Two stakeholders are arguing over which model to use for describing requirements. One insists that using an activity diagram is superior while the other prefers a state diagram. How should the business analyst (BA) resolve the conflict?
Option B is clearly the way to go - let them duke it out in a good ol' fashioned model-off. Loser has to buy the BA a coffee. Or, you know, a stronger drink.
Option C is a bold move, but I'm not sure introducing a third model is the way to go. Seems like it might just create more confusion. Keep it simple, folks!
I'm with the stakeholder who prefers the state diagram. It's just more fun to draw, you know? But option A makes the most sense for resolving this conflict.
Option D sounds like the best solution. A fusion model that integrates the two would be a wise compromise. Gotta keep those stakeholders happy, am I right?
I think option A is the way to go. The models are complementary, not mutually exclusive. The BA should explain how they can work together to get a more complete picture.
Yes, the BA should emphasize that the models complement each other. This way, both stakeholders can see the value in using a combination of activity and state diagrams.
Cyril
1 months agoBreana
1 months agoOsvaldo
1 months agoAlton
18 hours agoPamela
2 days agoLavonda
6 days agoFelix
7 days agoCatalina
2 months agoJenelle
2 months agoTawna
1 months agoDottie
1 months agoLindsey
1 months agoTijuana
2 months agoMatthew
2 months agoJani
2 months ago