Steering Committee And End Users Construction Phase example essay topic

System Development Life Cycle Table of Contents Overview of System Development Lifecycle 4 Models of System Development Lifecycle 4 Waterfall Model 4 Spiral Model 5 Rapid Application Development Model 5 Phases of System Development Life Cycle 5 Systems Development Lifecycle in Practice - A Case Study 8 Overview 8 Phase 1 - Planning 8 Phase 2 - Analysis 8 Phase 3 - Design 9 Phase 4 - Implementation 9 Phase 5 - Support and Maintenance 10 Conclusion 10 References 11 Overview of System Development Life Cycle A system development life cycle (SDLC) is a general process for developing information systems. It provides a framework for the tools, techniques and methods needed to build and implement systems that adequately address business needs. Most SDLC models incorporate fundamental principles which should underpin all systems development (Whitten et al, 1989, pp 81-85). These principles include: . The system is for the end-user. Establish phases and tasks.

Systems Development is not a sequential process. Systems are capital investments. Don't be afraid to cancel. Documentation is a product of all phases Models of System Development Life Cycle A SDLC defines the phases and tasks that are essential to systems development regardless of the size or scope of the impending system. While there are many versions or 'models' of the SDLC, they differ only in terminology and are more often alike than dissimilar. In its simplest form, the SDLC consists of five phases: planning, analysis, design, implementation, and support.

Following are examples of three different models, and have been included to further highlight the similarity between the phases and underlying principles. The Waterfall Model This model is sometimes known as the 'classic's DLC. It incorporates seven phases and depicts a method that is linear and sequential. The graphic representation of the phases in this model resembles the downward flow of a waterfall. Once a phase of development is completed, the development proceeds to the next phase. The Waterfall Model also allows the developer to return to previous phases for systematic reviews and to check procedures where necessary.

Phases of this model are: . Planning. Analysis. Design. Construction. Implementation.

Post Implementation Review. Maintenance The Spiral Model The spiral model incorporates the first five phases of the waterfall model listed above and is graphically illustrated as a continuing spiral, beginning from the centre and coiling around as the system grows. One could argue that the spiral model is actually a series of short waterfall cycles, each producing an early prototype representing a part of the entire project. This model emphasizes the need to go back and reiterate earlier stages a number of times as the project progresses. The spiral approach helps demonstrate a proof of concept early in the cycle, and resources can be held constant as the system size grows. Rapid Application Development In the rapid application development (sometimes called rapid prototyping) model, initial emphasis is on creating a prototype that looks and acts like the desired product in order to test its usefulness.

The prototype is an essential part of the requirements determination phase, and may be created using tools different from those used for the final product. Once the prototype is approved, it is discarded and the 'real's oftware is written. The four phases of this model are: . Requirements Planning. User Design.

Construction. CutoverPhases of System Development Life Cycle All phases of the SDLC, regardless of the model, consist of a number of tasks that need to be undertaken in order to complete the life cycle. It is important to note here that while the phases are sequential in nature, overlapping and iteration of phases (and tasks) can occur. Using the waterfall model, the following table identifies phase tasks, their aims and their outcomes. Figure 1 illustrates how phases might overlap and has been provided to give a broad impression only. The actual overlap will depend on the scope of the system to be implemented and will vary considerably between projects.

Tasks Key Stakeholders Outcomes Planning Phase. Beginning phase of the SDLC. Usually generated by a 'request' from users and / or management to improve a current system or process. Survey project scope - Determine problem - Identify users. Survey project feasibility - Assess cost of new system. System analyst gathers information from management and users...

System analyst presents a written feasibility assessment to management or steering committee. Usually includes a preliminary cost-benefit analysis that determines if the project is feasible. Analysis Phase. This stage cannot be commenced until the planning phase is complete as the projected costs of the new system may outweigh the perceived benefits. Development at this stage can return to the planning phase if required... Study and analyse current system.

Define end-users requirements. System analyst again gathers information from managers and end-users. May also consult top-level management to determine business needs and long term strategic planning goals. Project team is formed comprising of system analyst and specialised IT staff...

Project team develops a requirements statement using various system model ling techniques. This is presented to management or steering committee. Design Phase. This stage can be commenced once the requirements statement has been reviewed and accepted. It may be necessary to return to the analysis phase should unexpected problems arise during the design tasks... Select a feasible solution, taking into consideration: - technical feasibility - operational feasibility - economic feasibility.

