Think Like a Business Analyst
Kanban Think Like a Business Analyst
Kanban - Focus on the Flow, Identify Bottlenecks, Improve Efficiency
Your Professional Portfolio as a Business Analyst: Ready to be shared in Interviews / Present to a Client/ Company
As a Business Analyst, your key value add is to be able to take the Business flows, connect them to the "front-line" for better accountability and tracking, and help remove Bottlenecks through the lens of Salesforce Modules.
A) Select the company / Industry of your choice
B) Select 2 Business flows for: Sales, Marketing, Customer Service, Operations
C) Your Project as a Business Analyst:
What would the Executives /Managers want to see in terms of Metrics / KPIs, Dashboards, Reports (Think in terms of 3-5 metrics / KPIs to track accountability and Reporting)?
What are the "Pain points" for the beginning of the chain that need to be alleviated.
What are the modules, fields, status, and other details that you would do to map Salesforce modules / screens to your Client / Company's Business Process.
Your submission:
Word Document - No more than 6 pages.
Suggestions:
Include this on a separate word document:
This assignment is for setting up the CRM towards the major assignment: "Thinking like a Business Analyst"
1. Choose an Industry -> Company.
2. Define all the Data Setup that needs to be done for that company.
3. Create Data and Setup in Salesforce.
4. Take screenshots for the data setup done for each part of the setup: E.g. Products, Regions, Price Books, Contacts, Opportunities, Opportunity Stages. Setup should not be limited to only these steps. Identify what data is required for your Company's Business flow.
Take all screenshots, and put them into a Word Document. Upload the Word document as part of your Setup.
Individual Witten Assignment (100)
Individual Witten Assignment (100)Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
---|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAction | 0ptsARecommended course of action has strong arguments based in the analysis and issues and includes anticipated consequences and alternatives. | 0ptsBRecommended course of action is appropriate to address major issues, and is linked to the analysis. Some anticipated consequences and alternatives are included. | 0ptsCRecommendations are mostly appropriate to address issues and are at least partially linked to the analysis. Anticipated consequences and alternatives are lacking. | 0ptsDThe recommended course of action could use more connections to the identified issues, and the addition of one or more anticipated consequences or alternatives would strengthen the plan. | 0ptsFRecommendations are largely inappropriate or absent. |
| 0pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIssue Analysis | 0ptsAPresents an insightful and thorough analysis of all identified issues. Includes all necessary calculations. | 0ptsBMost major issues are identified and adequately discussed. | 0ptsCSeveral major issues are identified, but may be discussed in a somewhat superficial manner. | 0ptsDOne or two major ideas are identified, but there is only a surface discussion of these major ideas occurs. | 0ptsFThe level of analysis almost entirely lacks framing and/or depth. |
| 0pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIssue Identification | 0ptsAPresents an accurate and detailed description of a variety of problems and opportunities that are compelling and insightful. | 0ptsBMost major issues are identified and adequately discussed. | 0ptsCSeveral major issues are identified, but may be discussed in a somewhat superficial manner. | 0ptsDOne or two major ideas are identified, but there is only a surface discussion of these major ideas occurs. | 0ptsFFails to identify or adequately discuss major ideas. |
| 0pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOrganization and Clarity | 0ptsAPaper demonstrates concise and consistent writing. Transitions between ideas are handled well. Formatting is appropriate and writing is free of grammar and spelling errors. | 0ptsBPaper is organized and clear. Errors do not detract from overall ideas. Could have used better transitions between ideas. Some grammar or spelling errors. | 0ptsCPaper lacks clear organization. Errors sometimes detract from overall ideas. Some weak transitions between ideas. Grammar or spelling errors sometimes detract from overall clarity of ideas. | 0ptsDWriting needs outside support. The main ideas are getting lost as a result of the grammar and spelling errors. | 0ptsFWriting is barely legible to the point that ideas are almost entirely overshadowed by poor grammar and spelling. |
| 0pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeUse of Course Concepts | 0ptsADemonstrates complete command of tools and concepts from the course. Makes appropriate and powerful connections between identified issues and the strategic concepts studied in the course readings and class lectures. | 0ptsBDemonstrates sufficient command of tools and concepts from the course. Makes some connections between identified issues and the strategic concepts studied in the course readings and class lectures. | 0ptsCDemonstrates partial command of tools and concepts from the course. Makes limited connections between identified issues and the strategic concepts studied in the course readings and class lectures. | 0ptsDMakes only a few, if any, connections between identified issues and concepts from course readings and class lectures. | 0ptsFFails to make connections between identified issues and concepts from course readings and class lectures. |
| 0pts
|
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeOverall | 100to >90.0ptsA | 90to >80.0ptsB | 80to >70.0ptsC | 70to >60.0ptsD | 60to >0ptsF |
| 100pts
|
Total Points:100 |