architecture, and business process management. A perspective can be thought of as a lens through which the business analysis practitioner views their work activities based on the current context. One or many perspectives may apply to an initiative, and the perspectives outlined in the BABOK® Guide do not represent all the contexts for business analysis or the complete set of business analysis disciplines. 1.3 Who is a Business Analyst? A business analyst is any person who performs business analysis tasks described in the BABOK® Guide, no matter their job title or organizational role. Business analysts are responsible for discovering, synthesizing, and analyzing information Pre-Project Post-Project Benefits Project Delivery Strategy Analysis RADD Rationale Project Solution Evaluation
- 17. Introduction Structure ofthe BABOK® Guide 3 from a variety of sources within an enterprise, including tools, processes, documentation, and stakeholders. The business analyst is responsible for eliciting the actual needs of stakeholders—which frequently involves investigating and clarifying their expressed desires—in order to determine underlying issues and causes. Business analysts play a role in aligning the designed and delivered solutions with the needs of stakeholders. The activities that business analysts perform include: • understanding enterprise problems and goals, • analyzing needs and solutions, • devising strategies, • driving change, and • facilitating stakeholder collaboration. Other common job titles for people who perform business analysis include: • business architect, • business systems analyst, • data analyst, • enterprise analyst, • management consultant, • process analyst, • product manager, • product owner, • requirements engineer, and • systems analyst. 1.4 Structure of the BABOK® Guide The core content of the BABOK® Guide is composed of business analysis tasks organized into knowledge areas. Knowledge areas are a collection of logically (but not sequentially) related tasks. These tasks describe specific activities that accomplish the purpose of their associated knowledge area. The Business Analysis Key Concepts, Underlying Competencies, Techniques, and Perspectives sections form the extended content in the BABOK® Guide that helps guide business analysts to better perform business analysis tasks. • Business Analysis Key Concepts: define the key terms needed to understand all other content, concepts, and ideas within the BABOK® Guide. • Underlying Competencies: provide a description of the behaviours, characteristics, knowledge, and personal qualities that support the effective practice of business analysis.
- 18. Structure of theBABOK® Guide Introduction 4 • Techniques: provide a means to perform business analysis tasks. The techniques described in the BABOK® Guide are intended to cover the most common and widespread techniques practiced within the business analysis community. • Perspectives: describe various views of business analysis. Perspectives help business analysts working from various points of view to better perform business analysis tasks, given the context of the initiative. 1.4.1 Key Concepts The Business Analysis Key Concepts chapter provides a basic understanding of the central ideas necessary for understanding the BABOK® Guide. This chapter consists of: • Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ (BACCM™) • Key Terms • Requirements Classification Schema • Stakeholders • Requirements and Design 1.4.2 Knowledge Areas Knowledge areas represent areas of specific business analysis expertise that encompass several tasks. The six knowledge areas are: Each knowledge area includes a visual representation of its inputs and outputs. • Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring: describes the tasks that business analysts perform to organize and coordinate the efforts of business analysts and stakeholders. These tasks produce outputs that are used as key inputs and guidelines for the other tasks throughout the BABOK® Guide. • Elicitation and Collaboration: describes the tasks that business analysts perform to prepare for and conduct elicitation activities and confirm the results obtained. It also describes the communication with stakeholders once the business analysis information is assembled and the ongoing collaboration with them throughout the business analysis activities. • Requirements Life Cycle Management: describes the tasks that business analysts perform in order to manage and maintain requirements and design information from inception to retirement. These tasks describe establishing meaningful relationships between related requirements and designs, and assessing, analyzing and gaining consensus on proposed changes to requirements and designs. • Strategy Analysis: describes the business analysis work that must be performed to collaborate with stakeholders in order to identify a need of strategic or tactical importance (the business need), enable the enterprise to
- 19. Introduction Structure ofthe BABOK® Guide 5 address that need, and align the resulting strategy for the change with higher- and lower-level strategies. • Requirements Analysis and Design Definition: describes the tasks that business analysts perform to structure and organize requirements discovered during elicitation activities, specify and model requirements and designs, validate and verify information, identify solution options that meet business needs, and estimate the potential value that could be realized for each solution option. This knowledge area covers the incremental and iterative activities ranging from the initial concept and exploration of the need through the transformation of those needs into a particular recommended solution. • Solution Evaluation: describes the tasks that business analysts perform to assess the performance of and value delivered by a solution in use by the enterprise, and to recommend removal of barriers or constraints that prevent the full realization of the value. The following diagram shows a general relationship between the knowledge areas. Figure 1.4.1: Relationships Between Knowledge Areas 1.4.3 Tasks A task is a discrete piece of work that may be performed formally or informally as part of business analysis. The BABOK® Guide defines a list of business analysis tasks. The definition of a given task is universally applicable to business analysis efforts, independent of the initiative type. A business analyst may perform other Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring Requirements Life Cycle Management Solution Evaluation Elicitation and Collaboration Requirements Analysis and Design Definition Strategy Analysis
- 20. Structure of theBABOK® Guide Introduction 6 activities as assigned by their organization, but these additional activities are not considered to be part of the business analysis profession. Tasks are grouped into knowledge areas. Business analysts perform tasks from all knowledge areas sequentially, iteratively, or simultaneously. The BABOK® Guide does not prescribe a process or an order in which tasks are performed. Tasks may be performed in any order, as long as the necessary inputs to a task are present. A business analysis initiative may start with any task, although likely candidates are Analyze Current State (p. 103) or Measure Solution Performance (p. 166). Each task in the BABOK® Guide is presented in the following format: • Purpose • Description • Inputs • Elements • Guidelines/Tools • Techniques • Stakeholders • Outputs .1 Purpose The Purpose section provides a short description of the reason for a business analyst to perform the task, and the value created through performing the task. .2 Description The Description section explains in greater detail what the task is, why it is performed, and what it should accomplish. .3 Inputs The Inputs section lists the inputs for the task. Inputs are information consumed or transformed to produce an output, and represent the information necessary for a task to begin. They may be explicitly generated outside the scope of business analysis or generated by a business analysis task. Inputs that are generated outside of the business analysis efforts are identified with the qualifier '(external)' in the input list. There is no assumption that the presence of an input means that the associated deliverable is complete or in its final state. The input only needs to be sufficiently complete to allow successive work to begin. Any number of instances of an input may exist during the life cycle of an initiative. The Inputs section includes a visual representation of the inputs and outputs, the other tasks that use the outputs, as well as the guidelines and tools listed in the task.
- 21. Introduction Structure ofthe BABOK® Guide 7 .4 Elements The Elements section describes the key concepts that are needed to understand how to perform the task. Elements are not mandatory as part of performing a task, and their usage might depend upon the business analysis approach. .5 Guidelines and Tools The Guidelines and Tools section lists resources that are required to transform the input into an output. A guideline provides instructions or descriptions on why or how to undertake a task. A tool is something used to undertake a task. Guidelines and tools can include outputs of other tasks. .6 Techniques The Techniques section lists the techniques that can be used to perform the business analysis task. .7 Stakeholders The Stakeholders section is composed of a generic list of stakeholders who are likely to participate in performing that task or who will be affected by it. The BABOK® Guide does not mandate that these roles be filled for any given initiative. .8 Outputs The Outputs section describes the results produced by performing the task. Outputs are created, transformed, or changed in state as a result of the successful completion of a task. An output may be a deliverable or be a part of a larger deliverable. The form of an output is dependent on the type of initiative underway, standards adopted by the organization, and best judgment of the business analyst as to an appropriate way to address the information needs of key stakeholders. As with inputs, an instance of a task may be completed without an output being in its final state. Tasks that use a specific output do not necessarily have to wait for its completion for work within the task to begin. 1.4.4 Underlying Competencies Underlying competencies reflect knowledge, skills, behaviours, characteristics, and personal qualities that help one successfully perform the role of the business analyst. These underlying competencies are not unique to the business analysis profession. However, successful execution of tasks and techniques is often dependent on proficiency in one or more underlying competencies. Underlying competencies have the following structure: • Purpose • Definition • Effectiveness Measures
- 22. Structure of theBABOK® Guide Introduction 8 .1 Purpose The Purpose section describes why it is beneficial for business analysts to have this underlying competency. .2 Definition The Definition section describes the skills and expertise involved in the application of this competency. .3 Effectiveness Measures The Effectiveness Measures section describes how to determine whether a person is demonstrating skills in this underlying competency. 1.4.5 Techniques Techniques provide additional information on ways that a task may be performed. The list of techniques included in the BABOK® Guide is not exhaustive. There are multiple techniques that may be applied alternatively or in conjunction with other techniques to accomplish a task. Business analysts are encouraged to modify existing techniques or engineer new ones to best suit their situation and the goals of the tasks they perform. Techniques have the following structure: • Purpose • Description • Elements • Usage Considerations .1 Purpose The Purpose section describes what the technique is used for and the circumstances under which it is most likely to be applicable. .2 Description The Description section describes what the technique is and how it is used. .3 Elements The Elements section describes key concepts that are needed to understand how to use the technique. .4 Usage Considerations The Usage Considerations section describes the conditions under which the technique may be more or less effective.
- 23. Introduction Structure ofthe BABOK® Guide 9 1.4.6 Perspectives Perspectives are used within business analysis work to provide focus to tasks and techniques specific to the context of the initiative. Most initiatives are likely to engage one or more perspectives. The perspectives included in the BABOK® Guide are: • Agile • Business Intelligence • Information Technology • Business Architecture • Business Process Management These perspectives do not presume to represent all the possible perspectives from which business analysis is practiced. The perspectives discussed in the BABOK® Guide represent some of the more common views of business analysis at the time of writing. Perspectives are not mutually exclusive, in that a given initiative might employ more than one perspective. Perspectives have the following structure: • Change Scope • Business Analysis Scope • Methodologies, Approaches, and Techniques • Underlying Competencies • Impact on Knowledge Areas .1 Change Scope The Change Scope section describes what parts of the enterprise the change encompasses when viewed from this perspective and to what extent it impacts both the objectives and operations of the enterprise. The change scope also identifies the type of problems solved, the nature of the solutions being sought, and the approach to delivering these solutions and measuring their value. .2 Business Analysis Scope The Business Analysis Scope section describes the key stakeholders, including a profile of the likely types of sponsors, the target stakeholders, and the business analyst's role within an initiative. It also defines likely outcomes that would be expected from business analysis work in this perspective. .3 Methodologies, Approaches, and Techniques The composition of this section is unique to each perspective. In each case it describes the methodologies, approaches, or techniques that are common and specific to the application of business analysis in the perspective. Methodologies
- 24. Structure of theBABOK® Guide Introduction 10 and approaches are specialized ways of undertaking the business analysis work. The techniques included in this section are techniques that are not included in the Techniques chapter of the BABOK® Guide but are especially relevant to the perspective. In the Business Architecture perspective, reference models are listed instead of methodologies or approaches. In the Business Process Management perspective, frameworks are listed instead of approaches. .4 Underlying Competencies The Underlying Competencies section describes the competencies that are most prevalent in the perspective. .5 Impact on Knowledge Areas The Impact on Knowledge Areas section describes how knowledge areas are applied or modified. It also explains how specific activities within a perspective are mapped to tasks in the BABOK® Guide.
