Team Introduction
Michael Ambroise
Time Keeper
Wai-Lam Chan
Project Historian
Allen Lee
Project Analyst
Ovide Mercure
Project Manager
Introduction to Study

Feasibility


Determine the feasibility of developing SOGRS vs.
Alternate Systems. (ACPEA and WebCT)
Project Plan

Outline administrative tasks for the development of
SOGRS
Feasibility

Problem Statement

Inconveniences of current Excel and e-mail system



Problems with WebCT


Sensitive information cannot be sent via e-mail
Cumbersome and Time Consuming
Difficult to attend due to scheduling conflicts and existing workloads
Alternatives



Automated Cut Paste Email Application (ACPEA)
Student Online Grade Report System (SOGRS)
WebCT
Operational Feasibility

Criteria for Operational Feasibility
Performance – throughput and response time
 Information – provides timely and pertinent info
 Economy – cost effective services
 Control – security and fraud protection
 Efficiency – maximum use of resources
 Services – reliability, flexibility

Feasibility Criteria
Wt.
Operational Feasibility
Performance
Information
Economy
Control
Efficiency
Service
User Friendliness
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Performance
LOW
1.No control over the throughput
of email server.
Performance
HIGH
1.Fully Supports user required
functionality.
Performance
HIGH
1.Fully Supports user required
functionality.
Information
LOW
1.Sensitive information cannot be
sent via email.
2.Only supports the distribution of
grade reporting.
Information
HIGH
1. Fully Supports user required
functionality.
Information
HIGH
1. Fully Supports user required
functionality.
Economy
MED
1.Economic to implement.
Economy
MED
1.Economic to implement.
Economy
HIGH
1.Very economic to
implement.
Control
LOW
1.Does not allow for sensitive
information to be transmitted.
Control
MED
1.Allows for sensitive
materials.
Control
HIGH
1.Allows for sensitive
materials.
Efficiency
MED
Efficiency
MED
Efficiency
Service
LOW
Service
HIGH
1.Fully Supports user required
functionality.
Service
N/A
1.No control over this attribute.
2.Fully Supports user required
functionality.
User Friendliness: Yes
User Friendliness: Yes
Score: MED-HIGH
Score: HIGH
30%
User Friendliness: Yes
Score: LOW
HIGH
Technical Feasibility


Technology – maturity and availability
Expertise – how much is needed?
Feasibility Criteria
Wt.
Technical Feasibility
Technology
Expertise
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Technology
When implemented in JAVA
this application fulfills criteria.
Technology
The technology is available but
most developers within the team
are unfamiliar with the Tomcat
server. All team members are
familiar with JAVA
programming but need to learn
JSP and Servlets technology.
Technology
Currently Implemented
Expertise
JAVA and SMTP protocol
knowledge.
Expertise
JAVA, JSP and Apache
Tomcat server technology.
Expertise
Currently Implemented
30%
Score: MED
Score: MED
Alternative 3
Score: HIGH
Economic Feasibility

Cost Analysis of alternative.
Feasibility Criteria
Wt.
Economic Feasibility
10%
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Approximately
$89,876.00
Approximately
$145,032.00
Approximately
$0.00
Score: MED
Score: LOW
Score: HIGH
Economic

Cost analysis


PM = Duration of Deliverable in Days * (8 hours / 1 Day) * (1 PM / 152 hours)
SC = Effort estimate (PM) * RELY * TIME * STOR * TOOL * LTEX * $15,000

ACPEA



SOGRS



TPM = 6.16 PM
SC = $89,876.00
TPM = 9.93 PM
SC = $145,032.00
WebCT


TPM = 0 PM
SC = $0
RELY – Required System Reliability
TIME – Execution Time Constraints
STOR – Memory Constraints
TOOL – Use of Software Tools
LTEX – Language and Tools Experience
Schedule Feasibility

As assessment of how long the solution will take to
design and implement
Feasibility Criteria
Schedule Feasibility
Time required to design
and implement.
Wt.
Alternative 1
2 Months
Alternative 2
3 Months
Alternative 3
Done
30%
Score: MED
Score: LOW
Score: HIGH
Recommendations

Top Recommendation

Based on our matrix result


WebCT
Second Recommendation


If inconvenience is the top factor
If cost is not a factor

SOGRS
Project Plan Introduction



Hardware and Software
SOGRS Cost Analysis
Project Schedule
H/W & S/W Requirements

Server Computer




Client Computer



Java 1.4.2
Tomcat 5.0
Ethernet Connection
Web Browser with JVM (students and
professor)
Excel (professor only)
Development



Rational Rose
JCreator
Microsoft Project, Word, and EXCEL
SOGRS Cost Analysis

Deliverable 1: Feasibility Study and Project Plan



Deliverable 2: Software Requirements Document







PM = 36 * 8 / 152 = 1.9 PM
SC = 1.9 * .91 * 1.07 * 15,000 = $27,750.00
Deliverable 5: Software Document


PM = 85 * 8 / 152 = 4.4 PM
SC = 4.4 * .91 * 1.07 * 15,000 = $64,264.00
Deliverable 4: Test Document


PM = 38 * 8 / 152 = 2 PM
SC = 2 * .91 * 1.07 * 15,000 = $29,211.00
Deliverable 3: Design Document


PM = 20 * 8 / 152 = 1.1 PM
SC = 1.1 * .91 * 1.07 * 15,000 = $16,066.00
PM = 10 * 8 / 152 = .53 PM
SC = .53 * .91 * 1.07 * 15,000 = $7,741.00
TPM = 9.93 PM
SC = $145,032.00
Work Breakdown
















1 – Document Study
2 – Prototype User Interfaces
3 – Research Software Tools
4 – Feasibility Study and Project
Plan Deliverable
5 – Presentation of Project Plan
and Feasibility Study
6 – M1
7 – Document Project (SRD)
8 – Develop Use Cases
9 – Expertise with Software Tools
10 – M2 (Use Case Completion)
11 – Software Requirement
Documents (SRD)
12 – Presentation of SRD
13 – M3
14 – Document Project (DD)
15 – Develop Object Sequence
Structure
16 – Develop Class Structure















17 – M4 (Object and Class
Structure Done)
18 – Design Document
19 – Presentation of Design
Document
20 – Develop Implementation
21 – M5
22 – Test Document Project
23 – Develop Test Cases
24 – Testing
25 – Test Document (TD)
26 – Presentation of TD
27 – M6
28 – Document Project (SD)
29 – Software Document (D5)
30 – Presentation of SD
31 – M7
Project Schedule
Questions ? ? ?