BUSINESS CASE 11:

CAN TWO BECOME ONE?

Kelompok 3:
1. Agung Triayudi (1011600960)
2. Chandra wirawan (1011600838)

Activities
1. Prepare a top-down model for this case study. Gather materials for the model from the
information included in the case description.
Business : LifeForce and The Anderson Group (TAG) are both Midwest
biotechnology firms. They each develop and market leading edge
biomedical devices. Both companies are privately held, successful,
and well-funded firms, with excellent track records for the discovery
and sale of innovative medical devices worldwide. In the past the
companies had not been in direct competition on any of their product
lines. However, both are currently working independently on a very
similar line of products. These products are electromagnetic devices
used to increase the speed of bone growth and healing following
surgeries. The devices being developed by each company will
compete directly in the same market for the first time.
Application : No identification
Data : No identification
Network : TAG used Novell and Windows 2000 Server were the operating
systems. Desktop software was Office XP with Windows 2000 as a
client. Most network hardware was from Cisco, and Cisco network
management tools were in use.

LifeForce used UNIX, Windows 2000 servers and several Mandrake

Linux servers. Desktop software was Star office running with a
KDE windowing scheme. They used Nortel routing and switching
hardware. They used open source network management software.
Technology : TAG was located in three stories of a single building in which they
leased space. Their lab was cramped and the electrical system was
problematic. Their computer network was composed of over 300
workstations from various vendors, connected over a collapsed
backbone. Servers were rack mounted. Network attached storage
was used. Novell and Windows 2000 Server were the operating
 systems. Databases were Oracle. Desktop software was Office XP
with Windows 2000 as a client. TAG had an IT development plan in
place. It was noted that morale was neutral and turnover was quite
high. There were regular complaints about the condition of the
physical plant. Most network hardware was from Cisco, and Cisco
network management tools were in use.

LifeForce was in three buildings on their own small campus. They

owned the site and had plenty of room for expansion. Their Lab was
designed to their specifications and very modern. Their IT structure
was also well organized. They had a FDDI ring connecting their
buildings and there was satisfaction with the network performance
and reliability. Their primary operating system was UNIX. There
were also Windows 2000 servers and several Mandrake Linux
servers. Most of their research software was custom written by their
internal programmers. They had about 400 workstations. Desktop
software was Star office running with a KDE windowing scheme.
LifeForce had a development plan that was well planned, current,
and successfully implemented. They used Nortel routing and
switching hardware. They used open source network management
software.

2. List any information that was not noted in the case study, but that is required for the top-
down model.
Information about application and data was not noted in the case study.
3. Note situations in the case study where information was passed from layer to layer.
Application :
Presentation :
Session :
Transport :
Network : Novell, Windows 2000 Server, Unix, Mandrake Linux servers
Data Link : Cisco, Nortel routing and switching hardware
Physical : a collapsed backbone, a FDDI ring
Business
1. What was the reason for the proposed merger?
A: the reason for the proposed merger was the founders of LifeForce and TAG realized the
deleterious effects of direct competition and decided to consider a merger. They noted
that the market would not support multiple devices of the type they were developing
and that the huge research costs for this device had a clear negative return on
 investment if developed and introduced by each firm separately. The companies had
many things in common. Both directors had attended graduate school together and they
had maintained a strong friendship over the years. Both also had ties to the surrounding
community and served together on several boards, both business and charitable. They
and many of their professional staff were also members of the same professional
organizations. These factors, coupled with the fact that both companies’ corporate
cultures were similar, helped encourage the founders and their top staff to make the
decision to work together.
2. Is the merger likely to solve the problem noted as the reason for the cooperative venture?
A: Yes, it is.
3. Are the business processes of the two companies likely to merge effectively?
A: Yes, they are.