- 25. 11 2 Business AnalysisKey Concepts The Business Analysis Key Concepts chapter includes information that provides a foundation for all other content, concepts, and ideas within the BABOK® Guide. It provides business analysts with a basic understanding of the central ideas necessary for understanding and employing the BABOK® Guide in their daily practice of business analysis. This chapter consists of: • Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ (BACCM™): defines a conceptual framework for the business analysis profession. • Key Terms: provides definitions of essential concepts, which are highlighted because of their importance to the BABOK® Guide. • Requirements Classification Schema: identifies levels or types of requirements that assist the business analyst and other stakeholders in categorizing requirements. • Stakeholders: defines roles, and characteristics of groups or individuals participating in or affected by the business analysis activities within a change. • Requirements and Designs: describes the distinction between—and the importance of—requirements and designs as they relate to business analysis.
- 26. The Business AnalysisCore Concept Model™ Business Analysis Key Concepts 12 2.1 The Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ The Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ (BACCM™) is a conceptual framework for business analysis. It encompasses what business analysis is and what it means to those performing business analysis tasks regardless of perspective, industry, methodology, or level in the organization. It is composed of six terms that have a common meaning to all business analysts and helps them discuss both business analysis and its relationships with common terminology. Each of these terms is considered to be a core concept. The six core concepts in the BACCM are: Change, Need, Solution, Stakeholder, Value, and Context. Each core concept is an idea fundamental to the practice of business analysis, and all the concepts are equal and necessary. Each core concept is defined by the other five core concepts and cannot be fully understood until all the concepts are understood. No single concept holds greater importance or significance over any other concept. These concepts are instrumental to understanding the type of information elicited, analyzed, or managed in business analysis tasks. The BACCM can be used to: • describe the profession and domain of business analysis, • communicate about business analysis with a common terminology, • evaluate the relationships of key concepts in business analysis, • perform better business analysis by holistically evaluating the relationships among these six concepts, and • evaluate the impact of these concepts and relationships at any point during a work effort in order to establish both a foundation and a path forward. Table 2.1.1: The BACCM Core Concept Description Change The act of transformation in response to a need. Change works to improve the performance of an enterprise. These improvements are deliberate and controlled through business analysis activities. Need A problem or opportunity to be addressed. Needs can cause changes by motivating stakeholders to act. Changes can also cause needs by eroding or enhancing the value delivered by existing solutions. Solution A specific way of satisfying one or more needs in a context. A solution satisfies a need by resolving a problem faced by stakeholders or enabling stakeholders to take advantage of an opportunity.
- 27. Business Analysis KeyConcepts The Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ 13 The core concepts can be used by business analysts to consider the quality and completeness of the work being done. Within each knowledge area description there are examples of how the core concepts may be used and/or applied during the tasks within the knowledge area. While planning or performing a task or technique, business analysts can consider how each core concept is addressed by asking questions such as: • What are the kinds of changes we are doing? • What are the needs we are trying to satisfy? • What are the solutions we are creating or changing? Stakeholder A group or individual with a relationship to the change, the need, or the solution. Stakeholders are often defined in terms of interest in, impact on, and influence over the change. Stakeholders are grouped based on their relationship to the needs, changes, and solutions. Value The worth, importance, or usefulness of something to a stakeholder within a context. Value can be seen as potential or realized returns, gains, and improvements. It is also possible to have a decrease in value in the form of losses, risks, and costs. Value can be tangible or intangible. Tangible value is directly measurable. Tangible value often has a significant monetary component. Intangible value is measured indirectly. Intangible value often has a significant motivational component, such as a company's reputation or employee morale. In some cases, value can be assessed in absolute terms, but in many cases is assessed in relative terms: one solution option is more valuable than another from the perspective of a given set of stakeholders. Context The circumstances that influence, are influenced by, and provide understanding of the change. Changes occur within a context. The context is everything relevant to the change that is within the environment. Context may include attitudes, behaviours, beliefs, competitors, culture, demographics, goals, governments, infrastructure, languages, losses, processes, products, projects, sales, seasons, terminology, technology, weather, and any other element meeting the definition. Table 2.1.1: The BACCM (Continued) Core Concept Description
- 28. Key Terms BusinessAnalysis Key Concepts 14 • Who are the stakeholders involved? • What do stakeholders consider to be of value? • What are the contexts that we and the solution are in? If any of the core concepts experience a change, it should cause us to re-evaluate these core concepts and their relationships to value delivery. Figure 2.1.1: The BACCM 2.2 Key Terms Business Analysis For more information, see What is Business Analysis? (p. 2). The BABOK® Guide describes and defines business analysis as the practice of enabling change in an enterprise by defining needs and recommending solutions that deliver value to stakeholders. Business Analysis Information Business analysis information refers to the broad and diverse sets of information that business analysts analyze, transform, and report. It is information of any Stakeholders Contexts Solutions Needs Value Changes
- 29. Business Analysis KeyConcepts Key Terms 15 kind—at any level of detail—that is used as an input to, or is an output of, business analysis work. Examples of business analysis information include elicitation results, requirements, designs, solution options, solution scope, and change strategy. It is essential to expand the object of many business analysis activities from 'requirements' to 'information' to ensure that all inputs and outputs of business analysis are subject to the tasks and activities described in the BABOK® Guide. For example, when performing 'Plan Business Analysis Information Management' it includes all the examples listed above. If the BABOK® Guide described 'Plan Requirements Management', it would exclude important outputs like elicitation results, solution options, and change strategy. Design For more information, see Requirements and Designs (p. 19). A design is a usable representation of a solution. Design focuses on understanding how value might be realized by a solution if it is built. The nature of the representation may be a document (or set of documents) and can vary widely depending on the circumstances. Enterprise An enterprise is a system of one or more organizations and the solutions they use to pursue a shared set of common goals. These solutions (also referred to as organizational capabilities) can be processes, tools or information. For the purpose of business analysis, enterprise boundaries can be defined relative to the change and need not be constrained by the boundaries of a legal entity, organization, or organizational unit. An enterprise may include any number of business, government, or any other type of organization. Organization An autonomous group of people under the management of a single individual or board, that works towards common goals and objectives. Organizations often have a clearly defined boundary and operate on a continuous basis, as opposed to an initiative or project team, which may be disbanded once its objectives are achieved. Plan A plan is a proposal for doing or achieving something. Plans describe a set of events, the dependencies among the events, the expected sequence, the schedule, the results or outcomes, the materials and resources needed, and the stakeholders involved. Requirement For more information, see Requirements and Designs (p. 19). A requirement is a usable representation of a need. Requirements focus on understanding what kind of value could be delivered if a requirement is fulfilled. The nature of the representation may be a document (or set of documents), but can vary widely depending on the circumstances.
- 30. Requirements Classification SchemaBusiness Analysis Key Concepts 16 Risk Risk is the effect of uncertainty on the value of a change, a solution, or the enterprise. Business analysts collaborate with other stakeholders to identify, assess, and prioritize risks, and to deal with those risks by altering the likelihood of the conditions or events that lead to the uncertainty: mitigating the consequences, removing the source of the risk, avoiding the risk altogether by deciding not to start or continue with an activity that leads to the risk, sharing the risk with other parties, or accepting or even increasing the risk to deal with an opportunity. 2.3 Requirements Classification Schema For the purposes of the BABOK® Guide, the following classification schema describes requirements: • Business requirements: statements of goals, objectives, and outcomes that describe why a change has been initiated. They can apply to the whole of an enterprise, a business area, or a specific initiative. • Stakeholder requirements: describe the needs of stakeholders that must be met in order to achieve the business requirements. They may serve as a bridge between business and solution requirements. • Solution requirements: describe the capabilities and qualities of a solution that meets the stakeholder requirements. They provide the appropriate level of detail to allow for the development and implementation of the solution. Solution requirements can be divided into two sub-categories: • functional requirements: describe the capabilities that a solution must have in terms of the behaviour and information that the solution will manage, and For more information, see Non-Functional Requirements Analysis (p. 302). • non-functional requirements or quality of service requirements: do not relate directly to the behaviour of functionality of the solution, but rather describe conditions under which a solution must remain effective or qualities that a solution must have. • Transition requirements: describe the capabilities that the solution must have and the conditions the solution must meet to facilitate transition from the current state to the future state, but which are not needed once the change is complete. They are differentiated from other requirements types because they are of a temporary nature. Transition requirements address topics such as data conversion, training, and business continuity. 2.4 Stakeholders Each task includes a list of stakeholders who are likely to participate in the execution of that task or who will be affected by it. A stakeholder is an individual or group that a business analyst is likely to interact with directly or indirectly. The
- 31. Business Analysis KeyConcepts Stakeholders 17 BABOK® Guide does not mandate that these roles be filled for any given initiative. Any stakeholder can be a source of requirements, assumptions, or constraints. This list is not intended to be an exhaustive list of all possible stakeholder classifications. Some additional examples of people who fit into each of these generic roles are listed in the definitions below. In most cases there will be multiple stakeholder roles found within each category. Similarly, a single individual may fill more than one role. For the purpose of the BABOK® Guide, the generic list of stakeholders includes the following roles: • business analyst, • customer, • domain subject matter expert, • end user, • implementation subject matter expert, • operational support, • project manager, • regulator, • sponsor, • supplier, and • tester. 2.4.1 Business Analyst The business analyst is inherently a stakeholder in all business analysis activities. The BABOK® Guide presumes that the business analyst is responsible and accountable for the execution of these activities. In some cases the business analyst may also be responsible for performing activities that fall under another stakeholder role. 2.4.2 Customer A customer uses or may use products or services produced by the enterprise and may have contractual or moral rights that the enterprise is obliged to meet. 2.4.3 Domain Subject Matter Expert A domain subject matter expert is any individual with in-depth knowledge of a topic relevant to the business need or solution scope. This role is often filled by people who may be end users or people who have in-depth knowledge of the solution such as managers, process owners, legal staff, consultants, and others. 2.4.4 End User End users are stakeholders who directly interact with the solution. End users can include all participants in a business process, or who use the product or solution. 2.4.5 Implementation Subject Matter Expert An implementation subject matter expert is any stakeholder who has specialized knowledge regarding the implementation of one or more solution components.
- 32. Stakeholders Business AnalysisKey Concepts 18 While it is not possible to define a listing of implementation subject matter expert roles that are appropriate for all initiatives, some of the most common roles are: project librarian, change manager, configuration manager, solution architect, developer, database administrator, information architect, usability analyst, trainer, and organizational change consultant. 2.4.6 Operational Support Operational support is responsible for the day-to-day management and maintenance of a system or product. While it is not possible to define a listing of operational support roles that are appropriate for all initiatives, some of the most common roles are: operations analyst, product analyst, help desk, and release manager. 2.4.7 Project Manager Project managers are responsible for managing the work required to deliver a solution that meets a business need, and for ensuring that the project's objectives are met while balancing the project factors including scope, budget, schedule, resources, quality, and risk. While it is not possible to completely define a listing of project management roles that are appropriate for all initiatives, some of the most common roles are: project lead, technical lead, product manager, and team leader. 2.4.8 Regulator Regulators are responsible for the definition and enforcement of standards. Standards can be imposed on the solution by regulators through legislation, corporate governance standards, audit standards, or standards defined by organizational centers of competency. Alternate roles are government, regulatory bodies, and auditor. 2.4.9 Sponsor Sponsors are responsible for initiating the effort to define a business need and develop a solution that meets that need. They authorize the work to be performed, and control the budget and scope for the initiative. Alternate roles are executive and project sponsor. 2.4.10 Supplier A supplier is a stakeholder outside the boundary of a given organization or organizational unit. Suppliers provide products or services to the organization and may have contractual or moral rights and obligations that must be considered. Alternate roles are providers, vendors, and consultants.
