Assessment (i.e. Exam), and is aligned to A Guide to the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge® (BABOK® Guide).
I read a lot. But I don't have much time to just sit and read a book. This is why I consume most of my books in audio versions while commuting on my motorcycle or doing other things that don't require much thinking (e.g. mowing a lawn). This also works perfectly with podcasts. Unfortunately, many books, especially professional ones, do not have audio copies, so reading such huge folios as BABOK has always been a challenge. I managed to get through v2 but I had less kids and more free time back then. I do understand the BABOK is more a reference guide rather than a piece of literature, but it would still be useful for any BA to read it in full at least once.
So, is there an audio version of BABOK v3 or not? Well, not exactly but you can make it yourself using the simple instructions below!
Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the companies whose products I am recommending here. I am just sharing my own experience. If you have a better way of doing this -- please share too!
Disclaimer: I have nothing to do with the companies whose products I am recommending here. I am just sharing my own experience. If you have a better way of doing this -- please share too!
So, to make my own BABOK 3 audiobook I:
- Downloaded an ePub version of my member copy of BABOK v3 -- free (if you are an IIBA member)
- Took my Android device (Samsung Galaxy Note 3) -- I wish it was free
- Turned on Samsung TTS (text-to-speech) engine and downloaded a British female voice that doesn't need a network connection -- free. Google TTS also works, I just liked the Samsung's voice better.
- And the main piece: I found the app @Voice Aloud Reader in Google Play -- also free (later I purchased an ad-free version with some additional features for $US4.5)
I then simply opened the ePub file by the @Voice app on my phone and the result has been so impressive so far that I decided to write this post. With some little tweaks (the app has abundant settings) you sometimes forget that this is an artificial voice (no, it doesn't resemble Dr Stephen Hawking at all). For example, I replaced 'BABOK®' with just 'Babok' so it doesn't pronounce 'be-ai-be-okay-registered-trademark' and sounds even more natural now. I've also read another business analysis e-book since then, it took me just a couple of days. Looking at pictures and diagrams later takes much less time than reading the whole book from the screen.
This app works offline and can read aloud almost everything that exists in a digital text form (please do your own research on how to do it with your Kindle books).
As a seeker of knowledge, I go around reading everything about business analysis that my hands lay upon. That said, it’s time for disclaimer: I don’t claim to be an expert in either BABOK or BA for Practitioners; and I do realize I still need time to regurgitate both.
However, looking at the discussions on ‘which certification is good: CBAP or PMI-PBA’, ‘BA for Practitioner is limited to business analysis in project management’, ‘BABOK has broader view of BA’, and so on… I decided to share my view on the comparison of the two major works of the BA world! For the sake of convenience, let me call “Business Analysis for Practitioners” as ‘BAP’.
Fundamental Difference
BABOK is a ‘Body of Knowledge’. BAP is a ‘Practitioner’s Guide’. Let me elaborate:
Wikipedia defines ‘Body of Knowledge’ as : “A Body of Knowledge (BOK or BoK) is the complete set of concepts, terms and activities that make up a professional domain, as defined by the relevant learned society or professional association.” Which seems to mean: BoK rather sets standards, nomenclature, and commonly accepted view (methods, practices, approaches etc.) of the profession. In section 1.1 of V3, BABOK mentions its purpose: “The primary purpose of the BABOK® Guide is to define the profession of business analysis and provide a set of commonly accepted practices.”
Which seems to imply:
- BOK gives generally accepted definition and the scope of the profession and terms used in a profession
- BOK describes competencies, methods, skills, processes pertaining to a profession, and generall does not prescribewhen to and how to employ what skill, practice, process...
- BOK provides generally accepted view, and as such doesn’t necessarily have to describe the profession in a particular scenario or branch.
Thus, BOK gives overall conceptual framework within which the profession is practiced. By its nature, conceptual framework is rather abstract.
Alas, we don’t seem to have a generally accepted definition of ‘Practitioner’s Guide’, or maybe it’s just that I couldn’t find one. But if I dare interpret (and I would), it guides a practitioner, which means it would elaborate on tools, techniques, methods, and processes, and it could even go to the extent of prescribing what to use and how to use!
According to BAP,
- It provides guidance on how to apply practices, tools and techniques
- It includes several specific examples to illustrate usage of practices, tools and techniques
- It is supporting material and instructions for theapplication of standards
We can thus conclude that BOK is rather concerned with establishing consensus on concepts, framework, terminology, generally employed tools/techniques/skills etc. without going into how and when; whereas a Practitioner’s Guide focuses more on the how and when part.
Question arises then: aren’t both of these complementary to each other? Obviously, yes! Why then IIBA doesn’t have a ‘Practitioner’s Guide’ and why then PMI doesn’t have a BOK like standards document? Does IIBA intend to have such a guide? Does PMI intend to have such a standards document? I hope that veterans from these institutes would give us some hints!
Having talked about the fundamental difference between them, let us have a detailed look at the scope, structure, and content of these two works.
Scope of Business Analysis in BABOK and BAP
It’s a myth that BAP defines business analysis within project management framework OR BAP thinks business analysis is all about requirements management. According to BAP:
- Requirements-management consists a significant portion of business analysis. (This means BAP does acknowledge business analysis is NOT all about requirements management.)