Design the new system. Acquire computer hardware and software (if necessary). Project team designs the computer outputs, inputs, files, methods and procedures using numerous tools. Interaction with managers and users is still important at this stage. System analyst produces a written design specifications or prototype which is reviewed by the steering committee and end-users Construction Phase. Programming is usually the principal activity of this phase and is sometimes one of the most time consuming tasks.

It may be necessary to return to preceding phases on a number of occasions, particularly if early phases have been poorly completed... Install computer hardware and software (if necessary). Build test data, files and databases. Write and test programs. Project team work from specifications that have been developed and refined through earlier phases. May involve the installation and / or modification of purchased software packages.

Management, users and programmers involved in system testing processes... Project team develop computer software that has been thoroughly debugged and tested. Design specifications are reviewed to ensure the system meets the requirements identified in the analysis phase. Implementation Phase.

The purpose of this phase is to smoothly convert from the old system to the new system. During this phase, the new system is delivered and installed and end-users are trained... Install files and databases. Train end-users to use the new system. Convert to the new system. Project team, technical support staff and data entry clerks may be involved in the installation process...

Project team will train end-users and management... End-users and management will validate and verify accuracy of converted data... Project team develop user documentation and training guides... Project team and end-uses will also document any errors uncovered and it may be necessary to return to the construction and / or design phase to implement any modifications. Post Implementation Review Phase. This phase of the SDLC commences only after the implementation phase is complete.

The aim at this stage is to evaluate the operational information system developed and to evaluate the systems development procedures... Immediate review. Delayed review. End-users, management and steering committee will review the system to determine if the goals and objectives identified early in the project are fulfilled... Steering committee will review feasibility to determine if projected benefits are being realised... System analysis with the assistance of end-users will prepare a systems audit report to present to management.

This should be conducted immediately following implementation and again after some period of time has elapsed. Maintenance Phase. The final phase of the SDLC. This phase is ongoing and aims to maintain and improve the system. This phase can commence once the system is placed into operation... Periodic evaluations and reviews.

System requests. Role of system analyst changes from development to support. Project team will conduct periodic evaluations to ensure end-user requirements are still being met and requests for maintenance and / or improvements will be evaluated and scheduled for action if required. System request forms generated by users and managers are reviewed by project team and steering committee.

Existing specification documentation is updated by project team if any changes to the system occur. Planning Analysis Design Construction Implementation Post Implementation Maintenance Figure 1. A visual concept of overlapping phases of the SDCL (Adapted from Whitten et al 1989, p. 97) Systems Development Lifecycle in Practice - A Case Study Overview Livingstone International is an Australian owned business distributing a range of healthcare products to hospitals, doctors, dentists, pharmacies, first-aiders, nursing home and childcare centres as well as laboratory consumables to schools, universities, pathologies and scientific laboratories. The company operates as a 'one stop shop's up ply service to approximately 10,000 active customers located throughout Australia and overseas.

Livingstone International markets, imports and distributes healthcare consumables and stocks in excess of 50,000 stock items and employs over 100 personnel. In early 2002, a decision was made by corporate management to diversify product range and Livingston International commenced the distribution of veterinary supplies to veterinarians and the animal health industry. As a result of the diversification and subsequent change in product mix, the current Order-entry and Follow-up system (OFS) functioning at Livingstone International quickly became inadequate. Huge delays were experienced as the system was unable to validate relative information such as customer data, credit status, product numbers and availability quickly enough.

Phase 1 - Planning After lengthy discussions between the Chief Executive Officer, Operations Manager and Manager of Customer Services, a decision was made to investigate an alternative system. Management was particularly concerned that the existing system would definitely not support an estimated increase in order transactions expected as a result of an upcoming intense advertising campaign. In the past, different promotional strategies from time to time had significantly impacted on the current order-entry process. The Customer Services Manager consequently met with both the Marketing and Finance department managers and, as a result of further discussions, a project 'proposal' form was prepared and lodged to the Information Management Department. After consideration of the proposal by the Manager of Information Systems (MIS), a 'Project Team' (consisting of a Senior Systems Analyst, a Programmer Analyst and two System Programmers) was formed to further investigate the current systems deficiencies and limitations. A 'Steering Committee' was also formed at this stage as it was verbally agreed by management that a new system was inevitable.

The Project team met with the Customer Services Manager (CSM) and also interviewed order-entry staff. They completed their preliminary study with one more in-depth interview with the CSM before preparing and submitting a 'formal's ystem request form to the Steering Committee. The request form outlined the current problems being experienced and also the perceived benefits of a new system. Phase 2 - Analysis The project was accepted by the steering committee and the project team undertook a detailed study of the current OFS. They reviewed documents and workflow by gathering realistic data and collecting copies of forms used in the various processes of order-entry, as well as reviewing the procedure manuals and written instruction guidelines currently in force. Order-entry staff, end-users of the system, were observed to see how they handled order requests and membership applications on a day-to-day basis.