- 33. Business Analysis KeyConcepts Requirements and Designs 19 2.4.11 Tester Testers are responsible for determining how to verify that the solution meets the requirements defined by the business analyst, as well as conducting the verification process. Testers also seek to ensure that the solution meets applicable quality standards, and that the risk of defects or failures is understood and minimized. An alternate role is quality assurance analyst. 2.5 Requirements and Designs Eliciting, analyzing, validating, and managing requirements have consistently been recognized as key activities of business analysis. However, it is important to recognize that business analysts are also responsible for the definition of design, at some level, in an initiative. The level of responsibility for design varies based on the perspective within which a business analyst is working. Requirements are focused on the need; designs are focused on the solution. The distinction between requirements and designs is not always clear. The same techniques are used to elicit, model, and analyze both. A requirement leads to a design which in turn may drive the discovery and analysis of more requirements. The shift in focus is often subtle. The classification as a requirement or a design may become less significant as the business analyst's work progresses to a greater understanding of and eventual fulfillment of the need. The tasks in the BABOK® Guide such as Trace Requirements (p. 79) or Specify and Model Requirements (p. 136) may refer to requirements, but the intent is to include designs as well. Business analysis can be complex and recursive. A requirement (or set of requirements) may be used to define a design. That design may then be used to elicit additional requirements that are used to define more detailed designs. The business analyst may hand off requirements and designs to other stakeholders who may further elaborate on the designs. Whether it is the business analyst or some other role that completes the designs, the business analyst often reviews the final designs to ensure that they align with the requirements. The following table provides some basic examples of how information may be viewed as either a requirement or a design. Table 2.5.1: Requirements and Design Requirement Design View six months sales data across multiple organizational units in a single view. A sketch of a dashboard. Reduce amount of time required to pick and pack a customer order. Process model. Record and access a medical patient’s history. Screen mock-up showing specific data fields.
- 34. Requirements and DesignsBusiness Analysis Key Concepts 20 Stakeholders may present a need or a solution to an assumed need. A business analyst uses activities found in Elicitation and Collaboration (p. 53), Strategy Analysis (p. 99), Requirements Analysis and Design Definition (p. 133), and Solution Evaluation (p. 163) to transform that request into a requirement or design. Regardless of the focus of the stakeholder, the importance of the role of the business analyst lies in continuously asking the question ‘why?’. For example, “Why is either the requirement or design necessary to provide value to an enterprise and to facilitate the realization of an enterprise’s goals and objectives?” Figure 2.5.1: Requirements and Design Cycle Develop business strategy, goals, and objectives for a new business. Business Capability Model. Provide information in English and French. Prototype with text displayed in English and French. Table 2.5.1: Requirements and Design (Continued) Requirement Design Transition Requirements What are the conditions? Business Requirements Why do I want it? Solution Requirements What do I want? Stakeholder Requirements What are the needs? Cycle continues until requirements are met. A s s e s s O utcomes Des i g n D e s ign Desi g n
- 35. 21 3 Business AnalysisPlanning and Monitoring The Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring knowledge area tasks organize and coordinate the efforts of business analysts and stakeholders. These tasks produce outputs that are used as key guidelines for the other tasks throughout the BABOK® Guide. The Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring knowledge area includes the following tasks: • Plan Business Analysis Approach: describes the planning of business analysis work from creation or selection of a methodology to planning the individual activities, tasks, and deliverables. • Plan Stakeholder Engagement: describes understanding which stakeholders are relevant to the change, what business analysts need from them, what they need from business analysts, and the best way to collaborate. • Plan Business Analysis Governance: defines the components of business analysis that are used to support the governance function of the organization. It helps ensure that decisions are made properly and consistently, and follows a process that ensures decision makers have the information they need. Examples of this include requirements management, business analysis risk management, and allocation of business analysis resources. • Plan Business Analysis Information Management: defines how information developed by business analysts (including requirements and designs) is captured, stored, and integrated with other information for long-term use.
- 36. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring 22 • Identify Business Analysis Performance Improvements: describes managing and monitoring how business analysis work is performed to ensure that commitments are met and continuous learning and improvement opportunities are realized. The Core Concept Model in Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring The Business Analysis Core Concept Model™ (BACCM™) describes the relationships among the six core concepts. The following table describes the usage and application of each of the core concepts within the context of Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring. Table 3.0.1: The Core Concept Model in Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring Core Concept During Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring, business analysts... Change: the act of transformation in response to a need. are responsible for determining how changes to business analysis results will be requested and authorized. Need: a problem or opportunity to be addressed. choose a business analysis approach that provides adequate analysis for the change. Solution: a specific way of satisfying one or more needs in a context. evaluate if business analysis performance was a key contributor to the successful implementation of a solution. Stakeholder: a group or individual with a relationship to the change, the need, or the solution. perform a stakeholder analysis to ensure planning and monitoring activities reflect stakeholder needs and account for stakeholder characteristics. Value: the worth, importance, or usefulness of something to a stakeholder within a context. conduct performance analysis to ensure business analysis activities continue to produce sufficient value for the stakeholders. Context: the circumstances that influence, are influenced by, and provide understanding of the change. ensure a complete understanding of the context under analysis in order to develop an efficient business analysis approach.
- 37. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring 23 Figure 3.0.1: Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring Input/Output Diagram Input Tasks 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance 3.2 Plan Stakeholder Engagement 3.1 Plan Business Analysis Approach 3.4 Plan Business Analysis Information Management 3.5 Identify Business Analysis Performance Improvements Needs Performance Objectives (external) 3.1 Business Analysis Approach 3.2 Stakeholder Engagement Approach 3.3 Governance Approach 3.5 Business Analysis Performance Assessment 3.4 Information Management Approach Output
- 38. Plan Business AnalysisApproach Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 24 3.1 Plan Business Analysis Approach 3.1.1 Purpose The purpose of Plan Business Analysis Approach is to define an appropriate method to conduct business analysis activities. 3.1.2 Description Business analysis approaches describe the overall method that will be followed when performing business analysis work on a given initiative, how and when tasks will be performed, and the deliverables that will be produced. The business analyst may also identify an initial set of techniques to use. This list may change as the initiative proceeds and the business analyst gains a deeper understanding of the change and its stakeholders. The business analysis approach may be defined by a methodology or by organizational standards. In some organizations, elements of the business analysis approach may be standardized and formalized into a repeatable business analysis process which can be leveraged for each effort. Even where a standard approach exists, it may be tailored to the needs of a specific initiative. Tailoring may be governed by standards that define which approaches are permitted, which elements of those processes may be tailored, and general guidelines for selecting a process. If organizational standards do not exist, the business analyst works with the appropriate stakeholders to determine how the work will be completed. For example, if the change is delivered via a project, the standards and approach may be developed during the project planning phase. The business analysis approach should: • align to the overall goals of the change, • coordinate the business analysis tasks with the activities and deliverables of the overall change, • include tasks to manage any risks that could reduce the quality of business analysis deliverables or impede task efficiency, and • leverage approaches and select techniques and tools that have historically worked well. 3.1.3 Inputs • Needs: the business analysis approach is shaped by the problem or opportunity faced by the organization. It is necessary to consider what is known about the need at the time of planning, while acknowledging that understanding evolves throughout business analysis activities.
- 39. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Business Analysis Approach 25 Figure 3.1.1: Plan Business Analysis Approach Input/Output Diagram Input Guidelines and Tools Tasks Using This Output Output 3.1 Plan Business Analysis Approach Business Analysis Performance Assessment 3.1 Business Analysis Approach 3.2 Plan Stakeholder Engagement Needs Business Policies Expert Judgment Methodologies and Frameworks Stakeholder Engagement Approach 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance 3.4 Plan Business Analysis Information Management 3.5 Identify Business Analysis Performance Improvements 4.1 Prepare for Elicitation 4.2 Conduct Elicitation 4.4 Communicate Business Analysis Information 4.5 Manage Stakeholder Collaboration 6.1 Analyze Current State 6.3 Assess Risks 6.4 Define Change Strategy
- 40. Plan Business AnalysisApproach Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 26 3.1.4 Elements .1 Planning Approach There are various planning methods used across perspectives, industries, and enterprises. Many planning methods fit somewhere along a continuum between predictive and adaptive approaches. Predictive approaches focus on minimizing upfront uncertainty and ensuring that the solution is defined before implementation begins in order to maximize control and minimize risk. These approaches are often preferred in situations where requirements can effectively be defined ahead of implementation, the risk of an incorrect implementation is unacceptably high, or when engaging stakeholders presents significant challenges. Adaptive approaches focus on rapid delivery of business value in short iterations in return for acceptance of a higher degree of uncertainty regarding the overall delivery of the solution. These approaches tend to be preferred when taking an exploratory approach to finding the best solution or for incremental improvement of an existing solution. Different approaches may be used within the same initiative. Among other factors, the business analyst may consider the organization’s standards, tolerance for uncertainty, and previous experience with different approaches when planning for business analysis activities. Regardless of the approach, planning is an essential task to ensure value is delivered to an enterprise. Planning typically occurs more than once on a given initiative as plans are updated to address changing business conditions and newly raised issues. The business analysis approach should describe how plans will be altered if changes are required. .2 Formality and Level of Detail of Business Analysis Deliverables When defining the business analysis approach, consider the level of formality that is appropriate for approaching and planning the initiative. Predictive approaches typically call for formal documentation and representations. Business analysis information may be captured in a formal document or set of representations following standardized templates. Information is captured at various levels of detail. The specific content and format of business analysis information can vary depending on the organizational methodologies, processes, and templates in use. Adaptive approaches favour defining requirements and designs through team interaction and gathering feedback on a working solution. Mandatory requirements representations are often limited to a prioritized requirements list. Additional business analysis documentation may be created at the discretion of the team, and generally consists of models developed to enhance the team’s understanding of a specific problem. Formal documentation is often produced after the solution is implemented to facilitate knowledge transfer.
