If modesty is a virtue, business analysts may be too saintly for their own good. Most are happy to conduct their vital analysis work in the background, letting others take the credit and shine under the limelight. After all, it is the outcome that really matters and few BAs join the profession solely to raise their own profile.

This approach of letting others shine is often taken with the best of intentions, however, there is an important balance to be struck. Too much modesty could actually undermine the credibility of the business analysis team. If others are seen as the 'linchpins' to success while the analysts work diligently (but invisibly) in the wings, there's a real danger that key stakeholders and decision makers genuinely don't know what business analysis is (or why they should need it). This credibility issue then tends to ripple down from the top of the organisation, to middle managers and operational stakeholders. 

Business Analysts and Impostor Syndrome 

One aspect that may amplify this modesty for some BAs is impostor syndrome. Perhaps you've experienced this yourself in your work: you've created a fantastic diagram or artefact but then the doubt crept in and you couldn't quite bring yourself to hit 'send' and forward it to the stakeholders. You just had to elaborate further, covering every possible objection first. Your inner monologue is racing: "What if they point out an error in the diagramming notation? It's been a while since I studied UML, perhaps I have something wrong. They might point out that I don't have the required knowledge…".

The same is true of adding long lists of unnecessary caveats to documents. Something that is relatively simple is made virtually unreadable by trying to cover absolutely every conceivable objection that somebody might raise to it for fear of being called out. As a result, everything takes longer and causes confusion. Imagine asking somebody if they're free for a meeting at 9am next Wednesday and getting a response such as:

"I'm 95% sure that I am, but this will depend on two other meetings that day, and also if there's snow that might affect my plans on the day. Additionally, if I'm unwell that day, then I wouldn't be available".

The answer is thorough and accurate, but you probably would have preferred a confident "yes". The detailed caveats, in this case, aren't useful and just cause confusion. A similar pattern is true in analysis artefacts and documents. 

The Confidence and Credibility Continuum 

These are two examples of hesitant behaviours which others might perceive as a lack of confidence. Nobody is arguing against ensuring the quality of artefacts, or ensuring stakeholders have the information they need, but like anything it is a question of balance. Get the balance wrong, and stakeholders sense nervousness. A confident "Yes, in my opinion that is correct", followed by a brief description of the rationale (with the stakeholder knowing there's more robust details available if they ask for them), goes a long way. 

Confidence and credibility are inextricably linked. Credibility is unlikely to be achieved without confidence, and confidence is likely to lead to better engagement (which enhances credibility). All of this relies on analysts continuing to step-up and highlight how they have contributed to their organisations' successes. It relies on overcoming (or at least dialling down) the natural modesty and impostor syndrome that seems all-too-prevalent in the profession. 

However, like so many things in life, when overplayed, confidence has a more sinister side too. Where confidence outstrips either competence or capacity, failure is likely to ensue. Overconfidence is also likely to lead to complacency. This can manifest itself in many different forms but one particularly troubling way is where a practitioner masters a particular set of techniques that work well on one project, and then slavishly repeats them on every other project from this point forward (rather than considering what would fit the context best). After all, previous successes are no guarantee of future success. 

Business Analysts need to Step into the Limelight 

There is no doubt that business analysis is an essential discipline for successful change initiatives. Sometimes, BAs don't get the recognition that they deserve and may even feel that they lack credibility within their organisation.

Confidently stepping into the 'limelight', contributing towards success and ensuring this is acknowledged, helps to build credibility. While many BAs might prefer to let others shine, moving beyond modesty and combating impostor syndrome (while avoiding complacency) is essential to elevate awareness of the benefits that effective business analysis can bring. 

Are you thinking about updating your BA toolkit? AssistKD offers a wide choice of business analysis training courses.