Instructions Using This Scenario Write A 34-Page Paper In Wh

InstructionsUsing This Scenario Write A 34 Page Paper In which Youd

Using this scenario, write a 3–4 page paper in which you: Determine the steps in the development of an effective entity relationship model (ERM) diagram and determine the possible iterative steps and factors that one must consider in this process, with consideration of the HR core functions and responsibilities of the client. Analyze the risks that can occur if any of the developmental or iterative steps of creating an ERM diagram are not performed. Select and rank at least five entities that would be required for the development of the data repositories. Specify the components that would be required to hold time-variant data for policy enforcement and training management. Diagram a possible 1:M solution that will hold salary history data, job history, and training history for each employee through the use of graphical tools.

Note: The graphically depicted solution is not included in the required page length. Plan each step of the normalization process to ensure the 3NF level of normalization using the selected five entities of the personnel database solution. Document each step of the process and justify your assumptions in the process. Diagram at least five possible entities that will be required to sustain a personnel solution. (Note: The graphically depicted solution is not included in the required page length.) The diagram should include the following: Dependency diagrams. Multivalued dependencies. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length. Include charts or diagrams created in any chart or drawing tool with which you are familiar. The completed diagrams or charts must be imported into the Word document before the paper is submitted. This course requires the use of Strayer Writing Standards (SWS). The library is your home for SWS assistance, including citations and formatting. Please refer to the Library site for all supports. Check with your professor for any additional instructions. The specific course learning outcome associated with this assignment is: Create a database using normalization techniques and logical/physical design best practices.

Paper For Above instruction

The development of an effective Entity-Relationship Model (ERM) diagram is fundamental in designing a reliable and efficient database system tailored for human resources management. This process involves several critical steps, iterative considerations, and an understanding of potential risks, all essential to ensure that the database aligns with organizational needs while maintaining data integrity and security.

The initial step in developing an ERM involves requirements gathering, where the specific HR functions—such as payroll, recruitment, training, policies, and employee records—are analyzed. Engaging stakeholders—including HR personnel, IT staff, and management—is vital to capture detailed functional requirements. These insights inform the identification of entities (e.g., Employee, Position, Salary, Training, Policy) and their relationships. Once core entities are identified, the next step involves conceptual modeling, where the ER diagram visually represents entities and their relationships using primary keys, foreign keys, and cardinality.

Iterative refinement is crucial, considering feedback from initial models, real-world constraints, and evolving organizational needs. Factors to consider include normalization levels, data redundancy, relationship cardinality, and future scalability. For example, overly complex relationships can hamper performance, while under-normalized models risk data inconsistency. Regular validation with end-users ensures the model reflects actual HR processes and responsibilities, such as policy enforcement and training management.

Neglecting any developmental or iterative step can introduce significant risks. Failing to properly identify entities and relationships may lead to data anomalies, redundancy, and inconsistency—compromising data integrity and decision-making accuracy. For instance, inadequate normalization might cause update anomalies, while neglecting relationship validation may result in orphan records or invalid links, adversely affecting HR operations.

For developing the data repositories, at least five key entities should be prioritized based on their importance to HR core functions. These entities include Employee, Salary History, Job History, Training Records, and Policy Enforcement. Ranking these entities involves assessing their frequency of use, data sensitivity, and dependency on other entities. Employee is central, followed by Salary History and Job History, which are time-variant and critical for tracking employee progression, compensation trends, and employment periods. Training Records are vital for compliance and professional development, whereas Policy Enforcement records ensure adherence to organizational policies.

Handling time-variant data such as salary changes and job history requires specialized components within the data model. For example, start and end dates are essential to track the validity of each record, enabling temporal queries, trend analysis, and policy enforcement over specific periods. Components like effective date fields, versioning, and temporal tables facilitate accurate representation of historical data, thereby supporting HR decision-making and policy compliance.

Diagramming a one-to-many (1:M) relationship for holding salary history, job history, and training history entails illustrating how multiple records for each employee relate to a single employee entity. For example, each employee can have multiple salary records over time, linked via foreign keys. Graphical tools such as Microsoft Visio, Lucidchart, or draw.io are suitable for creating such ER diagrams, depicting entities and relationships with appropriate cardinality indicators.

The normalization process aims to optimize the database structure to at least Third Normal Form (3NF), ensuring removal of redundancy and dependency anomalies. For each of the selected five entities—Employee, Salary History, Job History, Training Records, and Policy Enforcement—each normalization step involves:

• First Normal Form (1NF): Ensuring atomicity of data and eliminating repeating groups.
• Second Normal Form (2NF): Removing partial dependencies by ensuring all non-key attributes depend on full primary keys.
• Third Normal Form (3NF): Removing transitive dependencies, where non-key attributes depend on other non-key attributes.

For instance, in the Employee entity, atomic fields like Employee ID, Name, and Department are straightforward. Salary History would include Employee ID, Salary Amount, Effective Start Date, and End Date, with no repeating groups. Identifying functional dependencies during this process facilitates tracing the normalization steps, justifying assumptions such as the independence of salary records from employee demographic data.

Dependency diagrams and multivalued dependencies are also essential components. Dependency diagrams illustrate how attributes functionally depend on primary keys, helping identify transitive dependencies. Multivalued dependencies are relevant when an entity holds multiple related attributes, such as multiple training courses per employee, which should be modeled appropriately to avoid normalization anomalies.

In conclusion, developing a comprehensive ER diagram and well-normalized database schema requires meticulous planning, iterative refinement, and risk assessment. Ensuring the model accurately reflects HR core functions while preventing data anomalies will facilitate efficient HR operations, regulatory compliance, and strategic decision-making. Proper documentation, graphical depiction of relationships, and adherence to normalization standards underpin the success of a personnel information system tailored to organizational needs.

References

• Elmasri, R., & Navathe, S. B. (2015). Fundamentals of Database Systems. Pearson.
• Date, C. J. (2012). Database Design and Relational Theory. O'Reilly Media.
• Hoffer, J. A., Venkataraman, R., & Topi, H. (2016). Modern Database Management. Pearson.
• Rob, P., & Coronel, C. (2009). Database Systems: Design, Implementation, and Management. Cengage Learning.
• Inmon, W. H. (2005). Building the Data Warehouse. Wiley Publishing.
• Connolly, T., & Begg, C. (2014). Database Systems. Pearson.
• Silberschatz, A., Korth, H. F., & Sudarshan, S. (2010). Database System Concepts. McGraw-Hill.
• Kroenke, D. M., & Boyle, R. J. (2014). Database Concepts. Pearson.
• Batini, C., Ceri, S., & Navathe, S. B. (1992). Conceptual Database Design: An Entity-Relationship Approach. Benjamin/Cummings.