- 41. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Business Analysis Approach 27 Other considerations that may affect the approach include: • the change is complex and high risk, • the organization is in, or interacts with, heavily regulated industries, • contracts or agreements necessitate formality, • stakeholders are geographically distributed, • resources are outsourced, • staff turnover is high and/or team members may be inexperienced, • requirements must be formally signed off, and • business analysis information must be maintained long-term or handed over for use on future initiatives. Figure 3.1.2: Formality and Level of Detail of Business Analysis Deliverables .3 Business Analysis Activities A business analysis approach provides a description of the types of activities that the business analyst will perform. Frequently the organization’s adopted methodologies influence the activities that are selected. Integrating business analysis activities in the business analysis approach includes: • identifying the activities required to complete each deliverable and then breaking each activity into tasks, • dividing the work into iterations, identifying the deliverables for each iteration, and then identifying the associated activities and tasks, or Predictive Tasks are performed in specific phases. Tasks are performed iteratively. Solution Definition Level of Formality Activities Timing Activities required to complete deliverables are identified first and then divided into tasks. Activities are divided into iterations with deliverables first and then the associated tasks are identified. Formal—information is captured in standardized templates. Informal—information is gathered through team interaction and feedback. Defined before implementation to maximize control and minimize risk. Defined in iterations to arrive at best solution or improve an existing solution. Adaptive Approach
- 42. Plan Business AnalysisApproach Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 28 • using a previous similar initiative as an outline and applying the detailed tasks and activities unique to the current initiative. .4 Timing of Business Analysis Work Business analysts determine when the business analysis tasks need to be performed and if the level of business analysis effort will need to vary over time. This type of planning includes determining whether the business analysis tasks performed within the other knowledge areas will be performed primarily in specific phases or iteratively over the course of the initiative. The timing of business analysis activities can also be affected by: • the availability of resources, • priority and/or urgency of the initiative, • other concurrent initiatives, or • constraints such as contract terms or regulatory deadlines. .5 Complexity and Risk The complexity and size of the change and the overall risk of the effort to the organization are considered when determining the business analysis approach. As complexity and risk increase or decrease, the nature and scope of business analysis work can be altered and reflected in the approach. The approach may also be altered based on the number of stakeholders or business analysis resources involved in the initiative. As the number of stakeholders increases, the approach may be adjusted to include additional process steps to better manage the business analysis work. Other factors that can impact complexity include: • size of the change, • number of business areas or systems affected, • geographic and cultural considerations, • technological complexities, and • any risks that could impede the business analysis effort. Factors that can impact the risk level of a business analysis effort include: • experience level of the business analyst, • extent of domain knowledge held by the business analyst, • level of experience stakeholders have in communicating their needs, • stakeholder attitudes about the change and business analysis in general, • amount of time allocated by stakeholders to the business analysis activities, • any pre-selected framework, methodology, tools, and/or techniques
- 43. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Business Analysis Approach 29 imposed by organizational policies and practices, and • cultural norms of the organization. .6 Acceptance The business analysis approach is reviewed and agreed upon by key stakeholders. In some organizations, the business analysis process may be more structured and require key stakeholders to sign off on the approach to ensure all business analysis activities have been identified, estimates are realistic, and the proposed roles and responsibilities are correct. Any issues raised by stakeholders when reviewing the approach are documented by the business analyst and resolutions are sought. Stakeholders also play a role in reviewing and accepting changes to the approach as alterations are made to accommodate changing conditions across the initiative. 3.1.5 Guidelines and Tools • Business Analysis Performance Assessment: provides results of previous assessments that should be reviewed and incorporated into all planning approaches. • Business Policies: define the limits within which decisions must be made. They may be described by regulations, contracts, agreements, deals, warranties, certifications, or other legal obligations. These policies can influence the business analysis approach. • Expert Judgment: used to determine the optimal business analysis approach. Expertise may be provided from a wide range of sources including stakeholders on the initiative, organizational Centres of Excellence, consultants, or associations and industry groups. Prior experiences of the business analyst and other stakeholders should be considered when selecting or modifying an approach. • Methodologies and Frameworks: shape the approach that will be used by providing methods, techniques, procedures, working concepts, and rules. They may need to be tailored to better meet the needs of the specific business challenge. • Stakeholder Engagement Approach: understanding the stakeholders and their concerns and interests may influence decisions made when determining the business analysis approach. 3.1.6 Techniques • Brainstorming: used to identify possible business analysis activities, techniques, risks and other relevant items to help build the business analysis approach. • Business Cases: used to understand whether elements of the problem or opportunity are especially time-sensitive, high-value, or whether there is any particular uncertainty around elements of the possible need or solution.
- 44. Plan Business AnalysisApproach Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 30 • Document Analysis: used to review existing organizational assets that might assist in planning the approach. • Estimation: used to determine how long it may take to perform business analysis activities. • Financial Analysis: used to assess how different approaches (and the supported delivery options) affect the value delivered. • Functional Decomposition: used to break down complex business analysis processes or approaches into more feasible components. • Interviews: used to help build the plan with an individual or small group. • Item Tracking: used to track any issues raised during planning activities with stakeholders. Can also track risk related items raised during discussions when building the approach. • Lessons Learned: used to identify an enterprise’s previous experience (both successes and challenges) with planning business analysis approach. • Process Modelling: used to define and document the business analysis approach. • Reviews: used to validate the selected business analysis approach with stakeholders. • Risk Analysis and Management: used to assess risks in order to select the proper business analysis approach. • Scope Modelling: used to determine the boundaries of the solution as an input to planning and to estimating. • Survey or Questionnaire: used to identify possible business analysis activities, techniques, risks and other relevant items to help build the business analysis approach. • Workshops: used to help build the plan in a team setting. 3.1.7 Stakeholders • Domain Subject Matter Expert: can be a source of risk when their involvement is required and availability is lacking. The approach taken may depend on availability and level of their involvement with the initiative. • Project Manager: determines that the approach is realistic for the overall schedule and timelines. The business analysis approach must be compatible with other activities. • Regulator: may be needed to provide approval for aspects of the business analysis approach or decisions made in tailoring the process, especially in organizations where the business analysis process is audited. • Sponsor: can provide needs and objectives for the approach and ensures that organizational policies are followed. The selected approach may depend on availability and involvement with the initiative.
- 45. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Stakeholder Engagement 31 3.1.8 Outputs • Business Analysis Approach: identifies the business analysis approach and activities that will be performed across an initiative including who will perform the activities, the timing and sequencing of the work, the deliverables that will be produced and the business analysis techniques that may be utilized. The remaining outputs of the Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring knowledge area may be integrated into an overall approach or be independent based upon methodology, organization, and perspective. 3.2 Plan Stakeholder Engagement 3.2.1 Purpose The purpose of Plan Stakeholder Engagement is to plan an approach for establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with the stakeholders. 3.2.2 Description Plan Stakeholder Engagement involves conducting a thorough stakeholder analysis to identify all of the involved stakeholders and analyze their characteristics. The results of the analysis are then utilized to define the best collaboration and communication approaches for the initiative and to appropriately plan for stakeholder risks. When planning for stakeholder engagement, the degree of complexity can increase disproportionately as the number of stakeholders involved in the business analysis activities increases. This is important because new or different techniques for the management of stakeholders may be required when the engagement moves from collaborating with a few stakeholders into dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of people. 3.2.3 Inputs • Needs: understanding the business need and the parts of the enterprise that it affects helps in the identification of stakeholders. The need may evolve as stakeholder analysis is performed. • Business Analysis Approach: incorporating the overall business analysis approach into the stakeholder analysis, collaboration, and communication approaches is necessary to ensure consistency across the approaches.
- 46. Plan Stakeholder EngagementBusiness Analysis Planning and Monitoring 32 Figure 3.2.1: Plan Stakeholder Engagement Input/Output Diagram 3.2.4 Elements .1 Perform Stakeholder Analysis Stakeholder analysis involves identifying the stakeholders (who will be directly or indirectly impacted by the change) and their characteristics, as well as analyzing the information once collected. Stakeholder analysis is performed repeatedly as business analysis activities continue. A thorough and detailed stakeholder list ensures that stakeholders are not overlooked. Understanding who the stakeholders are, the impact of proposed changes on them, and the influence they may have on the change is vital to understanding what needs, wants, and expectations must be satisfied by a Tasks Using This Output Output 3.2 Plan Stakeholder Engagement Business Analysis Performance Assessment 3.2 Stakeholder Engagement Approach 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance 3.1 Business Analysis Approach Needs Change Strategy Current State Description 3.4 Plan Business Analysis Information Management 4.1 Prepare for Elicitation 4.5 Manage Stakeholder Collaboration 4.2 Conduct Elicitation 4.4 Communicate Business Analysis Information 6.3 Assess Risks 6.4 Define Change Strategy 3.1 Plan Business Analysis Approach Input Guidelines and Tools
- 47. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Stakeholder Engagement 33 solution. If stakeholders are not identified, the business analyst may miss uncovering critical needs. Stakeholder needs uncovered late will often require a revision to business analysis tasks that are either in progress or are completed. This can result in increased costs and decreased stakeholder satisfaction. How business analysts perform stakeholder analysis can vary between projects, methodologies, and organizations. A company’s organizational chart and business processes can serve as an initial source for identifying internal stakeholders. The sponsor may also identify stakeholders. Stakeholders outside the organization may be identified and can be uncovered by understanding any existing contracts that may be in place, anticipated vendors that may have a role based on existing relationships with the organization, as well as regulatory and governing bodies that may influence the work. Shareholders, customers, and suppliers are also considered when searching for external stakeholders. Roles Business analysts identify stakeholder roles in order to understand where and how the stakeholders will contribute to the initiative. It is important that the business analyst is aware of the various roles a stakeholder is responsible for within the organization. Attitudes Stakeholder attitudes can positively or negatively impact a change. Business analysts identify stakeholder attitudes in order to fully understand what may impact a stakeholder’s actions and behaviours. Knowing how a stakeholder perceives the initiative allows an opportunity for the business analyst to specifically plan their collaboration and engagement with that stakeholder. Business analysts analyze stakeholder attitudes about: • business goals, objectives of the initiative, and any proposed solutions, • business analysis in general, • the level of interest in the change, • the sponsor, • team members and other stakeholders, and • collaboration and a team-based approach. Stakeholders with positive attitudes may be strong champions and great contributors. Other stakeholders may not see value in the work, may misunderstand the value being provided, or may be concerned about the effect the change will have on them. Stakeholders who are expected to serve in key roles and participate heavily in business analysis activities, but who view a change negatively, may require collaboration approaches that increase their cooperation. Decision Making Authority Business analysts identify the authority level a stakeholder possesses over business analysis activities, deliverables, and changes to business analysis work.
- 48. Plan Stakeholder EngagementBusiness Analysis Planning and Monitoring 34 Understanding authority levels upfront eliminates confusion during the business analysis effort and ensures the business analyst collaborates with the proper stakeholders when looking for a decision to be made or seeking approvals. Level of Power or Influence Understanding the nature of influence and the influence structures and channels within an organization can prove invaluable when seeking to build relationships and trust. Understanding the influence and attitude each stakeholder may have can help develop strategies for obtaining buy-in and collaboration. Business analysts evaluate how much influence is needed to implement a change compared to the amount of influence the key stakeholders can bring. If there is a mismatch between the influence required and the amount of influence the stakeholder has or is perceived to have, business analysts develop risk plans, responses and other strategies that might be needed to obtain the required level of support. .2 Define Stakeholder Collaboration Ensuring effective collaboration with stakeholders is essential for maintaining their engagement in business analysis activities. Collaboration can be a spontaneous event. However, much collaboration is deliberate and planned, with specific activities and outcomes determined ahead of time during planning activities. The business analyst may plan different collaboration approaches for internal and external stakeholders, and approaches may differ by business analysis activity. The objective is to select the approaches that work best to meet the needs of each stakeholder group and ensure their interest and involvement is maintained across the initiative. Some considerations when planning collaboration include: • timing and frequency of collaboration, • location, • available tools such as wikis and online communities, • delivery method such as in-person or virtual, and • preferences of the stakeholders. Planning considerations can be documented in the form of a stakeholder collaboration plan. As factors change, plans can be revisited, and adjustments and adaptations can be made to ensure ongoing engagement of stakeholders. .3 Stakeholder Communication Needs The business analyst evaluates: • what needs to be communicated, • what is the appropriate delivery method (written or verbal), • who the appropriate audience is, • when communication should occur, • frequency of communication,
- 49. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Stakeholder Engagement 35 • geographic location of stakeholders who will receive communications, • level of detail appropriate for the communication and stakeholder, and • level of formality of communications. Communication considerations can be documented in the form of a stakeholder communication plan. Business analysts build and review communication plans with stakeholders to ensure their communication requirements and expectations are met. 3.2.5 Guidelines and Tools • Business Analysis Performance Assessment: provides results of previous assessments that should be reviewed and incorporated. • Change Strategy: used for improved assessment of stakeholder impact and the development of more effective stakeholder engagement strategies. • Current State Description: provides the context within which the work needs to be completed. This information will lead to more effective stakeholder analysis and better understanding of the impact of the desired change. 3.2.6 Techniques • Brainstorming: used to produce the stakeholder list and identify stakeholder roles and responsibilities. • Business Rules Analysis: used to identify stakeholders who were the source of the business rules. • Document Analysis: used to review existing organizational assets that might assist in planning stakeholder engagement. • Interviews: used to interact with specific stakeholders to gain more information or knowledge about stakeholder groups. • Lessons Learned: used to identify an enterprise’s previous experience (both successes and challenges) with planning stakeholder engagement. • Mind Mapping: used to identify potential stakeholders and help understand the relationships between them. • Organizational Modelling: used to determine if the organizational units or people listed have any unique needs and interests that should be considered. Organizational models describe the roles and functions in the organization and the ways in which stakeholders interact which can help to identify stakeholders who will be affected by a change. • Process Modelling: used to categorize stakeholders by the systems that support their business processes. • Risk Analysis and Management: used to identify risks to the initiative resulting from stakeholder attitudes or the inability of key stakeholders to participate in the initiative.
