System Request And Feasibility Analysis: Develop A Comprehen ✓ Solved

System Request and Feasibility Analysis: Develop a comprehen

System Request and Feasibility Analysis: Develop a comprehensive Systems Analysis and Design document that includes the System Request, feasibility analyses (operational, economic, technical, and schedule), analysis artifacts (Gantt Chart, Requirements Definitions, Data Flow Diagrams, Use Cases), design artifacts (Acquisition Strategy, Entity-Relationship Design, Prototypes/Mockups, Input/Output Design, Architecture Design, Hardware and Software Specifications), and implementation artifacts (Testing, Documentation, Migration and Conversion).

Provide a Description of Project, and consider Operational, Economic, Technical, and Schedule Feasibility.

Include: System Request: Project Sponsor Name(s), Title(s); Business Need – Why is this request being made; Business Requirements – What is specifically needed from this system; Business Value – how will this benefit the business; Special Issues or Constraints.

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction

This paper responds to a formal request for a System Request and accompanying Feasibility Analysis, structured to guide the development of a full Systems Analysis and Design (SAD) document. The approach aligns with standard MIS pedagogy and professional practice, which emphasize a staged progression from planning through implementation, with explicit artifacts at each phase (Kendall & Kendall; Satzinger et al.; Hoffer et al.). The aim is to clarify scope, justify the project financially and technically, and outline concrete deliverables for stakeholders.

System Request

The System Request establishes the business justification for the project and identifies the primary sponsor, scope, and expected benefits. In the example below, a mid-sized manufacturing firm seeks to replace a legacy inventory system with an integrated inventory and order-management platform. The sponsor provides the mandate, while business needs specify what the system must achieve. The request sets the stage for subsequent feasibility and design work (Laudon & Laudon; Whitin et al.).

Sample elements include:

  • Project Sponsor: Jane Doe, CIO; Title: Chief Information Officer
  • Business Need: Improve inventory visibility, reduce stockouts, and streamline order processing across multiple channels
  • Business Requirements: Real-time inventory data, seamless ERP integration, scalable user access, and robust reporting
  • Business Value: Increased on-time delivery, reduced carrying costs, and enhanced customer satisfaction
  • Special Issues: Data security, regulatory compliance, and migration risk

Feasibility analyses and design artifacts will be used to assess and plan the project in a disciplined manner, following established SAD methodologies (Dennis et al.; Schwalbe; Turner). In-text references offer context for best practices in feasibility assessment and project governance.

Feasibility Analysis

Operational Feasibility: Assesses whether the organization can operate the new system effectively and whether the current organizational structure supports the change. Factors include user acceptance, training needs, business process alignment, and change management capabilities. Operational feasibility also considers how the system will integrate into daily workflows and whether it will yield measurable improvements in service levels (Satzinger et al.; Whitten et al.).

Economic Feasibility: Evaluates the financial impact, including costs, benefits, return on investment (ROI), and payback period. This analysis compares total cost of ownership with anticipated benefits such as labor savings, revenue increases, and reduced error rates. Economic feasibility forms the backbone of a business case that justifies investment (PMBOK Guide; Laudon & Laudon).

Technical Feasibility: Examines whether the current technical environment can support the system, including hardware compatibility, software requirements, network capacity, and data security. It also considers risks related to integrating with existing systems and whether the organization has the internal expertise to implement and maintain the solution (Hoffer et al.; Dennis et al.).

Schedule Feasibility: Considers whether a realistic timeline exists to complete the project without compromising critical milestones. It addresses potential delays, resource constraints, and dependencies that could affect the planned delivery date (Satzinger et al.; Schwalbe).

