Project Risks and Feasibility Assessment

Advanced Systems Analysis and Design

Project Risk Factors

Project Risk Classification

Feasibility is the measure of how beneficial or practical the development of an information system will be to an organization. Feasibility analysis is the process by which feasibility is measured.

Feasibility should be measured throughout the life cycle. The scope and complexity of an apparently feasible project can change after the initial problems and opportunities are fully analyzed or after the system has been designed. Thus, a project that is feasible at one point in time may become infeasible at a later point in time.

Feasibility Assessment

Why feasibility assessment?

Information systems are major investments IS projects are subject to the same cost justifications as any other capital investments Business value paradox Avoid "black hole" projects

1 Survey

2 Study

3 Definition

End-users
4 Configuration

9 Support

5 Design

6 Procurement

8 Delivery

7 Construction

Vendors

Feasibility Analysis

Feasibility Checkpoints During Analysis

Systems Analysis -Survey Phase ``Do the problems (or opportunities) warrant the cost of a detailed study of the current system?'' Systems Analysis - Study/Definition Phase Better estimates of development costs and the benefits to be obtained from a new system. Requirements often prove to be more extensive that originally stated. If feasibility is in question, scope, schedule, and costs must be rejustified. Systems Analysis - Selection Phase A major feasibility analysis evaluating options for the target systems design. Typical options that are evaluated include Do nothing! Leave the current system alone. Reengineer the (manual) business processes, not the computer-based processes. Enhance existing computer processes. Purchase a packaged application.

Four Tests for Feasibility

Operational feasibility is a measure of how well a specific solution will work in the organization. It is also a measure of how people feel about the system/project. Does management support the system? How do the end-users feel about their role in the new system? What end-users or managers may resist or not use the system? Can this problem be overcome? If so, how? Usability analysis Ease of use, Ease of learning, User satisfaction Technical feasibility is a measure of the practicality of a specific technical solution and the availability of technical resources and expertise. Is the proposed technology or solution practical? Is the technology mature? Do we currently possess the necessary technology? Do we possess the necessary technical expertise, and is the schedule reasonable? Schedule feasibility is a measure of how reasonable the project timetable is. Economic feasibility is a measure of the cost-effectiveness of a project or solution. This is often called a cost-benefit analysis.

S y s t e m C o s t s
C o s t s D e v e l o p m e n t c o s t C o n s u l t i n g f e e s H a r d w a r e / s o f t w a r e C o n v e r s i o n / i n s t a l l a t i o n T r a i n i n g / D o c u m e n t a t i o n O p e r a t i o n / P r o d u c t i o n c o s t s P e r s o n n e l c o s t s S y s t e m u s a g e / m a i n t e n a n c e c o s t S y s t e m u p g r a d e s S u p p l i e s

S y s t e m B e n e f i t s
B e n e f i t s T a n g i b l e b e n e f i t s R e d u c e d p r o c e s s i n g e r r o r s I n c r e a s e d t h r o u g h p u t D e c r e a s e d r e s p o n s e t i m e M a n p o w e r r e d u c t i o n C o s t e l i m i n a t i o n I n c r e a s e d s a l e s R e d u c e d c r e d i t l o s s e s I n t a n g i b l e b e n e f i t s I m p r o v e d c u s t o m e r s a t i s f a c t i o n I m p r o v e d e m p l o y e e m o r a l e B e t t e r d e c i s i o n m a k i n g

C o s t B e n e f i t A n a l y s i s
P a y b a c k a n a l y s i s R e t u r n o n i n v e s t m e n t N e t p r e s e n t v a l u e P V = 1 ( 1 + i ) ^ n

Constructive Cost Model (COCOMO)

Developed by Barry Boehm (1981) Predicts the effort & duration of a project Based on size of the system & a number of cost drivers,

Constructive Cost Model (COCOMO)

CoCoMo Basic Equations

Mode
Organic Semidetached

Description
Small-Medium Size, In-house Dev. Intermediate-Large Size, Partial In-house & contracted Very Large Size, Contractor developed