Additional facts were then collected using questionnaires disseminated to the end-users and these were followed up with interviews where necessary to clarify any areas of uncertainty. Managers of all departments were then consulted to provide an understanding of their reporting requirements. Although this was quite a lengthy process it proved helpful in clearing up misunderstandings and identifying unusual circumstances. Once complete, the project team presented their understanding and ideas to the steering committee in the form of a written report and a basic data flow diagram (DFD). A meeting was then conducted involving end-users to review the current data and workflow through the order-entry system. Concluding this, the project team prepared a 'study / analysis phase' report.

This report included a feasibility study and an outline of the business requirements of Livingstone International. The steering committed approved the continuation of the project due to the favourable results of the feasibility study which demonstrated projected benefits of solving the existing order-entry problems far exceeded the projected costs for continuing. Phase 3 - Design The initial design of the new system was divided into two key areas: design of the computer files and databases and design of the computer outputs. The project team developed a thorough 'requirements statement' which defined the data flows and data stores of the new system. As the system analyst and the programmer analyst were able to work independently on this task, the first stage of the design phase was completed efficiently.

A 'walk through' with managers and key end-users (supervisors) was conducted to assist in the production of output specifications for reports and forms and to verify designs. These were reviewed at the next scheduled steering committee meeting (meetings were held on a fortnightly basis at this stage). The second stage of the design phase concentrated on the inputs and user interface of the impending system. This began with a meeting involving the project team and entire staff of the order-processing department and again concluded with a walk through of the various screens depicted in flowchart documents. At the conclusion of the design phase a completed set of file specifications (data dictionary forms, record layout charts, DFD diagrams, pseudo code reports) had been developed and the programming team constructed the system and created test files.

The programming team consisted of the two system programmers who formed part of the project team along with an additional applications programmer who was employed on a contractual basis to assist in the completion of this task. Phase 4 - Implementation The programming tasks progressed without incident and after several weeks of testing by the programming team, the project team planned an implementation schedule for the new system. This involved developing user and technical manuals and organising training for end-users. The systems analyst and the programmer analyst largely carried out these duties with assistance from administrative support staff.

Once training modules were completed a schedule was implemented and this proved to be the first 'setback' in the development life cycle of the system. The project team had assumed that the training would be conducted over one or two sessions comprising the entire order-entry staff and initial time planning in the feasibility study had reflected this. However, this proved impracticable and training was finally completed in six or seven small group sessions. The system was successfully implemented two weeks over schedule and was operated in parallel with the old system for two months.

During this time, managers were able to verify and validate daily and monthly reports and end-users were encouraged to identify any shortcomings or enhancements. As there were no 'critical' changes to be made to the design specifications (only minor problems with some print alignments), a 'cut off live' date of one month was determined by the project team in agreement with the steering committee. The conversion process went smoothly and a post-implementation review was conducted by the project team with the results reported to the steering committee. A second review has not been conducted to date to allow for a reasonable operating period to elapse however, it appears at this stage that implementation has been successful and user and business requirements have been fulfilled. Phase 6 - Support and Maintenance Support and maintenance of the new order-entry system is ongoing and is carried out by the project team and technical support staff employed by Livingstone International. The steering committee continues to meet on a monthly basis where their primary objective is to evaluate requests and enhancements mostly generated by end-users and department managers.

The steering committee will also continue to re-evaluate feasibility over the next five years to determine if business benefits are to realised. Conclusion Livingstone International possesses a progressive and positive attitude toward the information system function within companies and this has been reflected in an apparent successful system implementation, developed with methodologies consistent with the principles of the System Development Life Cycle. To date, the system has proved to be more efficient and effective than the old system and was implemented in accordance with budget constraints. The entire SDLC processes were conducted in a very professional manner and extensive end-user interaction throughout all of the phases possibly attributed to the minimal problems encountered.

Bibliography

Seldon, L. Graduate Certificate in Health Informatics, Course CD. CPE 7601, Health Information Systems 2002 Shelly, G.
Cashman, T., Rosenblatt, H. System Analysis and Design (4th edition). 2001.
Course Technology: Boston. Whitten, J., Bentley, L... , Barlow, V. Systems Analysis and Design Methods (2nd edition). 1989.
Irwin College Publishing: Boston Livingstone International. Mission Statement and Strategic and Business Plan, 2002-2005 Livingstone International, Steering Committee and Project Team minutes, Nov 2002 - Sept 2003.