Qeiteri Armelle

Consider the following dialogue between a systems professional, John Juan, and a manager of a department targeted for a new information system, Peter Pedro:

Juan: The way to go about the analysis is to first examine the old system, such as reviewing key documents and observing the workers perform their tasks. Then we can determine which aspects are working well and which should be preserved.

Pedro: We have been through these types of projects before and what always ends up happening is that we do not get the new system we are promised; we get a modified version of the old system.

Juan: Well, I can assure you that will not happen this time. We just want a thorough understanding of what is working well and what isn’t.

Pedro: I would feel much more comfortable if we first started with a list of our requirements. We should spend some time up-front determining exactly what we want the system to do for my department. Then you systems people can come in and determine what portions to salvage if you wish. Just don’t constrain us to the old system.

Required:

a.Obviously these two workers have different views on how the systems analysis phase should be conducted. Comment on whose position you sympathize with the most.
b.What method would you propose they take? Why?


As to the conversation made by Peter Pedro which is the department manager and John Juan the system Professional, it was obviously a conflict between their ideas on what they were going to do first upon developing the system that would surely a great help to a less hassle and a not time consuming system. Since they have been working before in the same project, Peter Pedro was saying that they have been undergo with the same process of system development but they have ending up making a modified version of the existing system in short they have not been successful attaining their target. So he said to John Juan that they have to go with another tactics in developing a system, but John Juan insist that they have to undergo with the same process again. I think I would go for the idea of John Juan, since they have been working for that process and they know the outcome was not the same as their target, they can easily made their development a little bit different from before, with this case they can now identify in which part of activities they have done wrong that would result to the modified version of existing system.
But actually, legacy system is not easy to replace but if you would made a very good system it would be like making a system that as easy to use as the legacy one.

In making the development of the new system successful, the two must agree with what process model they would use. I would suggest that they use the Waterfall model, not only because it was traditional model but it was tested and proven that it has a big possibilities that would come up to a very good system. First, the manager and the system professional must undergo planning which may cater their own ideas, such as listing the requirements of what the manager wants and at the same time the system professional can now observe the functionality of the existing system and review the document, after such they can now discuss what are the functions that the new system have that is unique with the existing and what to preserve functions. With this the two can now decide of what really is the scope of their project.

• 
• 
• 
• 
•