Posted: August 6th, 2022

Urgent 4

Urgent 1- 7 hours

BMIS 530

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3

Assignment Instructions

Overview

Recall the three stages of the project:
Phase 1: Introduction, problem statement, feasibility study, and project plan

Phase 2: Methodology to compare the old and new systems and the systems analysis

Phase 3: Results of comparison of the old and new systems and the systems design

In Phase 3 you will use the methodology developed in Phase 2 to compare the old information system analysis and design to the new information system that is cloud-capable, highly available, scalable, and secure. You will use the scholarly supported computing framework and standards (e.g. ANSI, COBIT, ISO, ITU, NIST, HIPAA, PCI) to benchmark the systems analysis and design of the old and new system. Once you perform this comparison, you will detail the results.

Instructions

This report must contain the following elements:

I. See the grading rubric for all minimums.

II. Cover page

III. Table of Contents (TOC)

IV. Every section must be well supported with scholarly information systems journal articles.

V. Introduction and conclusion sections

a.

Please update your previous introduction and conclusion sections as appropriate

b. A succinct, high quality, and well supported introduction and conclusion should be written

c. It is necessary to highlight the objectives and conclusions of the project

d. Introduce the primary goals of this particular phase, the coinciding objectives, and the outcomes

e. The conclusion should be the last heading and conclude the current phase and state the upcoming objectives and deliverables in the next phase.

VI. Systems analysis and design results

a. Follows a well-supported methodology including at least one framework and appropriate standards from scholarly journal articles

b. Uses objective standards accurately to benchmark the old system and the new system

c. Minimal comparison elements should include system:

i. Cloud/distributed computing capabilities

ii. High availability

iii. Scalability

iv. Security

v. Note, these are projected based upon the comparative benchmarked standards

d. A final updated financial analysis that projects associated costs of both systems once the final design is completed

e. Discuss the managerial implications of the results

f. Uses excel spreadsheets, graphs, figures, and tables to show the objective comparisons of the systems

VII. Systems design diagrams

a. A minimum of two diagrams (2) are necessary for each required type, one diagram represents the existing system and one diagram represents the new re-designed and improved system

b. The following systems design diagrams are required that compare the old and new systems:

i. Entity relationship data model diagrams

ii. Class diagrams

iii. User interface forms

iv. Distributed computing network and system architecture diagrams

1. Design the complete information system architecture environment for the old and new environments

c. Screenshots are required for each diagram with a visible operating system date/time and unique desktop element showing that indicates it is your computer

i. No credit will be given for diagrams without screenshots

ii. Include the screenshots in appendices in the project report

d. Describe the systems analysis as you complete it in a narrative form and link in each associated diagram referenced in the narrative using an appendix

e. Each diagram will be assessed according to UML standards and a level of detail that excels beyond textbook examples

i. Note, textbook examples are simpler versions meant to learn and not as complex as industry diagrams often

ii. Our textbook is a graduate version of systems analysis and design. If you need more undergraduate textbook support we encourage you to use Safari e-books from the Liberty Library. Our undergraduate textbook develops the more foundational SAD learning using the textbook:

1. Dennis, A., Wixom, B. H., & Tegarden, D. (2015). Systems analysis & design: An object-oriented approach with UML (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons.

Note: Your assignment will be checked for originality via the Turnitin plagiarism tool.

Page 2 of 2

Criteria Ratings Points

Introduction
and
conclusion

10 to >9.

0 pts

Advanced

The introduction is
succinct and embodies
the project’s primary
objectives and
outcomes. The
introduction constructs
the purpose of the
system. A compelling
and justifiable
conclusion is
developed that
supports the key
outcomes. More than
5 scholarly sources
and 500 words
combined.

9 to >7.0 pts

Proficient

The introduction and
conclusion are succinct
and embody most of the
project’s primary
objectives and
outcomes, and/or the
introduction constructs
an unclear purpose of
the system. Justified
conclusion developed.
Minimum of 5 scholarly
sources and 500 words.