Application
1. What applications would be modified during the merger?
A: applications for a single research facility would be more cost effective, and with the
pooling of their separate experts, the pace of innovation could be increased and new
products could be moved from the research stage to the consumer product stage in
much less time.
2. How were applications implemented differently in the separate companies?
A: TAG implemented applications with servers were rack mounted. Network attached
storage was used. Novell and Windows 2000 Server were the operating systems.
Databases were Oracle. Desktop software was Office XP with Windows 2000 as a
client. Their computer network was composed of over 300 workstations from various
vendors, connected over a collapsed backbone. Most network hardware was from
Cisco, and Cisco network management tools were in use.

LifeForce implemented applications with a server operating system was UNIX. There
were also Windows 2000 servers and several Mandrake Linux servers. Most of their
research software was custom written by their internal programmers. They had about
400 workstations. Desktop software was Star office running with a KDE windowing
scheme. They had a FDDI ring connecting their buildings and there was satisfaction
with the network performance and reliability. They used Nortel routing and switching
hardware. They used open source network management software.

3. What software was used by each company?

 A: TAG used Novell and Windows 2000 Server were the operating systems. Desktop
software was Office XP with Windows 2000 as a client.
LifeForce used UNIX, Windows 2000 servers and several Mandrake Linux servers.
Desktop software was Star office running with a KDE windowing scheme.

Data
1. What types of data will be transferred between buildings on the new campus?
A: data for increasing the sophistication of long-range plans, for helping to meet
milestones more effectively. This would also allow for the early completion of the IT
projects that were on the back burner. This included improved plans for disaster
recovery (business continuity planning). A SAN was also being considered.
2. Are the architectures at the two facilities too diverse to be quickly integrated?
A: No, they aren’t.

Network
1. What network technologies were in use by each company?
A: TAG used most network hardware was from Cisco, and Cisco network management
tools were in use.
LifeForce used Nortel routing and switching hardware. They used open source
network management software.
2. Is it better to use a single vendor for networking equipment?
A: Yes, it is.
3. What backbone technology will be used in the new lab?
A: a FDDI ring will be used in the new lab.
4. Are there common network management systems in place at both companies?
A: Yes, they are.

Technology
1. What technologies are proposed to solve problems in the new lab?
A: Nortel routing dan switching hardware are proposed to solve problems in the new lab.
2. How do technologies interact in the current situation? How will they interact in the merged
company?
A: TAG was located in three stories of a single building in which they leased space. Their
lab was cramped and the electrical system was problematic. Their computer network
was composed of over 300 workstations from various vendors, connected over a
collapsed backbone. Servers were rack mounted. Network attached storage was used.
Novell and Windows 2000 Server were the operating systems. Databases were Oracle.
Desktop software was Office XP with Windows 2000 as a client. TAG had an IT
development plan in place. It was noted that morale was neutral and turnover was
quite high. There were regular complaints about the condition of the physical plant.
Most network hardware was from Cisco, and Cisco network management tools were
in use.

LifeForce was in three buildings on their own small campus. They owned the site and
had plenty of room for expansion. Their Lab was designed to their specifications and
very modern. Their IT structure was also well organized. They had a FDDI ring
connecting their buildings and there was satisfaction with the network performance
and reliability. Their primary operating system was UNIX. There were also Windows
2000 servers and several Mandrake Linux servers. Most of their research software
was custom written by their internal programmers. They had about 400 workstations.
Desktop software was Star office running with a KDE windowing scheme. LifeForce
had a development plan that was well planned, current, and successfully implemented.
They used Nortel routing and switching hardware. They used open source network
management software.

Under the merger TAG would move to the LifeForce campus, which would be
expanded to accommodate the increased number of staff. It was felt that there was no
need to reduce staffing in the new company. The increased IT staffing would be used
to increase the sophistication of long-range plans and help to meet milestones more
effectively. This would also allow for the early completion of the IT projects that were
on the back burner. This included improved plans for disaster recovery (business
continuity planning). A SAN was also being considered. It was decided that a
common system development process with jointly determined milestones or products
was needed and that two separate visions must be joined to one. Application
developers and networking specialists must integrate existing applications and
network connections to ensure stability under increased data traffic and larger
database and application usage. A new combined IT project portfolio was required;
this is one place where buy-in can occur.