- 50. Plan Stakeholder EngagementBusiness Analysis Planning and Monitoring 36 • Scope Modelling: used to develop scope models to show stakeholders that fall outside the scope of the solution but still interact with it in some way. • Stakeholder List, Map, or Personas: used to depict the relationship of stakeholders to the solution and to one another. • Survey or Questionnaire: used to identify shared characteristics of a stakeholder group. • Workshops: used to interact with groups of stakeholders to gain more information about stakeholder groups. 3.2.7 Stakeholders • Customers: a source of external stakeholders. • Domain Subject Matter Expert: may help to identify stakeholders and may themselves be identified to fulfill one or more roles on the initiative. • End User: a source of internal stakeholders. • Project Manager: may be able to identify and recommend stakeholders. Responsibility for stakeholder identification and management may be shared with the business analyst. • Regulator: may require that specific stakeholder representatives or groups be involved in the business analysis activities. • Sponsor: may request that specific stakeholders be involved in the business analysis activities. • Supplier: a source of external stakeholders. 3.2.8 Outputs • Stakeholder Engagement Approach: contains a list of the stakeholders, their characteristics which were analyzed, and a listing of roles and responsibilities for the change. It also identifies the collaboration and communication approaches the business analyst will utilize during the initiative.
- 51. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Business Analysis Governance 37 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance 3.3.1 Purpose The purpose of Plan Business Analysis Governance is to define how decisions are made about requirements and designs, including reviews, change control, approvals, and prioritization. 3.3.2 Description Business analysts ensure that a governance process is in place and clarify any ambiguities within it. A governance process identifies the decision makers, process, and information required for decisions to be made. A governance process describes how approvals and prioritization decisions are made for requirements and designs. When planning the governance approach, business analysts identify: • how business analysis work will be approached and prioritized, • what the process for proposing a change to business analysis information is, • who has the authority and responsibility to propose changes and who should be involved in the change discussions, • who has responsibility for analyzing change requests, • who has the authority to approve changes, and • how changes will be documented and communicated. 3.3.3 Inputs • Business Analysis Approach: incorporating the overall business analysis approach into the governance approach is necessary to ensure consistency across the approaches. • Stakeholder Engagement Approach: identifying stakeholders and understanding their communication and collaboration needs is useful in determining their participation in the governance approach. The engagement approach may be updated based on the completion of the governance approach.
- 52. Plan Business AnalysisGovernance Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 38 Figure 3.3.1: Plan Business Analysis Governance Input/Output Diagram 3.3.4 Elements .1 Decision Making Decisions are made throughout the initiative. A stakeholder may serve in various roles in the decision-making process such as: • participant in decision-making discussions, • subject matter expert (SME) lending experience and knowledge to the decision-making process, • reviewer of information, and • approver of decisions. The decision-making process defines what happens when teams cannot reach consensus, by identifying escalation paths and key stakeholders who hold final decision-making authority. Output Input Guidelines and Tools Tasks Using This Output 3.3 Plan Business Analysis Governance Business Analysis Performance Assessment 3.3 Governance Approach 3.4 Plan Business Analysis Information Management 3.2 Stakeholder Engagement Approach 3.1 Business Analysis Approach Business Policies Current State Description 5.3 Prioritize Requirements 5.4 Assess Requirements Changes 5.5 Approve Requirements Legal/Regulatory Information
- 53. Business Analysis Planningand Monitoring Plan Business Analysis Governance 39 .2 Change Control Process When business analysts develop a change control process, they: • Determine the process for requesting changes: specify which requirements and designs the change control process covers and determine whether it applies to all changes or only to changes of a specific size, cost, or level of effort. This process details the steps for proposing a change, when changes can be proposed, who can propose changes and how change requests are communicated. • Determine the elements of the change request: identify the information to be included in a proposal to support decision making and implementation if it is approved. Possible components to consider on a change request are: • Cost and time estimates: for each area affected by the proposed change, the expected cost of change is estimated. • Benefits: an explanation of how the change aligns with the initiative and business objectives to show how the change adds value. Benefits considered include both financial benefits and tactical benefits such as implications to scope, time, cost, quality, and resources. • Risks: an analysis of risks to the initiative, the solution, or business objectives. • Priority: the level of importance of the change relative to other factors such as organizational objectives, regulatory compliance requirements, and stakeholder needs. • Course(s) of action: the course of action for the change includes an assessment of the components of the change request (cost, time, benefits, risks and priority). It is common to identify several alternative courses, including those recommended by the requester and by other stakeholders so decision makers can make a choice that will best serve the needs of the initiative. • Determine how changes will be prioritized: the priority of the proposed change is established relative to other competing interests within the current initiative. • Determine how changes will be documented: configuration management and traceability standards establish product baselines and version control practices that identify which baseline is affected by the change. • Determine how changes will be communicated: how proposed changes, changes under review, and approved, declined, or deferred changes will be communicated to stakeholders. • Determine who will perform the impact analysis: specify who is responsible for performing an analysis of the impacts the proposed change will have across the initiative.
- 54. Plan Business AnalysisGovernance Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring 40 • Determine who will authorize changes: include a designation of who can approve changes and what business analysis information their authority covers. .3 Plan Prioritization Approach For more information, see Prioritize Requirements (p. 86). Timelines, expected value, dependencies, resource constraints, adopted methodologies, and other factors influence how requirements and designs are prioritized. When planning the prioritization process, business analysts determine the: • formality and rigour of the prioritization process, • participants who will be involved in prioritization, • process for deciding how prioritization will occur, including which prioritization techniques will be utilized, and • criteria to be used for prioritization. For example, requirements may be prioritized based on cost, risk, and value. The approach should also determine which stakeholders will have a role in prioritization. .4 Plan for Approvals An approval formalizes the agreement between all stakeholders that the content and presentation of the requirements and designs are accurate, adequate, and contain sufficient detail to allow for continued progress to be made. The timing and frequency of approvals are dependent on the size and complexity of the change and associated risks of foregoing or delaying an approval. The business analyst must determine the type of requirements and designs to be approved, the timing for the approvals, the process to follow to gain approval, and who will approve the requirements and designs. When planning the appropriate approval process, business analysts consider the organizational culture and the type of information being approved. For example, new systems or processes for highly regulated industries such as financial, pharmaceutical, or healthcare are likely to require frequent and rigorous review and approval of very detailed specifications. For other types of initiatives, a less intensive approval process may be more appropriate and result in a faster implementation. Planning for approvals also includes the schedule of events where approvals will occur and how they will be tracked. Stakeholder availability, attitude, and willingness to engage determine the efficiency of the approval process and may significantly affect delivery timelines. 3.3.5 Guidelines and Tools • Business Analysis Performance Assessment: provides results of previous assessments that should be reviewed and incorporated into all planning approaches.
- 55. Random documents withunrelated content Scribd suggests to you:
- 56. in a spiritedmanner, and hit, hit, and hit again, till Turner went down. 17.—Some sharp blows occurred between the combatants in this round. Scroggins made a hit over the left eye of Turner, and he also touched his body; but Turner sent his adversary down. 18.—After some sparring, Turner put down his hands and rubbed them against his body. Some blows were exchanged. In struggling to obtain the throw, Turner neatly tripped up his antagonist. 19.—The hands of Turner were covered with the claret of his opponent. In closing, Scroggins was undermost. 20.—Some good hits were exchanged, but materially in favour of Turner, who planted four blows in succession, without having any return, but he (Turner) went down rather weak. 21.—Scroggins planted a sharp blow on the side of Turner’s head, when he dropped down on one knee, but instantly rose again and went on his second’s knee. 22.—Good exchanges. In closing, Turner was down, and Scroggins fell upon him. 23.—On setting-to Turner sighed loudly, as if in want of wind, and, after some little sparring, he dropped his hands, as did also his opponent. Scroggins let several opportunities slip of going in, and when he did it was more of the “forlorn hope” sort of attack, than from the cool judgment of the tactician. 24.—The little hero went in with much resolution, and ultimately sent down Turner upon his latter end. 25.—On coming to the scratch Turner displayed considerable weakness; his knees trembled violently. In the course of this round Turner turned from his antagonist, but Scroggins ultimately went down. 26.—Some sparring occurred, and Turner put down his hands; after this the men fought their way into a close. They broke away and closed again, and dealt out to each other some heavy blows, and Turner received so severely on his kidneys, that he appeared to go down from weakness. 27.—One hour and three minutes had now elapsed, and Scroggins appeared to stand the firmest on his legs; but the betting did not change in his favour. The
- 57. position of Turnerrendered him so formidable that it was dangerous to attack him. Scroggins displayed some of his old antics, and in going in slipped down from a slight hit. 28.—Some blows were exchanged, and Turner went down. 29.—Scroggins even now appeared well upon his legs, and he followed Turner all round the ring, and, in closing, Turner was undermost. 30.—Scroggins felt determined to win if possible. Turner was hit away from his intention of going in. It was a good round, and both down. 31.—Notwithstanding Scroggins showed himself off in good style, the chance was completely against him. He went down from a slight hit. Turner in general finished most of the rounds decidedly in his favour. 32.—Scroggins went down from a severe hit in the body. 33.—This was a good round. Scroggins followed his opponent in a desperate manner all over the ring, and Turner went down from a slip or a slight hit. 34.—The chancery suit was fast coming on Scroggins, and his nob was completely at the service of his opponent. The little hardy hero nevertheless contended for victory till he fell in an exhausted state. 35.—If Scroggins was not satisfied with the superiority of his opponent, the spectators had long previous to this period been convinced that he had no chance of winning. He went down from a slight hit almost upon setting-to. 36.—Turner sent down Scroggins in a twinkling, and his legs doubled up. 37.—The head of Scroggins was in a terrible state; but, notwithstanding, he stood at the scratch in a more firm state than might have been expected. He was shortly hit down, and the general cry was, “Take him away.” 38.—The desperation of Scroggins was not quite exhausted, and he endeavoured to contend up to the last moment. He was so weak that he went down from a mere touch.
- 58. 39 and last.—Hisfriends were now perfectly satisfied that Scroggins had done everything that a brave man could attempt. The idea of losing seemed terrible to his feelings, and he again endeavoured to meet his opponent. On setting-to the punishment of his adversary was so severe that he turned, in a confused state, and fell forward upon the ropes. Turner patted him upon the back, implying, “you are a brave fellow.” The battle was now at an end. Scroggins could not come again, and Turner immediately went up to him and shook him by the hand before he quitted the ring. It lasted one hour and thirty-one minutes and a half. Remarks.—Scroggins, from the brave conduct he displayed in this third battle, completely removed the insinuations which were levelled at him respecting his defeat at Sawbridgeworth, and re-established his character as a determined game boxer. Though defeated, he has not been disgraced, but compelled to yield to superior skill, height, and length. Turner, from his distinguished conquests over a hero like Scroggins, who had gained such an ascendancy, has placed himself at the top of the tree. It should also be recollected that he has fought four prize battles, and experienced eight weeks’ close confinement, added to the agitation of his mind during his trial, within twelve months. His qualities are rare and valuable, and his position, though not showy, is formidable in the extreme. Cool and collected in the heat of battle, with game of the first quality, Turner retired from the ring with merely a slight mark upon his ear. He was well seconded by Owen and Painter. Turner’s backers presented him with the whole of the battle- money. He returned to London the same evening, and appeared among the company at Belcher’s as if nothing had happened. Scroggins showed himself in town the next morning; his head exhibited terrible marks of punishment. Turner by this second victory attained high pugilistic eminence, yet he was literally dragged into milling popularity, by the sovereign contempt with which his capabilities were treated by Scroggins and not a few of his admirers: however, Turner wore his “blushing honours” with becoming moderation.
