Order Number |
636738393092 |
Type of Project |
ESSAY |
Writer Level |
PHD VERIFIED |
Format |
APA |
Academic Sources |
10 |
Page Count |
3-12 PAGES |
Stage 3: Requirements
Before you begin work on this assignment, be sure you have read the Case Study and reviewed the feedback received on your Stage 1 and 2 assignments.
Overview
As the business analyst in the CIO’s department of Maryland Technology Consulting (MTC), your next task in developing your Business Analysis and System Recommendation (BA&SR) Report is to develop a set of requirements for the hiring system.
Assignment – BA&SR Section III. Requirements
The first step is to review any feedback from previous stages to help improve the effectiveness of your overall report and then add the new section to your report. Only content for Stage 3 will be graded for this submission. Part of the grading criteria for Stage 4 includes evaluating if the document is a very effective and cohesive assemblage of the four sections, is well formatted and flows smoothly from one section to the next.
For this assignment, you will add Section III of the Business Analysis and System Recommendation (BA&SR) Report to your Sections I and II. In this section you will identify requirements for the new hiring system. This analysis leads into Section IV. System Recommendation of the BA&SR (Stage 4 assignment) that will analyze a proposed IT solution to ensure it meets MTC’s organizational strategy and fulfills its operational needs.
Using the case study, assignment instructions, Content readings, and external research, develop your Section III. Requirements. The case study tells you that the executives and employees at Maryland Technology Consultants (MTC) have identified a need for an effective and efficient applicant tracking or hiring system. As you review the case study, use the assignment instructions to take notes to assist in your analysis. In particular, look for information in the interviews to provide stakeholder interests and needs.
Use the outline format, headings and tables provided and follow all formatting instructions below.
III. Requirements
Then to complete the table below, use information from the stakeholder interviews and identify one significant challenge or problem for each stakeholder related to the current hiring process (not their future expectations). Then explain how a system could address their problems. Do not define what that position does in the organization. (Provide an introductory sentence for this section, copy the table below and complete the two columns with 1-2 complete sentences for each role in each column.)
Role | Specific problem related to the current hiring process | How a technology solution to support the hiring process could address the problem |
1. CEO | ||
2. CFO | ||
3. CIO | ||
4. Director of Human Resources | ||
5. Manager of Recruiting | ||
6. Recruiters | ||
7. Administrative Assistant | ||
8. Hiring Manager (Functional supervisor the new employee would be working for.) |
System performance requirements express how the system will perform in several performance areas and security. As a member of the CIO’s organization, you will use your professional knowledge to Identify 5 User Requirements (including one specifically related to reporting) and 5 System Performance Requirements (including 2 security-related requirements). Refer to Week 5 content on requirements; security requirements are covered in Week 6. Additional research can expand your knowledge of these areas.
Once you have identified the 10 requirements, evaluate each one using the criteria below and create 10 well-written requirements statements for the new hiring system.
The requirement statement:
For a full requirements document, there will be many requirement statements; you only need to provide the number of requirements identified for each category. Do not provide generic statements but relate to the needs of MTC to improve its hiring process.
(Provide an introductory sentence, copy the table, and complete the Requirements Statement and Stakeholder columns. No additional information should be entered into the first column, Requirement ID.)
Requirement ID# only | Requirement Statement | Stakeholder
(Position and Name from Case Study that identified this requirement) |
User Requirements – (What the user needs the system to do) | ||
EXAMPLE | The system must store all information from the candidate’s application/resume in a central applicant database. EXAMPLE PROVIDED – (Retain text but remove this label and gray shading in your report) | Recruiter – Peter O’Neil |
1. | ||
2. | ||
3. | ||
4. | ||
5. | (Reporting-Output of organized information retrieved from the system—replace this statement with a specific reporting requirement) | |
System Performance Requirements – (How the system will perform) | ||
EXAMPLE | The system must be implemented as a Software as a Service solution. EXAMPLE PROVIDED – (Retain text but remove this label and gray shading in your report) | CIO – Raj Patel |
6. | ||
7. | ||
8. | ||
9. | (Security-replace this with a specific security requirement) | |
10. | (Security-replace this with a specific security requirement) |
Formatting Your Assignment
Consider your audience – you are writing in the role of an MTC business analyst and your audience is MTC and your boss, the CIO. Don’t discuss MTC as if the reader has no knowledge of the organization. Use third person consistently throughout the report. In third person, the writer avoids the pronouns I, we, my, and ours.
The third person is used to make the writing more objective by taking the individual, the “self,” out of the writing. This method is very helpful for effective business writing, a form in which facts, not opinion, drive the tone of the text. Writing in the third person allows the writer to come across as unbiased and thus more informed.
