In business analysis, facilitation techniques, presentation of alternatives, and prioritization of requirements (e.g., MoSCoW, Kano, pairwise comparison), interviews, and prototyping are widely used. It is important to organize a process in which all stakeholders can express their expectations and problems.
Key features:
Does formalizing requirements (creating documentation) alone help avoid conflicts?
No, even with extensive documentation, the key to avoiding conflicts is regular communication and alignment of requirements.
Is it enough to try automatic prioritization methods (e.g., voting) to resolve all conflicts?
No, automation helps, but often facilitation sessions are needed to resolve disagreements and understand the essence of the requirements.
Is stakeholder interest analysis solely the analyst's task?
No, the analyst is responsible for this work, but regularly engaging all participants ensures a higher quality outcome.
Negative case:
The analyst works only with the main client, overlooking other participants. Unexpected requirements arise from secondary stakeholders in the project, leading to conflicts, missed deadlines, and rework. Pros: saves time at the beginning. Cons: high probability of conflicts, costly rework, deterioration of team relationships.
Positive case:
The analyst plans workshops involving all stakeholders, uses MoSCoW to agree on priorities, documents contentious points, and brings them up for separate discussion. Pros: transparency, reduced number of conflicts, flexibility in requirements. Cons: increased time investment in analysis at the start.