Describe the process of conducting a multicriteria analysis for comparing alternative projects.
A method for deciding among different projects, or when considering alternative designs for a given
system, is called multicriteria analysis. Multicriteria analysis uses a weighted scoring method for a
variety of criteria to contrast alternative projects or system features. For example, suppose that for a given
system that has been identified and selected, there are three alternative designs that could be pursued–A,
B, or C. Let’s also suppose that early planning meetings identified three key system requirements and
four key constraints that could be used to help make a decision on which alternative to pursue. Because
not all requirements and constraints are of equal importance, they are weighted based on their relative
importance. In other words, you do not have to weigh requirements and constraints equally; it is certainly
possible to make requirements more or less important than constraints. Weights are arrived at in
discussions among the analysis team, users, and sometimes, managers. Weights tend to be fairly
subjective and for that reason, should be determined through a process of open discussion to reveal
underlying assumptions, followed by an attempt to reach consensus among stakeholders. Notice that the
total of the weights for both the requirements and constraints is 100 (percent).
Next, each requirement and constraint is rated on a scale of 1 to 5. A rating of 1 indicates that the
alternative does not meet the requirement very well or that the alternative violates the constraint. A rating
of 5 indicates that the alternative meets or exceeds the requirement or clearly abides by the constraint.
Ratings are even more subjective than weights and should also be determined through open discussion
among users, analysts, and managers. For each requirement and constraint, a score is calculated by
multiplying the rating for each requirement and each constraint by its weight. The final step is to add up
the weighted scores for each alternative. Notice that there are three sets of totals: for requirements, for
constraints, and overall totals. When selecting a project, the overall score is taken into consideration, but
also if a project violates any requirements or constraints. Thus, a project with the highest overall score
may not always end up being chosen.
Briefly describe the three stages of the information systems planning process.
The process of describing the current situation begins by selecting a planning team that includes
executives chartered to model the existing situation. To gain this understanding, the team will need to
review corporate documents; interview managers, executives, and customers; and conduct detailed
reviews of competitors, markets, products, and finances. The type of information that must be collected
to represent the current situation includes the identification of all organizational locations, units,
functions, processes, data (or data entities), and information systems. Once high–level information is
collected, each item can typically be decomposed into smaller units as more detailed planning is
performed. After creating these lists, a series of matrices can be developed to cross–reference various
elements of the organizations.
After describing the current situation, the next step in the ISP process is to define the target situation that
reflects the desired future state of the organization. This means that the target situation consists of the
desired state of the locations, units, functions, processes, data, and information systems. For example, if a
desired future state of the organization is to have several new branch offices, or a new product line that
requires several new employee positions, functions, processes, and data, then most lists and matrices will
need to be updated to reflect this vision. The target situation must be developed in light of technology
and business trends, in addition to organizational constraints. This means that lists of business trends and
constraints should also be constructed in order to help ensure that the target situation reflects these issues.
Once the creation of the current and target situations is complete, a detailed transition strategy and plan
is developed by the information systems planning team. This plan should be very comprehensive,
reflecting both broad, long–range issues in addition to providing sufficient detail to guide all levels of
management concerning what needs to be done, how and when it needs to done, and who will be doing
it in the organization.