BAPv5 Exam Dumps : BCS Practitioner Certificate in Business Analysis Practice v5.2

A mind map is a technique for organising and visualising information in a hierarchical and associative way. It helps to generate, structure and classify ideas and concepts and show how they are related or connected. Therefore, option A is the correct answer, as a mind map would enable Girby to model the arising themes and how they relate to each other. A mind map would help to identify the main theme or problem (declining production) and the sub-themes or causes (staff blaming each other, more parts being faulty etc.) and arrange them in a tree-like structure. A mind map would help to use colours, symbols, images and keywords to represent and emphasise the themes and their relationships. A mind map would help to analyse and evaluate the themes and their relationships and identify any patterns or gaps that may exist. Option B is not a correct answer, as a business activity model is not a technique for modelling the arising themes and how they relate to each other. A business activity model is a technique for modelling business activities within an organisation or project at a high level of abstraction. It helps to understand what an organisation does, how it does it, who does it, where it does it and why it does it. Option C is not a correct answer, as a rich picture is not a technique for modelling the arising themes and how they relate to each other. A rich picture is a technique for drawing a holistic view of a complex situation or problem using informal symbols and images. It helps to capture the main elements and aspects of a situation or problem and how they interact or influence each other. Option D is not a correct answer, as a business process model is not a technique for modelling the arising themes and how they relate to each other. A business process model is a technique for modelling business processes within an organisation or project at a low level of abstraction. It helps to understand how business processes are performed or delivered in terms of inputs, outputs, activities, tasks, roles, rules, events etc.

The documentation is explicit about how BAMs should be used when multiple stakeholder perspectives exist. It states that initially there will be one BAM for each distinct perspective, and later these models are examined to identify where there is agreement or conflict. The ultimate aim is to combine them and, through discussion with stakeholders, achieve a consensus BAM.

This is important because different stakeholders can hold different (yet valid) “world views” about the same organisation—what the book describes as “duck-rabbit” perspectives—so the analyst must understand and reconcile them to avoid building change based on a single partial view. Once the separate BAMs exist (Finance, Marketing, Logistics, Stores), the next logical step is therefore to facilitate negotiation and collaboration to create one agreed model that represents the idealised way forward and that stakeholders will “buy in” to.

Option A is unnecessary at this point because CATWOE is used to help derive activities and perspectives; the BAMs already exist. Option C (asking the Managing Director to pick) is specifically described as a fallback only if stakeholders cannot agree; it is less desirable than securing shared agreement because it risks lack of acceptance and weaker commitment to the final model.

The documentation defines gap analysis as exploring the differences between a current state (“as is”) and a desired future state (“to be”). The emphasis is on understanding where the organisation wants to be and, by comparing with the current situation, identifying what needs to change to reach that target state. It also states that the outcome of gap analysis is a list of business requirements to be delivered—typically phrased at the “what” level rather than prescribing detailed solutions.

In this scenario, the retailer’s desired future state includes a more capable online experience and integration with inventory and other applications—this is fundamentally a change in capability. Therefore, identifying new and improved business capabilities (and capturing them in a target view such as a Target Operating Model) is exactly the kind of work performed in gap analysis: it clarifies what the future business system must be able to do, so gaps against the current capabilities can be identified and addressed.

By contrast, a Gantt chart (A/B) is delivery planning, not gap analysis; a RACI matrix (C) is a responsibilities definition; and brainstorming (D) is an idea-generation technique that may help option creation but is not the core “compare as-is to to-be and identify gaps” activity.