Effort
WM= 2.4(KDSI)1.05 WM= 3.0(KDSI)1.12 WM= 3.6(KDSI)1.20

Schedule
TDEV= 2.5(MM)0.38 TDEV= 2.5(MM)0.35 TDEV= 2.5(MM)0.32

Embedded

WM = Work-Months; TDEV = Time of Development KDSI = Thousands of delivered source instruction

Cost Drivers in COCOMO

Product attributes software reliability, database size, software complexity Hardware/platform attributes execution time constraints, main storage constraints, virtual machine volatility, turnaround time Personnel attributes Analyst capability, applications experience, programmer capability, virtual machine experience, language experience Project attributes use of modern programming practices, use of software tools, development schedule constriants

Factors not Included in COCOMO

Application type Language level Requirements volatility Personnel continuity Management quality Customer interface quality Amount of documentation Hardware configuration Security and privacy restrictions

Function Point Analysis

Developed by Allan Albrecht at IBM (1979) Based on estimation of inputs, outputs, queries, interfaces, and files Main advantages Possible to estimate function points early in the development life cycle Can be estimated by non-technical personnel

Function Point Analysis

Basic Equation: FP = FC (PCA) PCA = 0.65 + (0.01) ci PCA Processing Complexity Adjustment; C Complexity Factors Simple Input Output (eg, reports, screens) Inquires Files Applications Interfaces 3 4 7 5 3 Average 4 5 10 7 4 Complex 6 7 15 10 6 FC = Count * Weight

Feasibility Analysis of Candidate Systems

Candidate Systems Matrix

The candidate systems matrix documents similarities and differences between candidate systems; however, it offers no analysis. The columns of the matrix represent candidate solutions. The rows of the matrix represent characteristics that serve to differentiate the candidates. The breakdown is as follows: TECHNOLOGY INTERFACES DATA PROCESSES GEOGRAPHY

Candidate 1 Name Candidate 2 Name Candidate 3 Name Technology Interfaces Data Processes Geography

Characteristics Portion of System Computerized Brief description of that portion of the system that would be computerized in this candidate. Benefits Brief description of the business benefits that would be realized for this candidate. Servers and Workstations A description of the servers and workstations needed to support this candidate. Software Tools Needed Software tools needed to design and build the candidate (e. g., database management system, emulators, operating systems, languages, etc.). Not generally applicable if applications software packages are to be purchased. Application Software A description of the software to be purchased, built, accessed, or some combination of these techniques. Method of Data Processing Generally some combination of: on-line, batch, deferred batch, remote batch, and real-time. Output Devices and Implications A description of output devices that would be used, special output requirements, (e.g. network, preprinted forms, etc.), and output considerations (e.g., timing constraints).

Candidate 1 COTS package Platinum Plus from Entertainment Software Solutions would be purchased and customized to satisfy Member Services required functionality. This solution can be implemented quickly because its a purchased solution. Technically architecture dictates Pentium pro, MS Windows NT class servers and Pentium, MS Windows NT 4.0 workstations (clients). MS Visual C++ and MS ACCESS for customization of package to provide report writing and integration.

Candidate 2 Member Services and warehouse operations in relation to order fulfillment.

Candidate 3 Same as candidate 2.

Candidate ...

Fully supports user required business processes for Soundstage Inc. Plus more efficient interaction with member accounts. Same as candidate 1.

Same as candidate 2.

Same as candidate 1.

MS Visual Basic 5.0 System Architect 3.1 Internet Explorer

MS Visual Basic 5.0 System Architect 3.1 Internet Explorer

Package Solution

Custom Solution

Same as candidate 2.

Client/Server

Same as candidate 1.

Same as candidate 1.

