The following articles are in PDF format. Click here or on the icon to download Acrobat Reader.

Coming soon--BAseBOK™ - Business Analysis should employ (this) Body of Knowledge

50+ articles Robin Goldsmith published as a subject expert on TechTarget's that can be viewed only on their site.

What the Heck Is Enterprise Analysis Part 2
Modern Analyst featured article, October 05, 2010

The powerful Problem Pyramid™ is described as a systematic disciplined way to accurately identify the business need and value for any project.without necessitating a separate Enterprise Analysis that often doesn't happen.

What the Heck Is Enterprise Analysis Part 1
Modern Analyst featured article, October 05, 2010

BABOK v2 implies that business needs are identified only in a separate somewhat lofty pre-project Enterprise Analysis that in reality seldom occurs as BABOK v2 envisions.

Quality Assurance Meets Quality Control
SD Times Guest View featured article, August 1, 2010

Introduces the author's Proactive Software Quality Assurance™ concepts that are being adopted in the forthcoming IEEE Std. P730 for Software Quality Assurance and distinguishes quality assurance from testing and other quality controls.

Get the REAL Value Proposition Right
Requirements Networking Group featured article, June 15, 2010

Identifies salepeople as perhaps the most fruitful requirements constituency and describes a Value Selling Maturity Model culminating in Breakthrough Value Maturity Level 5 – REAL Customer Value Proposition.

BAs Will Falter Until They Learn to Discover REAL, Business Requirements
Modern Analyst featured article, January 10, 2010

Business Analysts (BAs) keep being taught unwise conventional wisdom requirements models which destine their efforts to disappointment. There’s a better model shown here.

Value Selling Maturity Model article with Anthony Sarno, October 28, 2009

Why most of what is called Value Selling fits within low-effectiveness Levels one through four but fail to achieve breakthrough benefits of Level 5 maturity.

Who the Heck Needs ROI?
Technology Evaluation Center featured article with Anthony Sarno, June 12, 2009

Sellers as well as buyers and other project stakeholders need to know and use right, reliable, and responsible Return on Investment (ROI).

Right, Reliable, and Responsible REAL ROI™ article with Anthony Sarno, April 20, 2009

How REAL ROI™ overcomes pitfalls that make most ROI determinations wrong, unreliable, and irresponsible.

SPaMCAST 49 - Goldsmith, Requirements – Part 2, A Game Plan For 2009
Software Process and Measurement podcast interview by Tom Cagley, December 28, 2008

Part two of one of the most widely downloaded of Tom Cagley's podcast interviews.

SPaMCAST 47 - Goldsmith, REAL Requirements, Your Career
Software Process and Measurement podcast interview by Tom Cagley, November 30, 2008

Part one of one of the most widely downloaded of Tom Cagley's podcast interviews.

Should BABOK Include Shorthand?
Requirements Networking Group featured article, November 11, 2008

BABOK v2 portrays business analysis as mindless dictation-taking, rather than the interactive value-adder it could and should be.

ROI is Deceptive Without REAL Requirements and Quantified Intangibles
Requirements Networking Group featured article, March 20, 2007
(see discussion at

This article was featured in the Dec. 18, 2008 issue of the IT Metrics and Productivity Journal

Dirty little secrets of Return on Investment (ROI) that make many such determinations questionable and how to responsibly guide objective decision making.

Low-Overhead REAL Software Process Improvement

This article was featured in the Dec. 18, 2008 issue of the IT Metrics and Productivity Journal

Actually achieiving targeted high-payoff improvements quicker, cheaper, and with less risk than big branded blanket initiatives.

7 Low-Overhead REAL Software Process Improvements

An expanded description of ways to analyze and improve the REAL software process as well as some powerful good practices that are likely to produce improvements without the analysis.
REAL CHAOS, Two Wrongs May Make a Right

This article was featured in the Dec. 18, 2008 issue of the IT Metrics and Productivity Journal

Despite questionable measures and analysis that misses the most common cause of project failures, the CHAOS Reports' conclusions may be correct.


Drowning in CHAOS?

This is the REAL CHAOS article as published in the February 2008 Software Test & Performance magazine.

Proactive Testing™ vs. Conventional Reactive Software Testing

Go Pro's Proactive Testing™ methodology spots numerous errors that conventional testing ordinarily overlooks and yet also enables faster, cheaper, and better software deliver.


REAL, Business Requirements vs. Software Requirements

Distinctions that make a difference: between software requirements, that really are high-level design, and the REAL, business requirements the design must satisfy to provide value.


Powerful Problem Pyramid™ Tool Defines Requirements that Don't Creep

Six-step disciplined tool for systematically defining the REAL problem and the REAL, business requirements that will solve the problem and provide value.


Early and Effective: The Perks of Risk-Based Testing
Software Test and Performance, July 2006

Because Proactive Testing™ identifies big risks early, test plans dealing with the higher risks can be tested not only more often, but earlier in the life cycle.

10 ROI Pitfalls
Whitepaper in conjunction with

10 pitfalls that commonly affect the suitability of ROI calculations and their usage, from simpler issues related to the calculations themselves to the more difficult, and often more important, issues of how ROI is interpreted and used.

Proactive Testing Tames Your Banditos

International Institute for Software Testing Newsletter, March 2007

Go Pro's Proactive Testing™ methodology wins advocates among users, managers, and developers who traditionally say, "We don't need no stinkin' testing."

Let's Talk Requirements
Software Test & Performance, March 2007

Testers are challenged to know the requirements; but focusing on requirements management addresses primarily form, whereas requirements content provides the value
Conventional Requirements Model Flaw Misses Real Business Requirements

Requirements Networking Group featured article, February 13, 2007
(see discussion at

"Emperor's New Clothes" revelation why 20 years of requirements books and gurus haven't appreciably reduced the REAL major cause of creep.

The Forgotten Phase

Software Development, July 2002)

Development Models often consider testing an afterthought, but there are models that focus on testing. This month, we'll examine the V-Model - but is it flawed, too? Part 1 of 4
This or That, V or X?
Software Development, August 2002

The X Model purports to fill the gaps left open by the V Model. But does it really handle all the facets of development, such as hand-offs, frequent builds and so on? Part 2 of 4

Proactive Testing
Software Development, September 2002

Not X, not V. This combination model that intertwines testing with development provides a happy medium that an expedite your projects. Part 3 of 4

Test-Driven Development
Software Development, October 2002

What part of the system do you test first? The Proactive Testing Model helps you prioritize, manage a project-level plan and steer clear of risks. Part 4 of 4

Click here to see the correct Proactive Testing Life Cycle diagram which should have been in the 'Proactive Testing' article.
Upcoming Events
About Go Pro
Contact Us