III. Requirements
GRADING RUBRIC:
Criteria | 90-100%
Far Above Standards |
80-89%
Above Standards |
70-79%
Meets Standards |
60-69%
Below Standards |
< 60%
Well Below Standards |
Possible Points |
Stakeholder Interests
Identification of specific stakeholder problems (interests and objectives for improving the hiring process) and how a technology system could address. Generally, 0-3 points per role. Both quantity and quality evaluated. |
22-24 Points
Problems and how a technology solution will address are correctly and clearly described and fully explained using a sophisticated level of writing. |
20-21 Points
Problems and how a technology solution will address are clearly described and explained using an effective level of writing. |
17-19 Points
Problems and how a technology solution will address are described and explained. |
15-16 Points
Problems and how a technology solution will address are not clearly described and explained; and/or lacks effective presentation of information |
0-14 Points
Content missing or extremely incomplete, did not reflect the assignment instructions, showed little or no originality, demonstrated little effort, is not supported with information from the Case Study; and/or is not original work for this class section. |
24 |
User
Requirements 5 user requirements (1 addresses reporting) Generally, 0-5 points each. Both quantity and quality evaluated. |
23-25 Points
Correctly identified, written and sourced; clearly derived from the Case Study; demonstrates sophisticated analysis. |
20-22 Points
Identified, written and sourced correctly; requirements are derived from the Case Study; demonstrates effective analysis. |
17-19 Points
Identified and sourced; requirements are related to the Case Study. |
15-16 Points
Fewer than 5 requirements are identified and sourced; and/or information provided is not correct; and/or requirements are not all related to the Case Study. |
0-14 Points
Content missing or extremely incomplete, did not reflect the assignment instructions, showed little or no originality, demonstrated little effort, is not supported with information from the Case Study; and/or is not original work for this class section. |
25 |
Performance Requirements
3 performance requirements and 2 system security requirements Generally, 0-5 points each. Both quantity and quality evaluated. |
23-25 Points
Correctly identified, written and sourced; clearly derived from the Case Study; demonstrates sophisticated analysis. |
20-22 Points
Identified, written and sourced correctly; requirements are derived from the Case Study; demonstrates effective analysis. |
17-19 Points
Identified and sourced; requirements are related to the Case Study. |
15-16 Points
Fewer than 5 requirements are identified and sourced; and/or information provided is not correct; and/or requirements are not all related to the Case Study. |
0-14 Points
Content missing or extremely incomplete, did not reflect the assignment instructions, showed little or no originality, demonstrated little effort, is not supported with information from the Case Study; and/or is not original work for this class section. |
25 |
Research
Two or more sources–one source from within the IFSM 300 course content and one external (other than the course materials) |
9-10 Points
Required resources are incorporated and used effectively. Sources used are relevant and timely and contribute strongly to the analysis. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. |
8.5 Points
At least two sources are incorporated and are relevant and somewhat support the analysis. References are appropriately incorporated and cited using APA style. |
7.5 Points
Only one resource is used and properly incorporated and/or reference(s) lack correct APA style. |
6.5 Points
A source may be used, but is not properly incorporated or used, and/or is not effective or appropriate; and/or does not follow APA style for references and citations. |
0-5 Points
No course content or external research incorporated; or reference listed is not cited within the text. |
10 |
Format
Uses outline format provided; includes Title Page and Reference Page |
14-16 Points
Very well organized and easy to read. Very few or no errors in sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; double-spaced, written in third person and presented in a professional format. |
12-13 Points
Effective organization; has few errors in sentence structure, grammar, and spelling; double-spaced, written in third person and presented in a professional format. |
11 Points
Some organization; may have some errors in sentence structure, grammar and spelling. Report is double spaced and written in third person. |
10 Points
Not well organized, and/or contains several grammars and/or spelling errors; and/or is not double-spaced and written in third person. |
0-9 Points
Extremely poorly written, has many grammars and/or spelling errors, or does not convey the information. |
16 |
TOTAL Points Possible | 100 |
RUBRIC | |||
Excellent Quality
95-100%
|
Introduction
45-41 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. |
Literature Support
91-84 points The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed. |
Methodology
58-53 points With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached. |
Average Score
50-85% |
40-38 points
More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied. |
83-76 points
There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration. |
52-49 points
The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. |
Poor Quality
0-45% |
37-1 points
The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied. |
75-1 points
There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references. |
48-1 points
There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached. |
Place the Order Here: https://standardwriter.com/orders/ordernow / https://standardwriter.com/