(2) HP4MV department Laser printers (2) HP5SI LAN laser printers

(2) HP4MV department Laser printers (2) HP5SI LAN laser printers (1) PRINTRONIX bar-code printer (includes software & drivers) Web pages must be designed to VGA resolution. All internal screens will be designed for SVGA resolution. Apple Quick Take digital camera and software (15) PSC Quickscan laser bar-code scanners (1) - HP Scanjet 4C Flatbed Scanner Keyboard & mouse

Same as candidate 2.

Input Devices and Implications A description of Input methods to be used, input devices (e.g., keyboard, mouse, etc.), special input requirements, (e.g. new or revised forms from which data would be input), and input considerations (e.g., timing of actual inputs). Storage Devices and Implications Brief description of what data would be stored, what data would be accessed from existing stores, what storage media would be used, how much storage capacity would be needed, and how data would be organized.

Keyboard & mouse

Same as candidate 2.

MS SQL Server DBMS with 100GB arrayed capability.

Same as candidate 1.

Same as candidate 1.

Feasibility Analysis of Candidate Systems

Feasibility Analysis Matrix

This matrix complements the candidate systems matrix with an analysis and ranking of the candidate systems. It is called a feasibility analysis matrix. The columns of the matrix correspond to the same candidate solutions as shown in the candidate systems matrix. Some rows correspond to the feasibility criteria presented in this chapter. Rows are added to describe the general solution and a ranking of the candidates. The cells contain the feasibility assessment notes for each candidate.

Feasibility Analysis of Candidate Systems

Feasibility Analysis Matrix

Each row can be assigned a rank or score for each criteria (e.g., for operational feasibility, candidates can be ranked 1, 2, 3, etc.). After ranking or scoring all candidates on each criteria, a final ranking or score is recorded in the last row.

Candidate 1 Name Candidate 2 Name Candidate 3 Name Description Operational Feasibility Technical Feasibility Schedule Feasibility Economic Feasibility Ranking

Feasibility Criteria Operational Feasibility Functionality. A description of to what degree the candidate would benefit the organization and how well the system would work. Political. A description of how well received this solution would be from both user management, user, and organization perspective. Technical Feasibility Technology. An assessment of the maturity, availability (or ability to acquire), and desirability of the computer technology needed to support this candidate. Expertise. An assessment to the technical expertise needed to develop, operate, and maintain the candidate system.

Wt. 30%

Candidate 1 Only supports Member Services requirements and current business processes would have to be modified to take advantage of software functionality

Candidate 2 Fully supports user required functionality.

Candidate 3 Same as candidate 2.

Candidate ..

30%

Score: 60 Current production release of Platinum Plus package is version 1.0 and has only been on the market for 6 weeks. Maturity of product is a risk and company charges an additional monthly fee for technical support. Required to hire or train C++ expertise to perform modifications for integration requirements.

Score: 100 Although current technical staff has only Powerbuilder experience, the senior analysts who saw the MS Visual Basic demonstration and presentation, has agreed the transition will be simple and finding experienced VB programmers will be easier than finding Powerbuilder programmers and at a much cheaper cost. MS Visual Basic 5.0 is a mature technology based on version number.

Score: 100 Although current technical staff is comfortable with Powerbuilder, management is concerned with recent acquisition of Powerbuilder by Sybase Inc. MS SQL Server is a current company standard and competes with SYBASE in the Client/Server DBMS market. Because of this we have no guarantee future versions of Powerbuilder will play well with our current version SQL Server.

Score: 50 Economic Feasibility Cost to develop: Payback period (discounted): Net present value: Detailed calculations: 30% Approximately $350,000. Approximately 4.5 years. Approximately $210,000. See Attachment A. Score: 60 Less than 3 months.

Score: 95

Score: 60

Approximately $418,040. Approximately 3.5 years. Approximately $306,748. See Attachment A. Score: 85 9-12 months

Approximately $400,000. Approximately 3.3 years. Approximately $325,500. See Attachment A. Score: 90 9 months

Schedule Feasibility An assessment of how long the solution will take to design and implement. Ranking

10%

100%

Score: 95 60.5

Score: 80 92

Score: 85 83.5