- 59. About this perioda boxer, well known in after years to Londoners, young Cy. Davis, of Bristol, attracted much attention, and he was thought in every respect an excellent match for Turner. Davis, as we have said, was not only an object of considerable attraction at Bristol, but had recently given the Londoners a specimen of his quality. A match was therefore made, by Tom Belcher, on the part of his fellow townsman, Davis, for 100 guineas a side; and Turner, from his well- known tried qualities, did not want for friends to support him upon this occasion. Davis stood so well with the sporting people that it was even betting, the former for choice. Wallingham Common, in Surrey, seventeen miles from London, was the spot selected for this combat to take place, and the torrents of rain which prevailed for some hours on Friday morning, June 18, 1819, did not in the least deter the amateurs. Most of the fancy scorned even to sport an umbrella, and it should seem that the recollection of the anniversary of the battle of Waterloo gave them fresh vigour. At length all difficulties were at an end, the rain ceased, the ring appeared in view, and preparation was made for the combat to commence. Turner threw up his hat first in the ring, attended by Cribb and Randall, when, after waiting a considerable time, Davis was loudly called for by the Champion. Some minutes elapsed, when Davis appeared with Tom Belcher and Harmer, and repeated the token of defiance. At a quarter before two the men set-to, the colours having been previously tied to the stakes; the true blue was placed by Randall, and the original yellow-man (which has ever since the period of the late Jem Belcher, out of compliment to his pugilistic fame, been denominated “a Belcher”[158] ) was tied over the blue by Tom Belcher. Even betting was about the thing. THE FIGHT. Round 1.—Davis looked in fine condition, and appeared to be able to win it off hand; his opponent, however, showed better than was expected. But the contrast was great. Davis, from his fine and elegant form, was the beau ideal of the ring-goers, while Turner looked more like a weatherbeaten Greenwich pensioner. It was thought the gay Bristol Boy would go to work without ceremony, and nob Turner in style,
- 60. from the mannerhe disposed of Belasco the Jew; but whether the high fame of Turner had made any impression upon his feelings, or the Dutch-Sam-like countenance of his opponent checked him, it is certain that he was particularly cautious, and Turner hit first slightly with his left hand. Long sparring, and Davis kept retreating. Turner put in five light hits on the body and head, when Davis smiled. Another long pause of sparring occurred, and Randall was seen sitting on the ropes minutely eyeing the tactics of both the combatants. Some exchanges took place; the right cheek of Davis appeared red, and Turner planted a blow on the body that sent Davis staggering. He went down. (Loud shouting. Six to four.) 2.—Turner had scarcely planted a hit, when Davis went down. (Great murmurings, and “Turner, my boy, you’ll win it without a scratch.” Two to one.) 3.—Great astonishment was excited at the conduct of Davis, and he seemed as if afraid to face his man with any confidence. After some cautious sparring, Turner made a hit, but it was so much a question whether it touched Davis or not, that the umpires advised his seconds that he should be more careful in future in his going down, as, if such conduct was pursued, the battle must immediately have an end. (Disapprobation expressed.) 4.—Turner made play, and used both hands with success. Davis smiled, and with a tremendous right- handed hit on the head knocked Turner down. This decided the first knock-down blow; Turner also showed the first blood. (“Go along, Davis,” from the Bristolians; “you can do it if you like. Another such hit, and it will be all right.”) 5.—Instead of Davis going in to follow up his success, he again went down from a slight hit; in fact, it was thought almost without a blow. 6.—Turner followed Davis, and planted some hits. The latter, it should seem, had no inclination to go in, or he might have stood upon even terms with his opponent. He was no novice at fighting; he could also hit hard and stop well. He, however, again went down, when the Bristol men appeared quite angry with him, crying out, “Davis, what are you at?” (Four to one).
- 61. 7.—Davis appeared asif he felt these reproaches, and went to work in earnest. “Look, look,” observed several amateurs, “this chap may win it now, if he will but go in and fight. He can do something if he likes.” It was a good round; but Davis was now really hit down. “Bravo, Turner!” and “Give him a little one for me.” Also, “Well done, Davis.” 8.—Davis positively seemed afraid to hit home. Turner got away from a flooring right-handed hit; but the latter was now the most punished, and bleeding. Davis had the best of the hitting, and gave Turner a hard blow on the side of the head. Davis might have showed himself off in good style, but it was urged he wanted pluck. Both down. 9.—Davis went down with a slight hit. 10.—Notwithstanding the shy fighting of Davis, he hit Turner on the jaw so tremendously with his right hand, that he went down like a shot, and seemed almost in a state of stupor. “Go it, Davis,” from his partisans; “that’s the way to mill; you’ll win.” Turner was quite abroad; another such a hit, had it been quickly repeated, must have proved a quietus. This dreadful hit operated seriously on Turner’s backers. Long faces were seen in all directions, and even Randall shook his head, scarcely knowing what to think of it. Indeed, it was all but over with Turner. Great applause was here given to Davis, and the Bristolians were all as gay as larks. 11.—Davis did not follow up his success. Some sharp exchanges took place, and Turner’s face was clareted. Davis turned round from the hitting, and it was thought that Turner hit him when he was down. “Foul, foul,” was cried. “Never mind; they’re only even,” said a sly old sportsman. 12.—Turner stopped most of his opponent’s blows, and sent him down. This almost jaw-breaker waked Turner to the dangerous intent of his opponent’s right hand. However singular it may appear, it might almost be urged, that this blow gave victory to Turner. He now became down to it, and stopped it with great judgment. 13.—This was a good round; and Davis showed like a boxer till he was hit down. If he had possessed any sort of fear, it seemed now removed; and his conduct at this juncture claimed praise. An excellent judge exclaimed,
- 62. “Davis may winit now.” The Bristol Boy here received a great deal of applause from various parts of the ring. 14.—The right hand of Davis was very dangerous, and he nobbed Turner staggering away; but the latter, game-cock like, returned to the attack, and sent Davis down. 15.—In this round Turner beat Davis to a complete stand-still. “What’s o’clock now?” cried Cribb. “It’s all up, I believe.” 16 to 19.—Turner stopped with great skill most of Davis’s blows; but Turner received a dreadful hit over his right eye, that made him almost go down from its severity. The claret flowed again; but Turner, undismayed, followed his opponent, who again got down in the quickest manner he could, seemingly to escape hitting. 20.—In this round Turner got Davis in a corner, when Randall said, “Ned, do as I do; keep that in your eye, my boy, and you’ll soon fetch him out.” Davis turned aside from the severity of the hitting, and went down. 21, 22.—This was a singular round, from the following circumstance:—Belcher stooped down and picked up a piece of paper, and put it in Davis’s left hand, to keep it close. Turner thought it was a stone, and said, if that was the way he was to be used, he would not fight. Randall rushed in to see what it was, anxious to do his duty as a second, and almost tore the paper out of Belcher’s hand, who had now got hold of it, openly showing it, that nothing unfair was meant, and that it had been used merely for the purpose described. Some words ensued. The umpires inquired the cause of the disturbance. Belcher explained. It caused some little agitation round the ring, many of the amateurs thinking it was a bank note, and that a wager had been proposed, and that staking was attempted as a sort of ruse de guerre, to give Davis time. The umpires appeared satisfied that nothing “unfair” had been attempted. This was a sharp, well-fought, short round, and both the men went down. Davis had now retrieved his character in a great degree with the spectators, who asserted that when he was at work he did not mind it, but that it appeared he did not like to begin to hit.
- 63. 23 to 26.—Somegood rounds, Davis fighting better than he had done; but in the latter he received a body hit that made quite a dent upon his frame. Turner, in closing, slung him round like a cat. This wisty-castor on the body occasioned a complete revolution, and “bellows to mend” was the true feature. 27.—Turner put in a dreadful blow under the ear of Davis, or rather at the back part of his head. It occasioned a large gash, and he went down in a pitiable state. 28 and 29.—Good rounds and sharp hitting. Davis determined to let the amateurs see that he could fight a bit. Both the eyes of Davis had now been measured for a suit of mourning; and, on his forehead, he had got a lump like an egg. It was evident that after all he did not want for bottom in regard to taking. 30.—Davis, it was asserted, fell without a blow, and Turner fell heavily on him. 31.—This round might be termed the finisher. Davis was so stupid that he stood quite still, while Turner hit him down. He could not lift his hands. Nature had deserted him—his eyes had lost their fire, and he was viewed by the amateurs as an object of pity rather than ill-natured remarks. 32 and last.—It is true Davis made his appearance at the scratch, but he turned away from the blow and fell down. The contest was over in forty-five minutes. Remarks.—If any observations can be made a nut- shell might contain them. In a word, too much praise had been previously bestowed on the prime qualities said to be possessed by Davis. Owing to his decisive fight with Belasco, senior, anticipation was on tiptoe to behold another pugilist from Bristol—a soil that had given birth to Big Ben, Jem and Tom Belcher, the Game Chicken, Tom Cribb, Gulley, Nicholls, Bob Watson, etc.; names familiar whenever comparisons are made respecting the goodness of a boxer. Davis’s right hand was very dangerous. From his youth, weight, freshness, and strength, he ought to have won it. It was urged by his friends that his going down so often was owing to a weakness in his knees—a rheumatic affection, which had seized him a few days previous to the battle. It is only common justice to Davis to state that he was terribly beaten about the
- 64. head, and oneof his hands, arms, and shoulders exhibited heavy punishment; more experience, and another trial, perhaps, may recover him his lost laurel. It is no new case that some men are “half beat” before they enter the ring; and that young soldiers wink on first smelling powder. It should also be remembered that only one Randall and one Turner at present stand upon the list. The talents of the latter are so well known that it would be superfluous to state them. Upon this occasion, however, he became the offensive instead of the defensive pugilist. He might have been better in condition had longer time been allowed him; at all events, it must be a second Randall to defeat Turner. Such was the opinion of some of the best judges of the time, and it certainly was not prudent at any rate to match young Cy. against so good a tactician as Turner for a first trial. The sporting world now looked forward to a match between Turner and Martin, more especially as Turner, after his defeat by Randall, had been challenged by Martin, who had about the same time disposed of the hardy Scroggins; both men too had succumbed to Randall, and the different styles of their defeats had been the topic of much critical discussion. The match was at length made, neither man being loth, at Tom Spring’s (Tom then kept the Catherine Wheel, Little St. James’s Street, Pall Mall). Five to four on Turner was the first offer, but these odds were thought too small. Master Scroggins, who was an original in his way, being present, submitted the following remarks for the consideration of the amateurs: “He would not give tuppence for choice—he had tried both the men: Turner was the awkwardest man alive to get at; but Martin was the hardest hitter. Two gamer coves never entered the ring, and when either of the men said ‘No,’ the other would be very glad of it.” The opinion of Randall was diametrically opposite. He had also entered the lists with Martin and Turner. Scroggins was defeated by the latter in one hour and twelve minutes in good style; while, on the contrary, Martin, after a desperate contest, with Scroggins, of two hours and two minutes, only gained it, as it were, by the toss up of a halfpenny. Calculations were made accordingly, and Turner rose to seven to four, with evens
- 65. offered that thefight lasted over an hour, and two to one that Turner was not beaten in one hour and a quarter. This battle took place on Tuesday, October 26, 1819, for 100 guineas a side, at Wallingham Common, Surrey. Little betting occurred on the day of fighting, as it was booked to a certainty that Turner must win. The road, however, on the morning of fighting, exhibited the usual features of fun, frolic, and disaster. At one o’clock Turner threw his hat within the ropes, followed by Tom Belcher and Randall; Martin quickly replied, having the assistance and advice of Tom Cribb and Tom Spring. THE FIGHT. Round 1.—On stripping, both combatants appeared in the highest condition. Martin was as fine as the human frame could be trained; true, he looked big, but there was nothing gross about him; his form, however, seemed more calculated for a successful pedestrian than a pugilist, in consequence of the heavier half of him being from his hips to his feet. Turner was all that could be wished; indeed, he was never in such good trim before, and, excepting the weakness of his knee, there was not the slightest uneasiness by his friends as to the result. Much cautious sparring for an opening occurred before a blow was struck. Martin kept retreating a little, but at length he made a hit, which was stopped cleanly by Turner. Another pause, when Turner made a slight hit, and Martin kept getting away. Turner cool, and on the look-out, with his left hand felt for the body of his opponent, and, in returning, Martin threw his blow away. The latter seemed rather tired with holding up his hands, and on his looking down to the ground, the good generalship of Turner was visible to all the ring, as he immediately let fly on Martin’s nob. The baker, however, disengaged himself from a short rally, but in this spirt one of his ogles got severely damaged, and the claret was oozing out of the corner. Martin retreated from the attacks of his opponent to the corner of the ring, when some blows were exchanged, and, on Martin’s going down, he thought he had been hit improperly, as he exclaimed, “Isn’t that foul?”
