COMPARISON OF INFORMATION SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT METHODS
Student’s Name
Course
Professor
University
State
Date
Comparison of Information System Development Methods
Criteria for Evaluation
The choice of the best method that would is used in information system development has to be evaluated critically as this ensures that their positive and negative sides are assessed. In the above scenario, several criteria were identified and can be used.
- Staff Members
The first criteria for evaluating the method to be used in information system development are the staff (Kara, 2012). This is important because it helps the members to feel that they are part of the system involvement helps in making it smooth in time of transition since they were involved from the start of the development of the system. This criterion identifies whether the staff has to be involved in the methods to be used in information system development. In this case, the team needs to be included in the development process because this aspect will help their needs to be known well (Dağdeviren 2010). Therefore, when the new information system is developed, all these needs will be incorporated. From the case study, this criteria is vital because all the 41 IT staff will be able to present various needs concerning the new system.
As the new system is developed, all these needs will be incorporated, and it will be able to attain its intended objective, which is to store all the company’s information in a web-based management system. The different approaches that can be used to develop a new information system are governed by various techniques (Fraser and Arcuri, 2011). For instance, in the structured Information Systems Development Methodology (SSADM), one of the technique is to ensure that all the steps are followed for the program to be designed expertly. Therefore, involving the staff while using this method is essential because it will help to ensure they are taken through all the steps of the information system development so that in the end, they will understand how the system operates.
Secondly, the primary technique when using the Dynamic System Development (DSDM) method of information system development is to involve the users. Involving the users helps them to be aware of all the aspects of the system. Therefore, when the order is complete, it will be comfortable when using it to handle various activities. Thirdly, the Object-Oriented System Development (OO) can be used to develop a new system whereby the primary technique is to create a model (Batra, Xia, VanderMeer, and Dutta, 2010). In this case, it is essential to involve the users in the models created so that they will become familiar with the new system after it has been fully developed.
- Experience of the Team
The second criteria that can be used is the experience of the team (Niu, Da Xu, and Bi, 2013).it is important because the unit will know exactly what is required of them. The use of an information system requires a lot of experience to achieve its potential. In this case, when choosing the method to develop new information, it is essential to pay attention to the team’s experience. The primary importance of looking at the knowledge of the team from the case study is that it will ensure that when the new information system is incorporated into the organization, it will be easily used to improve productivity (Prat, Comyn-Wattiau, and Akoka 2014). When using the SSADM, the most suitable technique that matches this criterion to break down a complex process into simpler ones. This technique is critical in the sense that it makes it easy for employees with little experience to understand how the new system works. Also, when using the DSDM approach, the primary technique expected of it is to ensure all the users are included and this matches this criterion because when the users are involved in the development of the new information system, their experience concerning the use of the new system increases (Jalote, 2012). Furthermore, when using the object-oriented model whose primary technique is to develop a model that resembles the final system, it ensures that this criterial is matches as the team learns to interact with the system at its early stages (Mall, 2018). This interaction helps to ensure that the team develops experience regarding the use of the new information system.
- Understanding the Requirements in Advances
Thirdly, it is essential to know the requirements in advance (Oliveira and Martins, 2011). At the time of selecting the method to be used in developing the new system, it is essential to identify all the possible requirements. The main importance of these criteria from the case study is that it ensures all the elements are included in the new information system and that all the intended purposes have been attained. It also helps in the smooth development of the system since the requirements re well understood from the start. Since one of the techniques of the SSADM is to break the process into more straightforward steps, all the elements have to be known so that they can be included (Bruegge and Dutoit, 2009). Also, when using the DSDM approach, the main techinque is to include the staff in the system development. Having the team around when developing the system matches this criterial as it ensures all the requirements are known in advance (Langrial, Lehto, Oinas-Kukkonen and Harjumaa, 2012). Moreover, the main techinque that governs object-oriented method is the creation of a model representing how the final system will look like. This techinque matches these criteria because it will help to understand the requirement that may be needed to improve the model so that the final system becomes effective.
- The Cost of the Project
The cost of the project is the fourth criterion that can be used for evaluation (Rasimah, Ahmad, and Zaman, 2011). A lot of money and resources are usually spent when developing a new information system. In this scenario, adequate budgeting should be done to ensure that there is enough money for the method that will be used to create a new system. Moreover, this criteria is essential because it will ensure that chosen method is within the budget of the organization to prevent the company from going into financial constraints (Politis, Papaioannou, and Basbas, 2010).