- Business analysis involves several domains: from identifying business needs to solution implementation
- Success of a program (equivalent of ‘initiative’ in BABOK) and project highly depends on effective business analysis.
Definition of Business Analysis according to BAP is (Taken from Section 1.5, Page 3 of “Business Analysis for Practitioners – A Practice Guide” from PMI):
“Business analysis is the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to:
- Determine problems and identify business needs;
- Identify and recommend viable solutions for meeting those needs;
- Elicit, document, and manage stakeholder requirements in order to meet business and project objectives;
- Facilitate the successful implementation of the product, service, or end result of the program or project.”
I hope by now you have realized that BABOK and BAP have equally broad view of business analysis. In fact, their definitions of business analysis are somewhat analogous:
People may argue this mapping is not true, however, my aim is not to provide such a ‘true’ mapping. I hope we all would agree they both have equally broad and converging views on business analysis.
Overall Structure of BABOK and BAP
Allow me to skip the explanations and present you this table about key sections in both of the works:
![3.0 3.0](https://d1w7fb2mkkr3kw.cloudfront.net/assets/images/book/lrg/9781/9275/9781927584088.jpg)
Needless to say they both are covering/touching key areas of business analysis.
Techniques and Tools Covered
Several practitioners give importance to Techniques and Tools, and see it as a great source of value. BABOK has a dedicated section (Section 10: Techniques), where it describes 50 different techniques. However, BAP doesn’t have such a dedicated section, rather, all over the document more than 55 techniques and tools are explained. For your reference, here is a compilation of all tools and techniques (that I could find) in BAP {took me hours to compile it, say thanks to me guys ;-)}. One of the purposes of presenting this extensive list is to also to eliminate any doubts on this claim of number of tools covered in BAP.
Presentation of Tools and Techniques
BABOK elaborates all tools and techniques in alphabetical order in a dedicated section; whereas BAP elaborates each tool and technique in relevant knowledge area (section) in relevant task context throughout the document.
BABOK represents each technique in the following rigid format:
- Purpose of the technique
- Description of the technique
- Elements of the technique
- Usage Consideration while employing the technique, including strengths and weaknesses
Examples or diagrams given for techniques are (more often than not) generic, or with dummy labels (such as Task 1, Task 2, Task 3… in a process diagram).
BAP on the other hand doesn’t follow a strict format and talks of purpose, description, elements, usage etc. in an informal and contextual manner. The examples are very specific, and hence most readers may find it very easy to understand. Furthermore, BAP talks in detail about how to and when to apply these tools and techniques, to the extent that it often prescribes the sequence of actions/tasks under a particular domain (known as ‘Area of Knowledge’ in BABOK).
Composition of Key Sections in BABOK and BAP
Key sections here mean ‘Knowledge Areas’ in BABOK and ‘Domain’ in BAP. To us they are synonyms.
BABOK describes each ‘Knowledge Area’ in a strict format:
- The ‘Core Concept Model’ in XYZ Knowledge Area
- Input-Tasks-Output Diagram for the Knowledge Area
- Then for each ‘Task’ in the Knowledge Area:
- Purpose of the task
- Description of the task
- Input for the Task
- Input-Task-Output Diagram for the Task
- Elements of the Task
- Guideline and Tools for the Task
- Techniques Used for the Task
- Stakeholders concerned with the Task
- Output for the Task
It is noteworthy that tools or techniques mentioned in each task are rather a list. They are elaborated in detail in ‘Techniques’ section.
BAP on the other hand doesn’t follow a rigid structure for each domain, and presents it in more or less flexible flow, including:
- Importance or Purpose of the Domain (aka Knowledge Area)
- Terms, concepts and explanations/definitions related to given Domain
- Set of tasks – in a prescribed sequence – to undertake business analysis under given domain (work-flow, if I may say)
- For each task:
- Set of sub-tasks or actions to be performed in a prescribed sequence (work-flow)
- Inputs needed for a task or sub-task
- Tools and Techniques (with detailed elaboration) associated with these tasks
- Specific examples, tables, diagrams, charts, process, deliverables, etc. related to the task/action/tools
- Guidelines for tasks, limitations/strengths of techniques etc.
- Considerations, challenges, typical issues related to given domain/task
Again, one might not find consistent structure for each Domain, nor all of the parts mentioned above for each domain. The content rather flows in contextual manner.
Before you “whew”, here comes the last part:
![Babok v3 cheat sheet Babok v3 cheat sheet](/uploads/1/2/6/4/126474995/932053638.jpg)
Which 'Domain' or 'Knowledge Area' Has More Emphasis/Elaboration?
Well, this is a subject of another debate. I would rather present a finding and leave the rest to you:
To conclude: if you want to study concepts, BABOK is the book. If you want to understand application of concepts, BAP is the book. In terms of the scope of business analysis, coverage of key areas of business analysis, tools/techniques etc. both are nearly equally good!
Please feel free to criticize, debate, argue, support or oppose my views! The comments section below is all yours!
Disclaimer:
'BABOK', 'BACCM', 'Business Analysis for Practitioners – A Practice Guide', 'PMI', 'IIBA' are registered trademarks of respective owners. Material in “BABOK” and “Business Analysis for Practitioners – A Practice Guide” are copyrighted material of their respective publishers/sponsors. This article is written with the aim of professional discussion and bringing awareness about similarities and differences between the two works and there is no commercial motivation at all.