Analysis Phase Artifacts

Key artifacts in the analysis phase help document requirements, system boundaries, data flows, and user interactions. These artifacts provide the foundation for design decisions and future validation:

  • Gantt Chart: A project schedule detailing phases, tasks, durations, and dependencies to manage timelines and resource allocation.
  • Requirements Definitions: Functional and non-functional requirements that capture what the system must do and under what constraints.
  • Data Flow Diagrams (DFDs): Visualizations of data movement through the system, identifying sources, processes, storage, and data sinks.
  • Use Cases: Scenarios describing user interactions with the system to fulfill particular goals.

Design Phase Artifacts

The design phase translates analysis results into concrete specifications and blueprints for implementation:

  • Acquisition Strategy: Plan for procuring hardware, software, and services, including vendor evaluation, licensing models, and total cost of ownership.
  • Entity-Relationship (ER) Design: Data modeling to define entities, attributes, keys, and relationships for the database.
  • Prototypes/Mockups: User interface prototypes to gather feedback and guide iterative design improvements.
  • Input/Output Design: Screen layouts, forms, reports, and data capture mechanisms that meet user needs.
  • Architecture Design: Overall system architecture, including software tiers, integration points, and deployment model.
  • Hardware and Software Specifications: Detailed technical requirements for servers, workstations, networking, and software platforms.

Implementation Phase

The implementation phase focuses on building, testing, and deploying the system, with emphasis on quality assurance and knowledge transfer:

  • Testing: Unit, integration, system, and user acceptance testing to validate functionality and performance.
  • Documentation: User manuals, system operation guides, and technical documentation for maintenance.
  • Migration and Conversion: Plans for data migration, cutover strategies, and backward compatibility considerations.

Description of Project

Provide a clear, scoped description of the project, including goals, success criteria, and boundary conditions. The description should relate directly to the feasibility analyses and the artifacts produced in the analysis and design phases. Consider how each feasibility dimension informs decision-making and risk management, and outline potential alternatives should feasibility results indicate significant risk or insufficient ROI (Satzinger et al.; Dennis et al.).

In this example, the project targets improving inventory control, order processing, and cross-system reporting. Integration with existing ERP and CRM components is assumed, with a phased implementation to minimize disruption and enable early benefits realization.

System Request, Sponsor, and Business Considerations

To complete the formal submission, include the following fields:

  • System Request: A concise statement of the business need and expected outcomes
  • Project Sponsor Name(s) and Title(s)
  • Business Need – Why is this request being made
  • Business Requirements – What is specifically needed from this system
  • Business Value – How will this benefit the business
  • Special Issues or Constraints – Any regulatory, security, or organizational risks

Discussion and Conclusion

By organizing the SAD process into system request, feasibility analyses, and phased artifacts, organizations can make informed go/no-go decisions with a clear roadmap for design and implementation. This approach aligns with standard MIS practice and academic guidance, ensuring that technical requirements, business value, and risk considerations are balanced throughout the project lifecycle (Laudon & Laudon; Whitten et al.; Turban & Volonoff).

References

  1. Kendall, K. E., & Kendall, J. E. (2014). Systems Analysis and Design. Pearson.
  2. Hoffer, J. A., Venkataraman, R., & Topi, H. (2016). Modern Systems Analysis and Design. Pearson.
  3. Satzinger, J. W., Jackson, R. B., & Burd, S. (2019). Systems Analysis and Design in a Changing World. Cengage.
  4. Dennis, A., Wixom, W. D., & Roth, R. (2018). System Analysis and Design. Wiley.
  5. Whitten, J. L., Bentley, L. D., & Dittman, K. (2018). Systems Analysis and Design Methods. McGraw-Hill Education.
  6. Schwalbe, K. (2015). Information Technology Project Management. Cengage.
  7. PMI. (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK Guide). Project Management Institute.
  8. Laudon, K. C., & Laudon, J. P. (2018). Management Information Systems: Managing the Digital Firm. Pearson.
  9. Sommerville, I. (2011). Software Engineering. Addison-Wesley.
  10. Alpar, P. (2020). Information Systems: A Framework for Analysis and Design. Journal of Information Systems Education, 31(3), 179-186.

Related Assignments