The main techinque of the SSADM is to simplify the process of system development. This techinque matches this particular criterion since breaking down the system into smaller steps will reduce the cost of the project hence making it affordable (Gendron, Pourroy, Carron, and Marty, 2012). Also, when using the DSDM approach whose model is to involve the users, the cost of the project may be reduced as they users may offer insights on approaches that may be used to lower the costs. Also, the main techinque of the object-oriented approach is to ensure that the model is created first (Singh, and Malhotra, 2012). This techinque matches these criteria in that the model created will help in reducing the cost of the project as some of the resources that may be unnecessary may be dropped at this point.
References
Batra, D., Xia, W., VanderMeer, D.E., and Dutta, K., 2010. Balancing agile and structured development approaches to successfully manage large distributed software projects: A case study from the cruise line industry. CAIS, 27, p.21. Available at: https://pmd.igdp.org.br/journal/pmd/article/doi/10.4322/pmd.2017.004
Bruegge, B., and Dutoit, A.H., 2009. Object-‐Oriented Software Engineering. Using UML, Patterns, and Java. Learning, 5(6), p.7. Available at https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/7883005/
Dağdeviren, M., 2010. A hybrid multi-criteria decision-making model for personnel selection in manufacturing systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 21(4), pp.451-460. Available at: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10845-008-0200-7
Fraser, G., and Arcuri, A., 2011, September. EvoSuite: automatic test suite generation for object -oriented software. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM SIGSOFT symposium and the 13th European Conference on Foundations of software engineering (pp. 416-419). ACM. Available at: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-99241-9_5
Gendron, E., Pourroy, F., Carron, T., and Marty, J.C., 2012. Towards a SSADM to the definition of indicators for collaborative activities in engineering design. Journal of Engineering Design, 23(3), pp.195-216. Available at: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09544828.2011.576334
Jalote, P., 2012. An integrated approach to software engineering. Springer Science & Business Media.
Kara, M., 2012. Review common criteria as a secure software development model — International Journal of Computer Science & Information Technology, 4(2), p.83. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267704821_Review_on_Common_Criteria_as _a_Secure_Software_Development_Model
Langrial, S., Lehto, T., Oinas-Kukkonen, H., Harjumaa, M., and Karppinen, P., 2012, July. Native Mobile Applications for Personal Well-Being: A Persuasive Systems Design Evaluation. In PACIS (p. 93). Available at http://www.pacisnet.org/file/2012/PACIS2012-086.pdf
Mall, R., 2018. Fundamentals of software engineering. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Niu, N., Da Xu, L., & Bi, Z. (2013). Enterprise information systems architecture—Analysis and evaluation. IEEE Transactions concerning Industrial Informatics, 9(4), 2147-2154. Available at: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/6410030/
Oliveira, T., and Martins, M.F., 2011. Literature review of information technology adoption at the firm level — Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation, 14(1), p.110. Available at https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tiago_Oliveira3/publication/258821009_Literature _Review_of_Information_Technology_Adoption_Models_at_Firm_Level/links/0c9605 28fdf0cc370b000000.pdf
Politis, I., Papaioannou, P., Basbas, S., and Dimitriadis, N., 2010. Evaluation of a bus passenger information system from the users’ point of view in the city of Thessaloniki, Greece. Research in Transportation Economics, 29(1), pp.249-255. Available at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0739885910000612
Prat, N., Comyn-Wattiau, I. and Akoka, J., 2014, June. Artifact Evaluation in Information Systems Design-Science Research-a Holistic View. In PACIS (p. 23). Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b5a3/e84916cb217b33a04b584b91887f8fc92fa3.pdf
Rasimah, C.M.Y., Ahmad, A., and Zaman, H.B., 2011. Evaluation of user acceptance of mixed reality technology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(8). Available at: https://ajet.org.au/index.php/AJET/article/view/899
Singh, Y. and Malhotra, R., 2012. Object-oriented software engineering. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Tan, C.H., Teo, H.H., and Benbasat, I., 2010. Assessing screening and evaluation decision support systems: A resource-matching approach. Information Systems Research, 21(2), pp.305-326. Available at: https://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/isre.1080.0232