Attempt all the questions.
Section-A
Question1) Describe the 10 underlying principles of Group support Systems and expert systems.
Question2) Information System (IS) development is an iterative process and it consists of many identifiable stages. What stages define ‘the way things are’ and ‘the way things must be’. Explain these stages with suitable examples.
Question3) Write brief notes on:
a) Group Support system
b) Executive Information Systems
c) Open System
d) Forward Chaining
Question4) Why is a Distributed Support System (DSS) insufficient by itself and how did the addition of the EIS make it efficient.
Section-B
Case Study
Raashi Manufacturing is the medium-sized manufacturer with annual sales of Rs. 50 million per year. It is mainly a job-shop manufacturer, known for its ability in custom manufacturing projects primarily involving metal fabrication .In the effort to improve Raashi information systems, D S Vasu, vice president of information systems, recently brought in the new systems development manager, K K Raina from the competitor. Mr. Raina had a reputation for doing innovative things in a area of information systems development. General and top management of his previous employer was extremely pleased with types of information systems support that they had received. Mr. Raina had been particularly successful in implementing the prototyping development in systems analysis design process as a way to more accurately refine end-user requirements and cut short systems development process. Having joined Raashi Manufacturing, Mr Raina wanted to implement technologies and techniques that he had been so successful with previous to joining Raashi Manufacturing, but he ran into the serious problem. The systems analysis and design staff has recently gone through a revamping of their systems development methodologies. They had a rather substantial systems development methodology that had evolved over years, and in their most recent revision, they had incorporated the latest structured techniques into their old methodology. Having been involved in its development, staff had the strong commitment to the methodology. In assessing methodology, Raina quickly decided that it was entirely too procedure and rule-oriented and was exceptionally time consuming to use as a systems development guide. The staff also had made no provision for incorporating heuristic or prototyping techniques into their systems development methodology. In a staff meeting, Mr. Raina raised prototyping concepts with staff, but their response was immediate defensive. Most of them had not heard of a prototyping technique, but felt it was a way to develop systems for sloppy designers who didn’t have sufficient discipline to do it right. They stated that if the sloppy approach to systems development, such as prototyping, was to be used, you will have to be willing to give up the rigor and discipline of good formal procedures and good structured techniques. Overall, their general response was quite negative.
Mr. Raina feels he has the tricky situation on his hands. He knows the better way to approach systems development, but he does not want to get cross-wise with systems analysts and design staff, many of whom are senior to him in experience in systems development. He knows that if he tries heuristic approach and it fails, there’s going to be a lot of “I told you so”. He’s also concerned that if he pulls young designers off to the side and works with the methodology, it may cause a division among the staff and some serious hard feelings that can be detrimental to the two young analysts.
Questions:
a) Identify the problem in this case study.
b) Comment on the proposal of Mr. Raina for developing an information system using prototyping methodologies.
c) How will you manage the situation at Raashi Manufacturing?
d) Suppose Raashi Manufacturing is to make a digital company. How differently will you go about selecting development methods for developing MIS? Explain.