- 66. 2.—Turner soon putin a bodier, and repeated it without any return, but on attempting it a third time Martin stopped him. Turner, with much dexterity, put in a severe facer with his left hand, and also a winder, but Martin made some of his blows tell, and, in a severe struggle for the throw, both went down. 3.—Martin did not attempt to hit first, or to smash, as was anticipated, but kept retreating till he was compelled to hit as it were in his own defence. He again got into the corner of the ring, pursued by his opponent; but, unlike the Nonpareil, when in this perilous situation, he did not appear to know how to extricate himself, and went down from a hit. 4.—This was a manly round, and Martin made an exchange of hits, and also endeavoured to fib Turner. It was a sharp struggle, and both down, but Turner undermost. “Well done, Martin;” and the floury coves took a little courage, and sported a dead man or two, as they thought upon the improved suit. 5.—This round was a most mischievous one to Martin, and materially reduced his strength. He received a dreadful jobber right on his nose, and some other ugly hits, and, after a severe struggle, in going down Turner fell heavily upon him. 6.—Martin came up to the scratch distressed, but he commenced fighting, and hit Turner on the nob. The latter received it with the most perfect sang froid, and soon after put in a throttler that almost deprived the baker of breath. Turner followed it up by a bodier. Martin tried to make a return but without effect; and, in getting away from his opponent, he staggered and fell from weakness. 7.—Martin made a good stop, but he soon went down quite exhausted. 8.—The baker, with much courage, endeavoured to plant two good hits, but Turner stopped them with scientific excellence. Martin was very weak, and kept getting away, till he got a facer that sent him down, and his head rolled about like a top. Twenty to five was now offered. 9.—Martin came staggering to the scratch, and it was not long before he again found himself upon the ground.
- 67. 10.—The fine stoppingof Turner put all the well- meant efforts of Martin at defiance. This was a good round, and Martin fought manfully till he was fibbed down by Turner, who walked away. 11 to 15.—Martin was getting better in the last round, and threw his opponent. 16.—Turner not only had the best of the hitting, but fell heavily upon Martin. 17 and 18.—Turner put in a severe blow on the chest, and, in struggling for the throw, he slung Martin round and round till he went down. 19.—The science of Turner, in stopping nearly all the blows of Martin, convinced the good judges that, without an accident, he was winning cleverly. Martin, however, got Turner down in this round, and it was a bad fall for the latter. 20.—This was a sharp round, but nothing could keep Martin from retreating to the corner of the ring. Randall ordered the bottles to be moved, and both of them went down from a sharp struggle. 21 to 23.—It is true Martin was much better, but he could not take the lead. Turner, however, showed symptoms of weakness, and a little brandy was given him to recruit. Both down in all these rounds. 24 to 26.—The friends of Martin thought his chance improved; and in the last round, in throwing Turner, the bad knee of the latter narrowly escaped the post as his leg came in contact with it. 27 to 30.—Turner still fought cautiously, put in a good one now and then, reducing the strength of his opponent with ease to himself, and certainty as to the event. The majority of these rounds were in favour of Turner. 31.—Martin put in a sharp nobber, and also a body blow, and had altogether the best of this round, till they both went down. 32.—The baker felt elated with his success, and went sharply to work, and put in another heavy facer, and also some hits, till Turner went down weak. 33.—Turner let fly on setting-to, and a dreadful blow under the ear seemed almost to deprive Martin of his recollection. He, however, got away, and, upon endeavouring to make a stand, he fell down exhausted.
- 68. 34.—This round mightbe termed the quietus. Some blows were exchanged, when Turner hooked his opponent round the neck and hit him in the body, ditto, ditto, ditto, ditto, and ditto, and in struggling for the throw, while going down, Martin received another heavy body blow. “Well done, Turner,” and loud applause. 35.—The excellence displayed by Turner was of the highest order. He was never seen to such advantage before; and Angelo, in the best of his days, could not have shown greater skill in fencing than Turner did in parrying off the attacks of his opponent. The knee of Turner failed him in this round, and he slipped down from a slight hit. 36.—This was a good round, and the hitting was sharp on both sides. Martin exerted his last effort, and put in some heavy blows, till Turner slipped and went down. 37.—It was all up with Martin, and he was so exhausted, that, in endeavouring to get away from the punishment of Turner, it was said he fell without a blow. 38.—This was a similar round, when Turner said, “Jack, if I am to be beat, stand up and win it like a man.” Martin was in such a state of stupor as not to be able to reply. 39.—Martin was here so dead-beat that he again fell down without a blow. Some murmurings occurred, when the umpire said, “Martin, recollect this is to be a stand-up fight.” 40 and last.—Martin endeavoured to put in a blow, and went down from a slight hit. On the baker being put upon his second’s knee, and time called, Cribb said, “I believe we may say it’s all over.” Remarks.—Martin was very much punished about the throat, but particularly about his chest and body, yet scarcely any claret was spilt on this occasion. It was urged by some persons present that it was not a good fight, and that Martin did not show any pretensions to pugilism. It should, however, be recollected that Martin was opposed to one of the first boxers of the day, and that all his efforts were stopped by the superior skill of his opponent. Turner also exhibited
- 69. great improvement, andfought well with his right hand. He showed himself a complete general, for although he lost the toss, he seldom failed by his manœuvres in the round to place his adversary with his face to the sun. The coolness of Turner was also greatly in his favour; he can receive without being put out of his course. The Nonpareil has now left the Ring, but it may be said that Turner is also a Nonpareil. It was urged that could Turner have trusted to his knee, the fight would have been over in fifty minutes instead of one hour and seven (the time it lasted). He retired from the contest almost without a scratch upon his face, and it should be taken into the scale of calculation that Martin is not to be got at so very easy, as he is tall, and leans very backward on setting-to. Turner was considerably under eleven stone, and Martin eleven stone four pounds. Martin, it appears, was by no means satisfied with his defeat at the hands of Turner, but he resolved to have a little more experience in the prize ring before he essayed another match with that clever boxer. Tom Belcher, when Bacchi plenis, at Cy. Davis’s opening dinner at the Bear and Ragged Staff, Smithfield, Wednesday, August 9, 1820, made a foolish challenge to Turner, and also Randall, to fight each for £500 a side, and articles were drawn and a deposit made. On the following Saturday, the fumes of the wine having evaporated, all parties shook hands in friendship, Belcher acknowledging it was the liquor that was speaking, and the affair, exaggerated into importance by “the historian” ended in smoke. In the interim Martin had defeated, as we have already noted in the Life of Randall, ante, p. 351, Josh. Hudson, Cabbage, Phil. Simpson, and Dav. Hudson, and now challenged Turner to a second contest for £100 a-side. Ned could not in honour refuse, and on the 5th of June, 1821, our hero was defeated, as will be seen at length in the Life of Martin in the next chapter. The success of Martin brought forward another old opponent. Cy. Davis, having beaten J. Bushell at Moulsey, and feeling mortified at his defeat by Turner, addressed a letter to Turner, and shortly after they met. Six to four was betted upon Davis, and the result justified the odds. The gallant Ned was out of condition, and fell before the
- 70. strength and freshnessof his youthful antagonist. See Cy. Davis, in Appendix to this Period. A new candidate for fistic honours, Peace Inglis, having beaten one Hamilton, a waterman, at Moulsey (in 1822), then Deaf Davis at Harpenden (in February, 1823), and lastly George Curtis, brother of the Pet (in August of the same year), was matched against Turner for £100. The battle took place, April 20, 1824, and the brave Ned again succumbed to youth and stamina. Before the curtain finally falls upon the pugilistic career of Turner, we have a closing scene of triumph to redeem by a bright ray his setting sun. Challenged by Inglis, Ned at first declined to fight for less than £200, but was at last prevailed upon to make it £100, and Tuesday, November 9, 1824, being appointed, the former antagonists met at Colnbrook. The counter attraction of Lord Mayor’s Day, for it was then a pageant and a general city festival, thinned the road a little; but the regular ring-goers were there, and the old fanciers evinced high interest that the once glorious veteran should repair his recent reverses. His veteran daddy, “the sage of the East” (Tom Owen), who had been his companion for the last fortnight, keeping a watchful eye over Turner’s training at Walton, unfortunately met with an accident, and sprained his ankle, which prevented him from filling the position of second to his “darling boy.” Inglis looked well, and was confident of success, and, from his known bravery, was a fancy article, although the odds were against him. Turner first showed, attended by Tom Shelton and Harry Holt, and threw his hat into the ring. Inglis soon followed, but his castor (absit omen) fell outside of the ropes. Jem Ward and Ned Neale were his seconds. A brave fight was anticipated. THE FIGHT. Round 1.—On peeling, the ould one looked like a new man. The renovating air of the Welsh mountains appeared to have had the desired effect upon the frame of Turner. He looked steadily at his opponent, and made himself up to do mischief, but Inglis avoided close quarters. After some little dodging, an exchange of blows, but nothing the matter. Inglis got out of the corner well, but, in the middle of the ring, he napped a
- 71. hit, which gavehim the staggers. “Beautiful!” exclaimed the boys from Bermondsey. Turner, on going in, received a heavy right-handed blow between the ogles that made him wink again, filling his eyes with water, but no tears! This blow rather alarmed his backers, and the face of Jack Randall betrayed a serious aspect for the safety of his friend. Turner missed an upper-cut blow, which, in all probability, might have shortened the battle. Inglis was very quick upon his legs, but, although he made several motions to do summut, the position of Turner was so difficult that he could not get at him. Turner at length planted a nobber, and Inglis fell on one knee. (Huzzas, roars, and clapping of hands, expressive of the joy felt by the Bermondseyites at the success of Turner.) 2.—Turner was determined not to give another chance away; and the hint, “He’s coming with his right hand,” roared out by the eloquent Holt, kept Turner awake. Inglis bobbed his head once or twice; and it was lucky he did so, as a chancery slice was in readiness for him. Some heavy blows were exchanged, with this difference, Turner stopped them, while Inglis received. The latter got a severe nose-ender, which not only uncorked the claret, but left a stupefying quality behind it. “Bravo, Turner; the ould one is a little bit stronger than he was last time.” In a scuffle, two little drops of blood appeared on Turner’s cheek. In closing, both down. 3.—This was a short round. Ned was the hero of the tale at this early part of the fight; but “hopes and fears” were expressed as to his strength. “If he can but last,” said a knowing one, “it is as safe as the Bank.” The stops of Turner were truly excellent; but Inglis bored him to the ropes, and fell on him. 4.—Inglis got away from several rum ones; but he never took the lead to do any mischief. Turner planted in succession two heavy hits—stupefiers; Inglis never flinched. Turner got Inglis down, amidst most uproarious thunders of applause. 5.—This round added considerably to the odds in favour of Turner. After two or three movements of no effect, the ould one caught Inglis with a cutting-up, or rather a cutting-down, blow, and Inglis was floored. An artillery salute, and seven to four offered freely.
