Scoping is not about accepting a task description at face value — it is about deliberately defining what is in scope and out of scope.
At the IIBA Denmark online event on 28 January, business analysts explored how different scoping techniques help challenge assumptions, clarify boundaries, and create shared understanding. Using a case study of an e-commerce company facing challenges with complaints and return handling, participants worked hands-on with selected techniques to practice this boundary-setting in action.
Why scoping matters
Effective scoping plays a central role across multiple BA disciplines:
- Strategy Analysis – Scoping aligns initiatives with organisational goals, clarifies the gap between current and future states, and supports early identification of risks and constraints. This was reflected in the poll results, where 58% identified unclear or conflicting business goals as the most common cause of scoping breakdowns.
- Business Analysis Planning and Monitoring – Scoping defines boundaries, identifies stakeholders, supports prioritisation, and acts as a key communication tool. Poll results showed that 42% experience challenges due to unclear system or process boundaries, and 42% because key decision-makers are not involved early enough.
Scoping is therefore not a one-off task, but a recurring discipline that evolves as understanding deepens.
Many angles on scoping
There is no single “right” way to scope. Scoping emerges at the intersection of why, what, who, and how.
Business analysts use a wide range of techniques, including:
- Root cause analysis, problem statements and business model canvasses (why)
- Context/scope diagrams and scope breakdown structures (what)
- Stakeholder analysis and customer journey maps (who)
- High-level process maps and customer journey maps (how)
The participant poll reflected this diversity. While Business Model Canvas (58%), High-Level Process Maps (50%), and Problem Statements (50%) were most commonly used early on, many analysts combine multiple techniques to build a decision-ready view of scope.
Three key scoping techniques explored
At the event, three key techniques were explored - each with their own angle on scoping.
- Root Cause Analysis - Helps identify underlying causes rather than symptoms, supporting clearer problem definitions and more focused scope decisions. This directly addresses a key challenge from the poll, where 42% cited a weak or missing problem definition as a common breakdown point.
- Context / Scope Diagram - Provides a shared visual of system boundaries, actors, and interactions. With 42% highlighting unclear boundaries as a frequent issue, this technique proved particularly valuable as a conversation and alignment tool.
- Customer Journey Map - Focuses on the end-user experience to reveal pain points and value gaps. The poll showed that 33% experience scoping issues because the customer perspective is missing or oversimplified, underlining the importance of this technique.
Insights from the hands-on exercises
In the final part of the session, participants worked in break-out rooms, each group applying a selected scoping technique to the same case. Two clear conclusions emerged across the groups:
- Scope is about boundaries, not just tasks. When mapping scope, it is important not to be limited by the task description alone. The purpose of scoping is to explicitly identify what is in scope and out of scope.
- Different techniques, overlapping insights. Although scoping techniques have different focal points, their outputs often overlap - highlighting that there are many paths to a well-defined scope.
Poll insights at a glance
Where scoping discussions most often break down
- Unclear or conflicting business goals – 58%
- Weak or missing problem definition – 42%
- Unclear system or process boundaries – 42%
- Key stakeholders not involved early – 42%
- Missing or oversimplified customer perspective – 33%
Most-used scoping techniques in the early phase
- Business Model Canvas – 58%
- High-Level Process Map – 50%
- Problem Statement – 50%
- Scope / Work Breakdown Structure – 50%
- Root Cause Analysis – 42%
Future events
Thank you to everyone who participated and contributed insights to the session. We look forward to continuing the case study series and exploring more business analysis techniques together.
