Differentiating between the requirements analyst and the business analyst From what I've observed, the difference between business analyst and requirements analyst is the depth of the resulting solutions document, and the length of time spent on the project. Requirements analysts appear to create a specifically formatted document in a more linear development process, a document that is as complete as possible and drives the development, while a business analyst has more flexibility in document production and can work in any of a variety of development environments. The business analyst can function successfully in circumstances where there are no specific requirements, for example in a process improvement effort where the business analyst is observing and recording the business process and pointing out improvements to be made which may or may not end up as requirements for a development project

The requirements analyst also appears to complete his or her job when the requirements are completed and signed off. Some of the requirements experts, notably Karl, state that the ultimate goal is to gain the sign-off. The business analyst stays with the project to make sure the resulting product still solves the problem when delivered and makes sure the business transitions to the new system or process successfully which means the business analyst has responsibilities even after the project has ended with acceptance of the software.

That said, most organizations are not aware of the differences in the two positions, and job titles do not appear to reflect the actual roles being played. I've seen business analysts who only do requirements and then leave the project, and others (in one US government organization) who only do testing. I've worked with companies that have split their business analysts into business business analysts and technical business analysts. It's still the wild west out there in business analyst land.  ¶ 5:27 AM