- 72. 6.—Inglis again nappeda staggering blow, and twirled round in a confused state; nevertheless, he recovered himself, and fought like a good one, till both went down, Inglis undermost. 7.—The goodness of Inglis was never doubted, but there was nothing like winning about his exertions, provided Turner’s strength did not leave him. Inglis napped it on the mouth, succeeded by two severe facers. This was a long round. Inglis planted a slight body blow, but he received three blows for one, till Ned slipped accidentally down. 8.—The young one was piping a little, and the ould one was none the worse for a pause. Sparring for wind. In a struggle both went down, but the feather-bed maker was undermost. 9.—This round booked it almost to a certainty for Bermondsey. Two facers once more put Inglis’s nob into chancery. The young one, however, as good as gold, not only stopped, but countered well. The nose of Inglis, however, was at the service of Ned, and the claret followed as pure as any sample from the bins of Charley Wright, of the Haymarket. The eyes of Inglis lost their fire, and his countenance bore the marks of his mind being abroad. The latter hit anyhow, till he was floored by a nobber. (Cheers, noise, and applause. Two and three to one offered on Turner.) 10.—The chancery suit had performed the task for Ned, and Inglis was done almost brown. He, however, endeavoured to rally, but another cutting-up hit, added to his, already shakey state, produced extreme grogginess. His game was so good that he stood up like bricks, till a hit, almost severe enough to have knocked a stone out of a wall, again floored the brave but unfortunate feather-bed maker. (“Take him away, he has no chance!”) 11.—It was evident to every spectator that Inglis could not win. He staggered like a drunken man; but his goodness enabled him to show fight, and he made blows with the most determined spirit. The ould one again caught him with an upper-cut, and, as he went down, Ned might have added more punishment, but he nobly disdained taking an advantage, held up his hands, and walked away, amidst loud shouts of approbation. (“Bravo! Ned; that is like an
- 73. Englishman.” “True courageis always backed by feeling and generosity—first the lion and then the lamb,” said a cove in a rusty black suit, something like a schoolmaster. “Never mind,” said one of the Partiality Club, “it is good doctrine, come from whom it may.”) 12.—Short, but terribly severe. Inglis was floored sans ceremonie by Turner. (“Take the brave fellow away.”) 13.—When time was called, his seconds bustled him up; but Inglis was in a doldrum till they shook him, and, on roaring out in his ear, “Ned’s coming,” he opened his eyes wildly, and, as if by instinct, prepared himself to fight. He rushed towards his opponent, but Turner sent him down. 14.—“His youth will bring him round,” observed a few of his friends. “Not this fight,” said a costermonger; “he’s done brown twice over.” Inglis again down. A hat was thrown up— 15th and last.—But he came again to the scratch. Inglis staggered about for a second or two, when he fell stupefied, Turner merely looking at him. It was over in forty-six minutes. Remarks.—Science must win, if supported by moderate strength; science will win if a man is out of condition—that is to say, science will get a man out of trouble; it enables a boxer to wait for his man, time him, meet his opponent, bring him down to his weight, and ultimately prove the conqueror. It is not necessary for a long yarn to describe the beauties of the “ould one” in the ring; suffice it to observe, Ned is a master of the art; his stops were interesting to the spectator; his hits were decisive, and he finished off his man like a first-rate artist. Excepting a tremendous right-handed lunge which Ned received between his eyes in the first round, all the other hits did little execution. The method adopted by Turner to lead his opponent into trouble, and then punishing him for his temerity, evinced skill and tactics of the highest order of milling. Inglis proved himself a game man in every point of view; but, valuable a quality as endurance must always be considered in boxing, it is of little use when a man’s head gets into chancery. Inglis was beaten to a stand- still, and ought to have been taken away three rounds before the fight was over. Inglis was a brave, worthy,
- 74. honest, well-conditioned creature.Turner must have won the battle much sooner had not one of the small bones in his left hand been broken in the early part of the fight. Poor Ned was highly pleased to take leave of the prize ring in the character of a winner, and dined with his friends at Bill Moss’s, the Crown, in the Borough, on Monday, November 15, 1824. He was surrounded by some capital sporting patrons. On his health being drunk, he said, “It was very likely that he should not fight any more; but if he did alter his mind, he would always behave like a man.” Turner gradually began to decline in health: he became lame, and, labouring under the effects of an asthma, announced his farewell benefit to take place in April, 1826. His last appearance on any public occasion, was at Hudson’s dinner, on Thursday, March 31, 1826. Out of respect to an old favourite in the prize ring, the amateurs mustered strongly at the Tennis Court, on Tuesday, April 18, but it was not made known to the visitors that poor Ned had departed this life on Monday (the preceding day) at two minutes before five in the afternoon. The sets-to, generally, were well contested. Randall and Scroggins mounted the stage, and having made their bows, the former came forward, and spoke as follows:—“Gentlemen, I am requested by the friends of poor Turner to come forward and express their thanks in his behalf, for the kind and liberal manner in which you have this day manifested an interest in his fate. Gentlemen, Ned and I have been opponents in the ring, but we have always been friends in private, and no man feels more for his situation than I do. That we shall be able to see him here at any future time, I think is more than doubtful; but let us hope we may all see him hereafter” (loud applause). Randall appeared much affected. Jack Scroggins followed. “Gemmen,” said he, “Ned was always a gentlemanly sort of a man—he is now gone to his long home, and I hope God will forgive him, as well as everybody else. Let us all live while we can, and when we can’t live no longer, why, I suppose we must die; and I don’t see why a fighting man shouldn’t see eternity as well as anybody else.”
- 75. “Well! so I’vefloor’d these ‘fancy’ fighting cocks, And finish’d them in style! Presumptuous fellows! They chaff’d of science—and, forsooth, would box With one whose ‘hits’ are sure to touch ‘the bellows!’ Conceited mortals! thus to ‘spar’ with Death! The greatest champions that the world e’er saw By turns have bow’d obedient to my law. Look back at history’s page, In every clime and every age, You’ll find I ‘mill’d’ the mightiest of them all. No matter how they sparr’d, My blows were sure and hard, And, when I threw them, fatal was their fall. From Alexander down to Emperor Nap, Whene’er I chose to give the rogues a slap, Not one could parry off a single rap. No, no! nor had they each a thousand lives, Could they have stood against my rattling bunch of fives!”[159] Turner’s remains were removed on Sunday, April 23, 1826, between the hours of one and two, from the house of his cousin, Mr. Baxter, hat maker, in East Smithfield, and deposited in a deep grave in Aldgate Churchyard. The funeral was of the most respectable description. The hearse was followed by two mourning coaches. In the first coach were Mr. Turner (father of the deceased), Mr. Baxter (a cousin of Ned’s), Mr. Leslie, Tom Owen, and Pierce Egan. In the second mourning coach were Tom Cribb, Josh. Hudson, Jack Randall, Harry Holt, Harry Harmer, and Mr. Price Morris. “From an early hour in the morning,” says the report, “the house of Mr. Baxter was surrounded by numbers of persons anxious to pay respect to the remains of a man who once stood so high amongst the admirers of the art of self-defence. The church and churchyard also were crowded. We noticed many of the corps pugilistique. Scroggins, for the feeling and respect he paid to the deceased, deserves the highest praise. Forgetting all former differences; nay, more, following the side of the hearse, and dropping a tear over the grave of the man who had proved his conqueror, speaks a volume in his favour, as a generous-minded English boxer. Every person present appeared sorry for the loss of Turner. In all his battles he behaved like an honest, honourable man; in fact, throughout his life he was never known to have committed a dishonourable action—his conduct
- 76. was always uponthe square. His last moments were marked by resignation and Christian-like behaviour; and he expired without a sigh in the arms of his cousin, Mr. Baxter. Turner was in the thirty- fourth year of his age.” The reporter adds, “Turner was a most difficult boxer to be got at; standing with his right leg first, he proved at all times a truly awkward and dangerous customer. In a set-to with the gloves with Tom Spring, at a benefit in the city of Norwich, previous to the fight between Painter and Oliver, the science of Ned Turner was so much admired, and his blows were so effective, as to produce thunders of applause. “In point of true courage, Turner was never excelled in or out of the ring. He was a most modest, unassuming fellow, and, notwithstanding his intercourse with various grades of society, he was a ‘bashful’ man. In company he was cheerful and good-natured, always anxious to serve his brethren in the prize ring, and throughout the sporting world he was as much respected for his civility as his high courage.”
- 77. CHAPTER VIII. JACK MARTIN(THE “MASTER OF THE ROLLS”)—1813‒ 1828.[160] Jack Martin, on whom the ring reporters conferred the punning title of “Master of the Rolls,” from his calling as a baker, was born on the 10th of July, 1796, near Kennington Church. “Boxiana” contains the usual preliminary narrative of a “big coal- heaver,” “a sheriff’s officer, a well-known good man,” “a butcher,” etc., whom Martin disposed of while “a boy.” We shall pass these, and come to young Doughey’s first reported battle, which was with Tom Oliver’s brother George, at Ilford, in Essex, for 20 guineas, on Thursday, July 18, 1816, in a twenty-four feet ring, after the fight between Ford and Harry Lancaster. George Oliver was seconded by his brother Tom and Jack Clark, Martin by Harry Harmer and Bill Richmond. Five to four on Oliver. THE FIGHT. Round 1.—The attitude of Martin was free and good; it spoke more of the sparring school than that of his opponent, which was by no means that of a scientific boxer. Martin immediately went to work and nobbed his opponent without ceremony, till they got into a close, when, after hugging and pummelling each other for a few seconds, they broke away, and some hits were exchanged at arm’s length. They again closed and a violent struggle took place against the ropes, when they both went down. This round occupied one minute and a half. 2.—Both full of activity, but the flurried manner of Oliver was evident to every one, and his fists crossed
- 78. Welcome to ourwebsite – the perfect destination for book lovers and knowledge seekers. We believe that every book holds a new world, offering opportunities for learning, discovery, and personal growth. That’s why we are dedicated to bringing you a diverse collection of books, ranging from classic literature and specialized publications to self-development guides and children's books. More than just a book-buying platform, we strive to be a bridge connecting you with timeless cultural and intellectual values. With an elegant, user-friendly interface and a smart search system, you can quickly find the books that best suit your interests. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery services help you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading. Join us on a journey of knowledge exploration, passion nurturing, and personal growth every day! ebookbell.com