7 to >0.0 pts

Developing

The introduction and/or
conclusion are
generalized and embody
some of the project’s
primary objectives and
outcomes and/or has
less than the minimum of
5 scholarly sources and
500 words and/or is not
defensible.

0 pts

Not Present

Substantially
unmet or not
present

10 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric |
BMIS530_D01_202230

Criteria Ratings Points

Systems
analysis and
design

comparison
results

40 to >36.0 pts

Advanced

Systems analysis and
design results compare
key benchmarks
including cloud
computing capabilities,
high-availability,
scalability, and level of
security of the old and
newly designed
information systems
using relevant graphs,
tables, and figures. A
detailed process that
follows the selected
computing
methodology,
framework, and uses
the appropriate
standards exists.
There are scholarly
supported comparison
methods to contrast the
systems. Financial
analysis is included
that compares the two
system designs from a
managerial standpoint.
Over 1,500 words and
10 unique scholarly
journal articles from the
literature review that
justify the results and
validity of the
comparative analysis.

36 to >33.0 pts

Proficient

Systems analysis and
design results compare
some benchmarks
including cloud
computing capabilities,
high-availability,
scalability, and level of
security of the old and
newly designed
information systems
using relevant graphs,
tables, and figures
and/or processes that
follow the selected
computing methodology
exist with some
scholarly supported
comparison methods to
contrast the systems
and/or financial analysis
is included that
compares the two
system designs from a
managerial standpoint
and/or there is a
minimum of 1,500 words
and 10 unique scholarly
journal articles from the
literature review that
justify the results and
validity of the
comparative analysis.

33 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Systems analysis and
design results miss
benchmarks including
cloud computing
capabilities,
high-availability,
scalability, and level of
security of the old and
newly designed
information systems
using relevant graphs,
tables, and figures
and/or processes do not
follow the selected
computing methodology
and/or there is
insufficient scholarly
supported comparison
methods to contrast the
systems and/or financial
analysis does not
adequately compare the
two system designs from
a managerial standpoint
and/or there is not a
minimum of 1,500 words
and 10 unique scholarly
journal articles from the
literature review that
justify the results and
validity of the
comparative analysis.

0 pts
Not Present

Substantially
unmet or not
present
and/or
quotes more
than 5% of
the writing or
use of
existing
information
system

40 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric |
BMIS530_D01_202230

Criteria Ratings Points
Systems
analysis and
design

90 to >82.0 pts

Advanced

ER data model (2),
class diagrams (2), UIs
(2), and architecture
diagrams (2) are more
thorough and detailed
than the textbook
examples, follow
appropriate and
advanced UML
techniques, and meet
comparative industry
best practices and
standards. Diagrams
show an extensive
knowledge of the
system being
designed. ER data
model diagrams meet
3NF, have at least 5
tables each, have
accurate primary and
foreign keys, accurate
field types, and proper
cardinality. Minimum of
5 classes and 15
functions and methods
exist in each class
diagram. UIs follow
industry HCI standards.
Architecture diagrams
include accurate
routers, switches,
firewalls, load
balancers, servers,
databases, storage
area networks,
middleware, and other
appropriate systems for
cloud computing.

82 to >75.0 pts

Proficient

ER data model (2),
class diagrams (2), UIs
(2), and architecture
diagrams (2) are as
detailed as the textbook
examples, mostly follow
appropriate and
advanced UML
techniques, and meet
comparative industry
best practices and
standards and/or
diagrams show an
knowledge of the
system being designed
and/or ER data model
diagrams meet 3NF,
have at least 5 tables
each, have mostly
accurate primary and
foreign keys, accurate
field types, and proper
cardinality and/or a
minimum of 5 classes
and 10 functions and
methods exist in each
class diagram and/or
UIs follow some industry
HCI standards and/or
architecture diagrams
include mostly accurate
routers, switches,
firewalls, load balancers,
servers, databases,
storage area networks,
middleware, and other
appropriate systems for
cloud computing.

