Skip to main content

Welcome to a Grasp lesson

Create a free account to keep studying and create your own study path.

Lesson 70

BRD vs. Agile Backlog

Recommended resources

Hello! Welcome back to our course on Business Analysis.

In our last lesson, we dove into the art of backlog prioritization, learning how to use frameworks like MoSCoW and RICE to decide what the team should build next. All of these activities—writing user stories, refining the backlog, and prioritizing—are core to the Agile way of working.

However, many organizations, especially larger ones or those in regulated industries, still rely on more traditional forms of documentation. As a Business Analyst preparing for interviews and a new role, you will be expected to be bilingual, speaking both the language of Agile artifacts and traditional requirements documents.

Today, you will learn to differentiate between traditional requirements documents (like the Business Requirements Document or BRD) and Agile artifacts (like the product backlog). Understanding the purpose, structure, and context of each will make you a more versatile and valuable analyst, capable of navigating any project environment you encounter.

1. The Context: Waterfall vs. Agile

The difference between a BRD and a backlog is rooted in the philosophy of the project management methodology being used.

  • Waterfall: A traditional, sequential approach. You complete each phase fully before moving to the next (e.g., gather all requirements -> design the entire system -> build it -> test it). It emphasizes comprehensive upfront planning and documentation.
  • Agile: An iterative and incremental approach. You work in short cycles (sprints), delivering small pieces of a working product. It emphasizes flexibility, customer feedback, and adapting to change.

To get a clear overview of how these two methodologies approach project planning and documentation differently, let's watch a helpful comparison.

AGILE versus WATERFALL Project Plans

The video 'AGILE versus WATERFALL Project Plans' by David McLachlan provides an excellent side-by-side comparison. We'll watch a few segments to see how requirements and scope are handled in each world.

Please watch the following segments: Introduction (00:00 - 00:52): Understand the core premise that both methodologies manage the same project elements, but in different ways. Initial Planning Documents (00:52 - 03:06): Note the list of formal documents in Waterfall (like business case, project charter) versus the lighter kickoff artifacts in Agile. Requirements Gathering (04:59 - 07:33): Pay close attention to the contrast between Waterfall's 'requirements documentation' and Agile's focus on user stories, prototypes, and feedback.

As you saw, the Waterfall approach is document-heavy and front-loaded, while the Agile approach is more focused on artifacts that facilitate conversation and can evolve over time. Let's dig into the specifics.


2. Traditional Documentation: The Business Requirements Document (BRD)

In a Waterfall project, the Business Requirements Document (BRD) is the foundational document. It formally captures the business needs and objectives for a project. Think of it as a contract between the business stakeholders and the project team.

To understand the practical purpose and structure of a BRD, please read the following article.

BRD vs FRD vs User Stories: When Should a Business ...

The article 'BRD vs FRD vs User Stories' gives a very practical, interview-focused breakdown of these documents. We'll focus on its definition of the BRD.

Please read section 4, 'BRD — Business Requirements Document'. Focus on its purpose (the 'what' and 'why'), its audience (business stakeholders, management), and when it's typically used.

A BRD answers the question: "What does the business need to achieve?" It avoids technical details and focuses on business goals, scope, and expected outcomes. A well-structured BRD typically contains sections like:

  • Executive Summary
  • Project Scope and Vision
  • Business Objectives
  • Current and Future State Analysis (As-Is and To-Be)
  • Detailed Business Requirements (what the system must do from a business perspective)
  • Stakeholder Analysis
  • Constraints and Assumptions

This comprehensive nature is by design. In Waterfall, the goal is to define and approve everything upfront to minimize changes later, as changes are seen as costly deviations from the plan.


3. Agile Artifacts: The Product Backlog & User Stories

In Agile, the primary requirements artifact is the Product Backlog. It is not a static document but a living, prioritized list of everything that might be needed in the product. The items in the backlog are typically expressed as User Stories.

As we've discussed, user stories are not just a different format; they represent a different way of thinking about requirements. They shift the focus from a prescriptive list of features to the user's goals and the value they hope to receive.

Let's watch a video that makes a crucial point: the real difference isn't between "user stories" and "requirements," but between good requirements and bad requirements.

Requirement Specification vs User Stories

The video 'Requirement Specification vs User Stories' explains the philosophical shift that user stories represent.

Watch the key segments of this video: The Problem with Traditional 'Requirements' (02:00 - 03:46): Understand how traditional requirements often incorrectly prescribe the 'how' instead of the 'what'. The Job of the Requirements Process (04:38 - 07:50): Grasp the idea that requirements are about translating vague wishes into clear goals, separating 'what' from 'how'. User Stories as a Solution (07:50 - 10:20): See how user stories force a focus on the user's goals. The Real Difference (14:07 - 14:21): This short clip summarizes the core idea perfectly. What Makes a Good User Story (16:05 - 17:35): Note the characteristics of a good user story—high-level, non-technical, and focused on outcome.

