System Analysis and Design

Assessment1.docx

Home >Computer Science homework help >System Analysis and Design

Assessment 1: Case Study-1

Due date:	Week 5
Group/individual:	Group
Word count / Time provided:	2500 words
Weighting:	30%
Unit Learning Outcomes:	ULO-1, ULO-2, ULO-3

Assessment Details:

In this assignment, you have to perform a system analysis and design for the Natural Best Health store (NBH) case study provided at the case study section.

Case Study: Natural Best Health store (NBH)

Natural Best Health store is a chain of health stores provides different herbal supplements. The company wants to develop and deploy new ordering and delivery online System (OROS). The OROS required to install and configure email, web, database and management servers to provide the required services such as emails for staff and customers and suppliers, web page and database management system. In addition, the IT infrastructure must be established to provides the

communication and networking facilities with the required security and system availability. Different types of network devices and supporting servers including switches and routers must be installed and configured with all the required cabling services. Security devices and backup services must be used to improve the system performance.

The institute wants to use two online ordering and delivery systems, Domestic Ordering and Delivery System (DODS) and International Ordering and Delivery System (IODS). The software developer staff at the IT department assigned the task of developing both Ordering and Delivery System from scratch.

The head of the company wants to conduct a complete testing procedure to the whole system to find any bug and problem prior to the final system deployment.

The database system of the new system must allow each customer in each order to be assigned with an advisor. The advisor helps customer to order right herbal supplement. Each customer should have an account before ordering any supplement. Hoverer, if the customer finds difficulty for creating account, the advisor should support them. The system must keep track of customers, the assigned advisor for each, by recording the name of the advisor that support customer ordering for each time.

The institute uses several methods to evaluate the investments in this project. Table 1 shows the information the accountant provided to the system analyst to calculate Net Present Value (NPV), Payback Period and Return on Investment (ROI).

Table 1: Five-year investment evaluation

	Year
No.	Category	0	1	2	3	4	5
1	Value of benefits		$ 8,000.00	$ 8,000.00	$ 8,000.00	$ 8,000.00	$ 8,000.00
2	Development Cost	-$ 20,000.00	$750.00	$800.00	$770.00	$750.00	$730.00
3	Annual expenses		-$ 2,000.00	-$ 2,000.00	-$ 2,000.00	-$ 2,000.00	-$ 2,000.00
4	Net benefit/costs	$ 10,000.00
5	Discount factor	1.00
6	Net present value	-$ 10,000.00
7	Cumulative NPV	-$ 10,000.00

Tasks:

1. Develop your introduction and clearly define the aims and objectives of the report.

2. The Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) identifies all the activities required to build, launch, and maintain an information system. Discuss the six core processes of the SDLC required to develop the NRS project in detail.

3. Develop a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) description supported with a table for the NRS project explaining the ID, description, and duration for each task.

4. Develop PERT/CPM chart explaining the early and late start for each task. Identify the critical path and the total time to finish the project.

5. Use the information in Table 1, calculate the net present value, the payback period, and the return on investment by using a discount rate of 6 percent. The development costs for the project were $20,000. Do a five-year return on investment.

You may need to make some assumptions as required. Whenever you make assumptions, please state these clearly.

Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30% of the total unit mark.

Marking Criteria	Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark)	Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark	Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark	Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark	Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark
Introduction (10 marks)	Poor introduction with irrelevant details	Introduction is presented briefly and is missing the report outline	Introduction is generally presented along with the report outline	Introduction is well written, and the report outline is also discussed	Introduction is very well written, and the report outline is also discussed
Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC) (25 marks)	Poorly discussion of the six core processes of the SDLC required developing the NRS project.	Brief discussion of the six core processes of the SDLC required developing the NRS project.	Good discussion of the six core processes of the SDLC required developing the NRS project.	Well discussion of the six core processes of the SDLC required developing the NRS project.	Excellent discussion of the six core processes of the SDLC required developing the NRS project.
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) (15 mark)	Poor description with no poor table for the NRS project to include the ID, description, and duration for each task.	Brief description with brief table for the NRS project to include the ID, description, and duration for each task.	Generally good description with good supported table for the NRS project to explain the ID, description, and duration for each task.	Very clear description with good supported table for the NRS project to explain the ID, description, and duration for each task.	Very good description with very good supported table for the NRS project to explain the ID, description, and duration for each task.
PERT/CPM chart (20 mark)	Lack of evidence of understanding of PERT/CPM chart with no identification of critical path and the total time to finish the project.	Evidence of basic understanding of PERT/CPM chart with no clear identification of critical path and the total time to finish the project.	Evidence of good understanding and identification of PERT/CPM chart with clear identification of critical path and the total time to finish the project.	Very clear understanding and identification of PERT/CPM chart with clear identification of critical path and the total time to finish the project.	Has excellent understanding and identification of PERT/CPM chart with clear identification of critical path and the total time to finish the project.
Table-1 (20 mark)	Table-1 is missing or most of the required fields do not correct	Some fields of the table not correct or missing	All fields are available but many of them not accurate.	All field are available and some not very accurate	All fields are available and accurate
Summary (5 marks)	Summary not relating to the report	Brief summary of the report with some relevance	Generally good summary of the report	A section clearly summarizing the overall contribution	A section very clearly summarizing the overall contribution
References using Harvard style (5 marks)	Lacks consistency with many errors.	Unclear referencing/style	Generally good referencing/style	Clear referencing/ style	Clear styles with excellent source of references.