Business Analyst Entity Review Checklist
Purpose
This guide serves a checklist for business analysts to follow during a project.
Checklist Items and Scoring
Documentation and Analysis
Checklist Item
| Score
| Max Score
|
|---|
Recording Outcomes in Shared Space: Evaluate if outcomes are systematically recorded and shared in an accessible manner.
| | 5
|
How many of each entity type have been reviewed? (1 per entity*)[RF1] [RF2]
| | |
Checklist Item | Score | Max Score |
|---|
Recording Outcomes in Shared Space: Evaluate if outcomes (e.g., ER results, issues) are systematically recorded and shared on a platform accessible to all stakeholders. | 1 | 3 |
Entity Type Reviews: Focus on how individual types of entities is resolved. Assess the accuracy, depth, and effectiveness of the resolution for each type. | Individual Entity Review | 1 | 3 |
Business Entity Review | 1 | 3 |
Address Entity Review | 1 | 3 |
Other Entity Types Review (Use case-specific e.g. Vehicles, Accounts) | 1 | 3 |
Diversity of Entity Resolution Assessment: Evaluate the overall diversity and quality of entity resolutions. | 1 | 3 |
Problem Solving and Understanding
Checklist Item | Score | Max Score |
|---|
Focus on Root Problem Analysis: Evaluate emphasis on solving underlying root causes versus just addressing symptoms. | | 5 |
Depth of Edge Case Analysis: Assess how thoroughly edge cases or unusual scenarios are identified and analyzed. | | |
Edge Case Analysis - How many specific edge cases or samples have been used?[RF3]
Score: 0-5 (5 for comprehensive edge case analysis)
| | 5
|
Impact Assessment and Improvement
Checklist Item | Score | Max Score |
|---|
Impact on Scoring- Is the impact of ER on scoring mechanisms well-understood? Score: 0-5 (5 indicating a clear understanding of impact) | | 5 |
Review of Default Values - Have default values been reviewed and flagged for changes if necessary? Score: 0-5 (5 for a thorough review and appropriate flagging) | | 5 |
Quality Control and Comparisons
Checklist Item | Score | Max Score |
|---|
Recording Entity Quality Score (EQS) - Has EQS been recorded and analyzed for each entity? Score: 0-5 (5 for comprehensive recording and analysis of EQS) | | 5 |
EQS vs. Project Subset Comparison - How does EQS compare to project subsets?
Score: 0-5 (5 indicating detailed comparison and insights)[RF4]
| | 5
|
Additional Considerations
Checklist Item | Score | Max Score |
|---|
Change Impact Estimation- Is there an estimate for the impact of changes in the ER process? Score: 0-5 (5 for detailed and realistic impact estimates) | | 5 |
Scoring Guidelines
0 Points: Criteria not met or incomplete.
1-2 Points: Basic implementation or significant room for improvement.
3-4 Points: Criteria mostly met with minor areas for improvement.
5 Points: Criteria fully met with excellent implementation.
ER case logging table
Issue No. | Description | Priority | Select Criteria | Type of Issue | Resolution | Status | Notes |
|---|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
BA Entity Review Score
Item | Example deployment | Max Score |
|---|
Documentation and Analysis | | |
Problem Solving and Understanding | | |
Impact Assessment and Improvement | | |
Quality Control and Comparisons | | |
Additional Considerations | | |
Conclusion
This checklist provides business analysts with a structured method to evaluate the ER process, identify areas needing improvement, and guide the path towards enhancing ER effectiveness in deployments.
Project Name
| |
|---|
Date
| |
Implementation/POC
| |
Initial tuning/Continuous
| |
Sprint No
| |
Owner
| |
Audience
| TL/PM/SME/SSM
|
Total Issue Count
| H(), M(), L()
|
Notes
| |
| |
Entity Type
| Individual
|
|---|
Entity Sample Size
| |
Selection Criteria
| Manual/Tooling
|
Data Quality Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Overlinking Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Underlinking Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Notes
| |
Entity Type
| Business
|
|---|
Entity Sample Size
| |
Selection Criteria
| Manual/Tooling
|
Data Quality Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Overlinking Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Underlinking Issues (Yes/No)
| |
Notes
| |
Issue No.
| Description
| Priority
| Select Criteria
| Type of Issue
| Resolution
| Status
| Notes
|
|---|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | |
Need to bucket this all up. Shouldn't be that by reviewing 20 businesses I boost my score. (Probably give different weights per entity type, e.g. reviewing shed loads of accounts is a bit of a waste). [RF1]
Need some concept of a positive review, don't want a high score if all entities reviewed are poorly resolved. [RF2]
Know this is one of mine, but we need to think "how do you know you have done comprehensive edge case". Just think what you may consider to be a 3 in this mark scheme [RF3]
This will need to be kept out for now as it doesn't exist [RF4]