So, the product backlog, filled with well-written user stories, serves as the single source of truth for the work the team will do. It's intentionally incomplete and coarse-grained at the bottom, with fine-grained, well-understood stories at the top, ready to be worked on. This is the "just-in-time" detailing that contrasts sharply with the "all-upfront" detail of a BRD.


4. Head-to-Head: BRD vs. Product Backlog

Let's summarize the key differences in a table. This is the kind of clear comparison you should be able to articulate in a job interview.

Aspect Traditional (BRD) Agile (Product Backlog)
Nature A formal, static document. A dynamic, living artifact.
Purpose To define and freeze the scope; a contract for what will be built. To serve as a repository of options and a plan for what to do next.
Timing Created and signed off at the beginning of a project. Exists for the lifetime of the product; continuously refined and re-prioritized.
Detail Level Comprehensive and detailed for the entire scope upfront. High-level items at the bottom, detailed "just-in-time" at the top.
Unit of Work A list of "shall" statements (e.g., "The system shall..."). User stories, epics, tasks, bugs.
Ownership Often owned by the Business Analyst or Project Manager. Owned and prioritized by the Product Owner.
Change Discouraged. Managed via a formal Change Control Process. Welcomed. The backlog is designed to accommodate change.
Audience Business executives, project sponsors, project managers. The development team, Product Owner, and stakeholders.

This image perfectly visualizes the outcome of these different documentation philosophies. In traditional approaches, a lot of documentation can become outdated or describe features that were never built. In Agile, the goal is to have the documentation closely reflect the actual, implemented product.

Documentation Comparison: Traditional vs. Agile Management
This comparison illustrates the Agile principle of "working software over comprehensive documentation." The focus shifts from creating a perfect upfront plan to creating a product that delivers value, with documentation that supports this goal.

5. When to Use What? The Hybrid Reality

It’s tempting to see this as a battle between "old" and "new," but the reality is more nuanced. The best approach depends on the project's context.

  • A BRD-led (Waterfall) approach is often preferred for projects with:

    • Low uncertainty and stable requirements (e.g., building a bridge).
    • Strict regulatory or compliance needs where all requirements must be documented and signed off upfront (e.g., medical devices, financial systems).
    • Fixed-price contracts where scope must be precisely defined.
  • A backlog-led (Agile) approach is ideal for projects with:

    • High uncertainty and evolving requirements (e.g., developing a new mobile app).
    • A need for speed to market and quick user feedback.
    • Complex problems where the solution is not known upfront.

Many companies operate in a hybrid model. They might create a high-level BRD to define the overall business vision and secure funding, but then use an Agile backlog and sprints to execute the development work. As a BA, being able to bridge this gap is a highly valuable skill.

Business Requirements Document in Product Management

To understand how these concepts coexist, let's read a section from the 'Business Requirements Document in Product Management' article.

Please read the subsection titled 'BRDs in Different Development Methodologies', focusing on the descriptions for 'Waterfall Development', 'Agile Development', and especially 'Hybrid Approaches'.

Test your understanding!

You are a BA on a new project for your company in the AdTech industry. The goal is to build a brand new, experimental AI-powered tool to help advertisers optimize their ad spend in real-time. The exact features are unknown, and the team plans to release a basic version to a few pilot customers to gather feedback.

Which approach to requirements would be more appropriate, and why? A formal BRD or a Product Backlog?

Show answer

A Product Backlog would be much more appropriate.

Reasoning:

  • High Uncertainty: The problem is experimental, and the exact features are unknown. An Agile approach allows the team to learn and adapt as they go.
  • Evolving Requirements: The plan is to gather feedback from pilot customers, which will inevitably lead to changes and new ideas. A dynamic backlog is designed to handle this, whereas a fixed BRD would immediately become a bottleneck.
  • Speed to Feedback: The goal is to get a version out quickly. Agile and the backlog model are optimized for delivering value in small, fast increments.

Conclusion

Congratulations! You can now confidently articulate the differences between the traditional, document-driven world of Waterfall and the adaptive, value-driven world of Agile.

Key Takeaways:

  • Traditional requirements documentation, like the BRD, is a product of the Waterfall methodology. It is a comprehensive, static document created upfront to define and freeze project scope.
  • Agile requirements artifacts, like the Product Backlog and User Stories, are part of the Agile framework. They are dynamic, evolving tools designed to manage change and focus on delivering user value iteratively.
  • The core differences lie in their timing, level of detail, approach to change, and ultimate purpose.
  • The choice of approach is not about which is "better" but which is fitter for the project's context. Many organizations use hybrid models, and a skilled BA must be fluent in both.

Preview of the Next Lesson:

We have now concluded our module on Business Analysis in an Agile context. We're going to shift gears significantly. As a BA, you not only define what needs to be built but also help the business measure success and make data-driven decisions.

In our next lesson, we will begin our module on Business Analytics by learning how to apply basic statistical concepts including mean, median, and standard deviation. This will be the first step in building your data analysis toolkit.