1. Alex Bohl Chris Brown Neill Killgore Bruce Loe Brady McNaughton Wes Swart Team Members

2. TechnologicSolutions Feasibility Analysis – Technical Feasibility ERD LDD – Economic Feasibility – Organizational Feasibility Risk Assessment and Reduction – Size – Technological – Structure

3. Technical Feasibility Familiarity with As-Is System: (High) Can we build it? Team: (High) The group is highly familiar with the current helpdesk system. The group has a clear understanding of the current asset management system. The group has a clear understanding of the current license management system. Client: (High) The project champion, Darrell Eddy, has many years of experience working with the current system. The helpdesk staff has a clear understanding of how the current system functions. Between the project champion and helpdesk staff, Technologic Solutions can gain sufficient information required for the project.

4. Technical Feasibility Team: (Moderate) Collectively, the members of Technologic Solutions have gained a high level of applicable knowledge of the current issues in the IT industry through the CIS curriculum and work experience. All members have successfully completed the following courses at Louisiana Tech University: – CIS 310: Principles of Information Systems – CIS 315: Problem Solving & Introduction to Programming – CIS 323: Database Systems Management – CIS 337 or 335: Business Application Development – CIS 444: Network Design and Implementation

5. Technical Feasibility Familiarity with Technology: (Moderate) Team: (Moderate) Most members have basic database management skills. This includes experience with the following: – Access – MySQL – Oracle All members have a working knowledge of the following languages: – SQL – Visual Basic

6. Technical Feasibility Familiarity with Technology: (Moderate) Team: (Moderate) – 4 members have a working knowledge of the following languages: HTML JavaScript PHP Java – 5 members have experience working in an information technology environment.

7. Technical Feasibility Client: (High) The Network Administrator and Information Technology Coordinator, Darrell Eddy, has a high level of technical knowledge and skill. The helpdesk staff also has a relatively high level of technical knowledge, and is proficient in database management.

8. Table NameNumber of Fields Employee 7 Ticket8 Asset13 Room4 Staff 5 Administrative 6 Faculty 7 Consultant 3 Skill 2 Tier2 Issue 6 Priority_Level2 Assigned_to3 License6 Invoice3 Possesses3 Requires4 The system is composed of 17 tables which consist of 84 fields Project Size: Medium

9. Project Size: Continued 12 Program Interfaces Main (Login) Employee Add/Edit Ticket Add/Edit Asset Add/Edit Room Add/Edit Skill Add/Edit Tier Add/Edit Issue Add/Edit Priority Level Add/Edit License Add/Edit Invoice Add/Print Ticket Submission 8 Reports Assets in order of least to most help tickets List of asset information Help tickets in order of priority Software license information Number of tickets closed for given day or range of days Consultant with the most completed tickets in a given period Employee ticket history Asset ticket history

10. What are our three functions again? Three functions being proposed: – Asset Management – Software Management – Improved Helpdesk Functionality How do these functions work? – 17 Tables – 84 Fields

11. Asset Management Assigned to: Room Employee Room Desktop Podium Employee Laptop Mobile Projector

12. Software Licensing Management License assigned Invoices Stored

13. Improved Helpdesk Functionality

14. Economic Feasibility Tangible Benefits Intangible Benefits Cost-Benefit

15. Tangible Benefits Reduced paper and toner consumption – Paper - 30 pages x 195 days x $0.01 a page = $58.50 per academic year – Toner - 30 pages x 195 days x $0.02 a page = $117.00 per academic year Reduction in lost help tickets – 2 per wk x 2 hr of lost work x 39 wks per year x $41.50 hr = $6,474.00 per academic year Reduction in manual ticket submission time – $0.252/min x (10 min/ticket x 15 tickets/day) x 195 days = $7,371.00 per academic year

16. Tangible Benefits Increased turnover for help tickets – 12 tickets are completed with the as-is system at an average of 2 hours per ticket, but 20 would be able to be handled with the to-be system. – [(20 Tickets/day x 2 hours) - (12 Tickets/day x 2 hours)] x 7.5 Average Hourly IT Wage = 120 – $120/day * 195 days = $23,400 Total Tangible Benefits: $37,420.50

17. Intangible Benefits Increased faculty satisfaction Increased faculty service Reduction of stress levels for IT staff Decreased IT staff idle time Elimination of incorrectly assigned tickets

18. Cost-Benefit Analysis Year 0Year 1Year 2Year 3Year 4Year 5Total Benefits Reduced Paper Consumption0.0058.50 292.50 Reduced Toner Consumption0.00117.00 585.00 Reduction in Lost Help Tickets0.006,474.00 32,370.00 Reduction in Manual Ticket Submission Time0.007,371.00 36,855.00 Increased Turnover for Help Tickets0.0023,400.00 117,000.00 Total Benefits0.0037,420.50 187,102.50 In today's dollars0.0035,302.3633,304.1131,418.9729,640.5427,962.77157,628.76 Costs One-time costs Development Labor17,976.00 Training Costs0.00 Total One-time costs17,976.00 Recurring costs Hardware Software Operational Labor Total Recurring Costs0.00 Total Costs17,976.000.00 17,976.00 In today's dollars17,976.000.00 Net(17,976.00)37,420.50 169,126.50 In today's dollars(17,976.00)35,302.3633,304.1131,418.9729,640.5427,962.77139,652.76 NPV139,652.76 ROI90% Assumed interest rate0.06 Break-Even Point0.52 years

19. Organizational Feasibility (High) Project Sponsor: College of Business Management: Darrell Eddy and helpdesk staff Users: College of Business faculty and staff Other Stakeholders: Students in the College of Business and ultimately Louisiana Tech University

20. Size Risk Risk FactorScore Chosen Weight Assigned Total Category Total development work hours3412 Estimated project implementation time224 Number of other systems involved020 Number of departments (other than IT) involved with system 326 Number of vendors involved with system133 Cumulative Risk Score:25 Possible Score:43 % Risk Attributed to Size:17.61%

21. Technology Risk Risk FactorScore Chosen Weight Assigned Total Category New Hardware020 Software New to Team020 Customers' IT Knowledge339 Customer Representative's IT Knowledge030 Customer Representative's Application Knowledge 030 I.T. Team's Application Knowledge236 Vendor Support010 Cumulative Risk Score:15 Possible Score:51 % Risk Attributed to Technology:10.56%

22. Structure Risk Risk FactorScore Chosen Weight Assigned Total Category Systems replace on one-to-one basis133 Severity of user department changes122 Degree of user-organizational structural change 020 General attitude of the direct user030 Commitment of upper level management133 Joint ISD team established?339 Cumulative Risk Score:17 Possible Score:48 % Risk Attributed to Structure:11.97%

23. Total Risk and Reduction Original Cumulative Risk Score for Project: 57 Total Possible Risk Score: 142 % Risk Attributed to Project: 40.14% After Reduction Cumulative Risk Score for Project: 54 Total Possible Risk Score: 142 % Risk Attributed to Project: 38.03