The Chief Information Officer (CIO) and the Managing Director (MD) of Illustrious Limited recently had the following conversation regarding the development of a new information system for the company: CIO: The way to go about the analysis is to first examine the old system, such as reviewing key documents and observing the workers performing their tasks. Then we can determine which aspects are working well and which should be preserved. MD: We have been through these types of projects before, and what always ends up happening is that we do not get the new system we are promised. Instead, we get a modified version of the old system. CIO: I can assure you that this will not happen this time. My team just want a thorough understanding of what is working well and what is not. MD: I would feel much more comfortable if we first started with a list of our requirements. We should spend more time determining what exactly we want the system to do upfront. Then your team can come in and determine what portions to salvage if you wish. Just don’t constrain us to the old system! Required: a) The CIO and MD have different views on how the system analysis should be performed. Comment on whose position you sympathize with the most. b) What method would you recommend to Illustrious Limited for system analysis? Explain.

Illustrious Limited

a) I sympathize with the MD.  He noted "We have been through these types of projects before, and what always ends up happening is that we do not get the new system we are promised. Instead, we get a modified version of the old system."  The implication of his assertion is that something is missing in the way the CIO and her team had been handling system development projects in the past.  Even the CIO acknowledged the MD's assertions by assuring "that this will not happen this time."  In the past, the system development team had neglected understanding "what is working well and what is not."  This should not be the case in any good system development.  Preliminary analysis or investigation should uncover users' requirements and then conduct a thorough system analysis before the design and other stages are carried out in an iterative process.

b) I would recommend SCRUM instead of the Waterfall methodology.  With Scrum, the system development project is teamwork.   The team is held accountable and SCRUM utilizes iteration to achieve well-defined goals.  The SCRUM framework "begins with a simple premise, starting with what can be seen or known before it tracks progress and tweaks as necessary," to achieve set goals defined by users' requirements.

Explanation:

a) System Development is a process that follows a system development life cycle (SDLC) methodology and involves these seven stages: requirement analysis, system analysis, system design, development or programming, testing, implementation and documentation, and evaluation and support.

b) SCRUM is a framework in SDLC which follows "a set of meetings, tools, and roles that work in concert to help teams structure and manage their work."  SCRUM has been described as "an agile way to manage a project," especially software development because of its "iterative and flexible approaches."

c)  Waterfall model, on the other hand, follows linear sequential phases of conception, initiation, analysis, design, construction, testing, deployment, and maintenance, and each stage depends on the deliverables of the previous stage.  This is why "in software development, it tends to be among the less iterative and flexible approaches, as progress flows in largely one direction ("downwards" like a waterfall) through the phases."

The Fed and the FDIC are the regulatory agencies that provide general oversight for the banking industry.
The Fed refers to the Federal Reserve System, which is the central banking system in the US. The FDIC stands for Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which exists to provide consumers with deposit insurance. Both of these companies are very important when it comes to banking oversight.