For the sake of discussion, I will assume the data and conclusions are correct. I would never argue the absolutely critical aspect of good requirements. But once again I am troubled by the specified and implied recommendations. The focus appears to be on the business analysts and the requirements process - which should result in focusing on improving the function and the process. Great! But what about the lack of good governance that should be identifying this deficiency in the first place? At best, good governance and the associated executive oversight identifies the lack of good requirements when the investment is first proposed. At worst, good governance and the associated executive oversight identifies the lack of good requirements when the projects have been completed. In either case, this governance would invoke the necessary improvements to the requirements process and business analyst function - or any of the other problems or issues related to project and portfolio management. Until this governance and executive oversight is in place and functioning properly, these studies just give executives the excuse to point fingers at the worker-bees who are struggling to succeed in its absence.
Steve Romero, IT Governance Evangelist
http://community.ca.com/blogs/theitgovernanceevangelist/ 