75 to >0.0 pts

Developing

ER data model (2), class
diagrams (2), UIs (2),
and architecture
diagrams (2) are not as
detailed as the textbook
examples and/or do not
follow appropriate UML
techniques and/or meet
comparative industry
best practices and
standards and/or
diagrams do not show
knowledge of the system
being designed and/or
ER data model diagrams
fail to meet 3NF, have at
least 5 tables each, have
mostly accurate primary
and foreign keys,
accurate field types,
and/or proper cardinality
and/or less than a
minimum of 5 classes
and 10 functions and
methods exist in each
class diagram and/or UIs
do not follow industry
HCI standards and/or
architecture diagrams do
not include accurate
routers, switches,
firewalls, load balancers,
servers, databases,
storage area networks,
middleware, and other
appropriate systems for
cloud computing.

0 pts
Not Present

Substantially
unmet or not
present or
proper
screenshots
do not exist
for each
diagram or
use of
existing
information
system

90 pts

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric |
BMIS530_D01_202230

Criteria Ratings Points

APA,
Grammar,
and Spelling

20 to >17.0 pts

Advanced

Properly formatted APA
paper with table of
contents and
references pages.
Correct spelling and
grammar used.
Contains fewer than 2
errors in grammar or
spelling that distract
the reader from the
content and/or minimal
errors (1-2) noted in the
interpretation or
execution of proper
APA format. Excellent
organization, headings,
and flow of the main
concepts exist.

17 to >16.0 pts

Proficient

Paper contains fewer
than 5 errors in
grammar or spelling that
distract the reader from
the content and/or some
errors (3-7) noted in the
interpretation or
execution of proper APA
format and/or
inadequate organization,
headings, and flow of
the main concepts exist
and/or notable absences
in required APA
formatting elements
such as: Title page,
running head, font type
and size (Times New
Roman 12 point), and
line spacing.

16 to >0.0 pts

Developing

Paper contains fewer
than 10 errors in
grammar or spelling that
distract the reader from
the content and/or
numerous errors (7+)
noted in the
interpretation or
execution of proper APA
format and/or inadequate
organization, headings,
and flow of the main
concepts exist and/or
notable absences in
required APA formatting
elements such as: Title
page, running head, font
type and size (Times
New Roman 12 point),
and line spacing.

0 pts
Not Present

Paper
contains
more than 10
errors in
grammar or
spelling that
distract the
reader from
the content
and/or
numerous
errors (10+)
noted in the
interpretation
or execution
of proper
APA format
and/or
inadequate
organization,
headings,
and flow of
the main
concepts
exist.

20 pts

Overall
Requirements

40 to >36.0 pts
Advanced

Over 2,000 words and
8 diagrams exist of
original student
authorship that shows
excellent mastery and
knowledge of systems
analysis and design.
Over 10 unique
scholarly peer reviewed
journal articles from
well-respected IT
journals exist that
directly relate to and
sufficiently support an
operational systems
analysis and design.

36 to >33.0 pts
Proficient

Minimum of 2,000 words
and 8 diagrams exist of
original student
authorship that shows
mastery and knowledge
of systems analysis and
design and/or a
minimum of 10 unique
scholarly peer reviewed
journal articles from
well-respected IT
journals exist that relate
to and sufficiently
support an operational
systems analysis and
design.

33 to >0.0 pts
Developing

Less than 2,000 words
and 8 diagrams exist of
original student
authorship that shows
mastery and knowledge
of systems analysis and
design and/or there are
less than 10 unique
scholarly peer reviewed
journal articles from
well-respected IT
journals that relate to
and sufficiently support
an operational systems
analysis and design.

0 pts
Not Present
Substantially
unmet or not
present or
proper
screenshots
do not exist
for each
diagram or
use of
existing
information
system
40 pts

Total Points: 200

Systems Analysis and Redesign Project: Phase 3 Grading Rubric |
BMIS530_D01_202230

Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away

Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.

Calculate the price of your order

You will get a personal manager and a discount.
We'll send you the first draft for approval by at
Total price:
$0.00