<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Bob Lambert &#187; Analysis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://robertlambert.net/content/analysis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://robertlambert.net</link>
	<description>on business-aligned information technology</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 21:05:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Abstracting and recombining all the way to the bank</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2011/08/abstracting-and-recombining-all-the-way-to-the-bank/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2011/08/abstracting-and-recombining-all-the-way-to-the-bank/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2011 14:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[App Dev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alignment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Intelligence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Modeling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Database Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Strategy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=1208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the past I&#8217;ve never understood what people really mean they say &#8220;think outside the box&#8221; but Jim Harris, in a recent OCDQ blog post, helped me figure it out. Mr. Harris ends with this provocative line: &#8220;the bottom line is Google and Facebook have socialized data in order to capitalize data as a true corporate asset.&#8221;  The post <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2011/08/abstracting-and-recombining-all-the-way-to-the-bank/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2011/08/abstracting-and-recombining-all-the-way-to-the-bank/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Get an early start for on-time data modeling</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2011/07/get-an-early-start-for-on-time-data-modeling/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2011/07/get-an-early-start-for-on-time-data-modeling/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 22 Jul 2011 22:14:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[App Dev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Modeling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Database Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Requirements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=1201</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;m a data modeler, so I enjoyed Jonathon Geiger&#8217;s recent article entitled &#8220;Why Does Data Modeling Take So Long&#8221;.  But why does he say it like it&#8217;s a bad thing? Mr. Geiger&#8217;s bottom line is exactly right: &#8220;Most of the time spent developing data models is consumed developing or clarifying the requirements and business rules <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2011/07/get-an-early-start-for-on-time-data-modeling/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2011/07/get-an-early-start-for-on-time-data-modeling/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Metadata goals, ROI, and point solutions</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2010/11/metadata-goals-roi-and-point-solutions/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2010/11/metadata-goals-roi-and-point-solutions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 2010 21:11:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alignment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Modeling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Quality]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=1008</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently there has been a long, and very interesting, discussion of do-it-yourself versus third-party metadata tools on LinkedIn&#8217;s TDWI BI and DW discussion forum (membership required to follow the link). I have followed but haven&#8217;t commented, but I suppose I contributed when Information Management kindly published my article on DIY metadata. The discussion is extremely <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2010/11/metadata-goals-roi-and-point-solutions/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2010/11/metadata-goals-roi-and-point-solutions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Use conceptual data modeling in requirements definition</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2010/07/use-conceptual-data-modeling-in-requirements-definition/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2010/07/use-conceptual-data-modeling-in-requirements-definition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Jul 2010 16:24:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[App Dev]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Modeling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Database Design]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Requirements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=979</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I’ve often thought that conceptual data modeling was an underused tool in the arsenal available to requirements analysts, and in a recent conversation I found that many were surprised that it would be used in the requirements phase at all.  Checking the Business Analysis Body of Knowledge (BABOK) I found data modeling listed among the <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2010/07/use-conceptual-data-modeling-in-requirements-definition/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2010/07/use-conceptual-data-modeling-in-requirements-definition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>IT should own the misalignment problem</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/it-should-own-the-misalignment-problem/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/it-should-own-the-misalignment-problem/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:37:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alignment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CapTech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Requirements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=401</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In a new post at Insurance Networking News Ara Trembly provides a balanced perspective on IT/business misalignment (Business/IT Misalignment: Whose Responsibility?).  He describes the problem as cultural, more amenable to relational than management solutions.    His conclusion sums it up: &#8220;Take a geek/suit to lunch today!&#8221; To me (speaking as an IT professional) IT should take <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/it-should-own-the-misalignment-problem/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/it-should-own-the-misalignment-problem/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>No business value in nulls</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/no-business-value-in-nulls/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/no-business-value-in-nulls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 22:10:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data Modeling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Database Design]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=345</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It seems I&#8217;m frequently in conversations about using null to represent a business value.  To paraphrase, say there are credit and cash customers, and there&#8217;s a suggestion to set &#8220;Customer_Type&#8221; to &#8220;C&#8221; for credit and null for cash.  To data and database professionals this is obviously a bad idea, but it&#8217;s not obvious from a <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/no-business-value-in-nulls/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/04/no-business-value-in-nulls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A pretty good requirements analysis checklist</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/requirements-analysis-plan/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/requirements-analysis-plan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 10:16:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Project Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Requirements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Recently I was asked for a high level requirements plan for a large IT conversion.  I googled around a little for something standard.  I found some good references (see links at the bottom of this post), but not exactly what I was looking for: a simple, method-agnostic layout of the high level steps and checkpoints <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/requirements-analysis-plan/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/requirements-analysis-plan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Free form diagrams part 3: just right, with a few rules</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-3/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 16:02:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=81</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Free form diagramming doesn’t only mean “no rules”, it also means “just right”. This post, last in a three part series on free form diagramming, gives some simple guidelines for getting the technique right.  Part one talked about the tension between rigor and expression in diagramming for analysis and design, and how more precise diagrams <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-3/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Free form diagrams part 2:  real world applications</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-2/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:52:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=69</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is part two of a three part series on free form diagramming for IT projects.  This entry reviews free form diagramming in practice. Part one talked about the tension between rigor and expression in diagramming for analysis and design, and how more precise diagrams can hinder rather than help communications with business people.  Part <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-2/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Free form diagrams part 1:  rigor versus business appeal</title>
		<link>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-1/</link>
		<comments>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-1/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 14:34:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bob</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IT]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Architecture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business Analysis]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://robertlambert.net/?p=63</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One effective way of communicating complexity, especially in the overall architecture of a system, is the free form diagram.  A free form diagram can directly address unique characteristics of a system in a way that business people can understand. Out on a walk some years ago I met an acquaintance who happened to be a <a href='http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-1/'>[...]</a>]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://robertlambert.net/2009/02/free-form-diagrams-part-1/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

