The aim of this paper is to identify who is a systems analyst in organizations in a turbulent world. We see a need to radically rethink the way in which information systems are developed. There have appeared some efforts to create systems analysis methods for business professionals, for example, Alter (2002) and Bednar (2000). To promote the development of such methods, there is a need to theoretically validate the need for the development. From literature review, we derive a hypothesis that ‘analysis by external agents’ has been at the heart of the practice in organizations. In organizations that fit with the hypothesis, agency costs occur in the form of IS failures because business professionals could not forecast their future of business and are subject to bounded rationality not sufficient to control the agents. Having encountered complexity theory and the turbulent economy of globalism, some practitioners and researchers have recognized the increasing importance of creativity and sustainability of organizations, and started to use a term “chaordic organization” to describe a new type of organizations in contrast to the rationalistic one assumed in the dominant management discourse. We will show the inappropriateness of the hypothesis by revealing the built-in causality in the light of theoretical arguments made by Stacey et al (2000). They derived Transformative Teleology from the review of philosophical thinking, the purpose of which is the continuity and transformation of identity and difference. In chaordic organizations under Transformative Teleology, the future is unpredictable and under perpetual construction. This focuses attention on conversation as the central activity of organizing. This is inconsistent with the notion of ‘analysis by external agents.’ In a chaordic organization, its members create social realities under perpetual construction. Therefore, it is theoretically suggested that systems analysis becomes one of their ongoing activities. New systems analysis methods are required as the tools for sensemaking of their own practice and for interaction between the members. The methods are different from the conventional ones for IT professionals.