Business Analysis S1 2018 - Assignment 2 Medigood National Health Insurance System

BUSINESS ANALYSIS BUSINESS ANALYSIS 12.05 1 BUSINESS ANALYSIS Business Analysis S1 2018 – Assignment 2 Medigood National Health Insurance System Student Name: University Name: Task 2.01 Work Breakdown Structure 2 Task 2.02 “To-be” design activity 3 Task 2.03 Organisational change 3 Task 2.04 Screen 5 Task 2.05 Acceptance Criteria 6 Task 2.06 Applications Architecture 7 Task 2.07 Report to Client 8 Task 2.08 Agile and Waterfall differences 9 Task 2.09 Video Transcript 11

Running head: BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Business Analysis S1 2018 – Assignment 2
Medigood National Health Insurance System
Student Name:
University Name:

1BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Table of Contents
Task 2.01 Work Breakdown Structure............................................................................................2
Task 2.02 “To-be” design activity...................................................................................................3
Task 2.03 Organisational change.....................................................................................................3
Task 2.04 Screen..............................................................................................................................5
Task 2.05 Acceptance Criteria.........................................................................................................6
Task 2.06 Applications Architecture...............................................................................................7
Task 2.07 Report to Client...............................................................................................................8
Task 2.08 Agile and Waterfall differences......................................................................................9
Task 2.09 Video Transcript...........................................................................................................11
Bibliography..................................................................................................................................13
Appendix – Project Journal...........................................................................................................15

2BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Task 2.01 Work Breakdown Structure
Activity Duration
Development of Work Breakdown Structure for the assignment 03 days
Preparation of the “To-be” design activity diagram from Medigood case study 02 days
Discussing impact of new system on the business and recommendations for change
management
04 days
Development of two screen designs from two must stories 05 days
Demonstrating the acceptance criteria for the designs from two stories 03 days
Preparing a diagram to show the application architecture of the new system 02 days
Preparing the executive summary with explanation of the undertaken processes for
recommending preferred supplier
04 days
Comparison of Agile with Waterfall approach to demonstrate the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach
02 day
Preparation of a video to present a brief report to the client 02 day

3BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Task 2.02 “To-be” design activity
Task 2.03 Organisational change
“The Medigood business process has been dismembered and it is recognized that new
data framework will be important for recording the information of patients and also specialists
related in the methodology for restorative treatment. There may be period of slip-ups as the
present framework for securing records is manual and the organization is facing inconvenience
in supervising arrangements received from the patients by discovering authority according to the
prerequisite of patients. There is a prerequisite of new data framework such that booking of
arrangements can be taken care of effectively for checking specialist’s availability.

4BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Further, the data structure will help Medigood with giving the patients tele-success
gathering office so they can finish their treatment from remote area and do not have to visit the
specialist physically every time they require any remedial provoking. The new structure will help
the patients with checking their thriving with no other person's assistance and it will in like way
help Medigood in fruitful relationship of their business works out. The structure will other than
fortify outfitting the patients with expressive results remotely. The change and usage of another
data framework will unequivocally affect business systems of the organization together. The
change inside the association on account of use of the new structure must be overseen
beneficially with certifiable getting ready for change association and sensible essential authority.
The improvements should be comprehends how to such a degree, to the point that those
extraordinary parts lines up with the objectives behind use of the new data structure. The new
structure will help the relationship with coming to more clients and extension their capacity by
extending flexibility of the present framework.”

5BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Task 2.04 Screen
Login/Registration
Modules

6BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Task 2.05 Acceptance Criteria
“The acceptance of the new information system will rely upon satisfaction of the
customer prerequisites and use of appropriate programming advancement system. The system
will be accepted if the advancement procedure being taken after is as per the fitting programming
improvement philosophy. The significant acknowledgment criteria for the new system to help
Medigood relies upon the UI implies the outline ought to be anything but difficult to utilize with
the end goal that the clients do not lose their enthusiasm over the system. The UI is considered as
the middle person that collaborates with a system so it must be easy to use to such an extent that
the clients wear not feel unpredictability in utilizing the system. The new system must be created
in such a way, to the point that it meets required functionalities of the clients and in addition the
customer. The introduction of the system must be outlined in a reasonable structure so the clients
can without much of a stretch decide the capacities performed by the distinctive modules inside
the system.
The system must be executed with proper safety efforts as record of patient and in
addition other imperative data will be put away through the system. The system improvement
must be completed by keep up the quality measures with the goal that the clients are fulfilled
while utilizing the system. The system must be tried utilizing unit testing and for checking the
usefulness, convenience, viability and unwavering quality with the end goal that the system
mirrors a positive impression amid client acknowledgment testing. The practicality alongside
versatility tests must be improved the situation the system with the goal that quality is kept up
and the customer is guaranteed about the institutionalized item. The system ought to be executed
with appropriate validation and safety efforts as there will be capacity of individual data and also

7BUSINESS ANALYSIS
trade of data. The records of the patient can be gotten to by the executive however other patients
will not be able to view the information.”
Task 2.06 Applications Architecture
“The above diagram speaks to design of the system to be produced for Medigood so the
present business forms and existing system inside the association can be moved forward. The
design graph is created subsequent to examining the modules that must be produced for the
information system. The information system will involve mainly two modules that is one for
management of patients and the other for administrative parts of the association. The patient
administration system identifies with putting away, controlling and recovery of patient record.

8BUSINESS ANALYSIS
The administrative module will investigate the administration related data put away with the
system. The database for both the modules will be isolated with the goal that restore and backup
information can be completed effortlessly in the event of any disappointment. The administration
module will likewise encourage preparing of information from outer sources, for example,
information on clinical administrations being offered to the patients.”
Task 2.07 Report to Client
“This report is centered around portraying the procedures that has been attempted to
settle on a choice to build up the information system. The favored decision for building up the
new information system is In-House improvement implies designers will be contracted and the
system will be created with the joint effort of Medigood. The present business approach of
Medigood has been examined to decide necessities of the partners related with the association.
The new system is being proposed for interfacing patients with the pros and giving restorative
meeting to the patients so they do not need to visit the doctor's facility or center physically every
time they require a discussion.
The Waterfall approach has been chosen for advancement of the new system as the
necessities have been obviously distinguished and it would decrease the time required for
building up the system. The determination of a reasonable supplier is fundamental for fruitful
improvement of an information system as the acquirement of required materials on time and with
great quality will guarantee achievement of the system. The system will be produced by making
an in-house improvement group and to such an extent that it lines up with the business
necessities. The adjustments in necessities can be overseen while following the nimble strategy
however if there should arise an occurrence of waterfall approach the progressions cannot be

9BUSINESS ANALYSIS
received and the entire system must be disposed of and it must be begun once again to achieve
the coveted objectives.”
Task 2.08 Agile and Waterfall differences
There are different methodologies that can be executed for development of systems but
the selection of methodology depends on the type of system to be developed. The conventional
waterfall approach is characterized as the mostly used methodology for the development of
information systems. The Agile strategy is additionally being currently utilized by different
associations for creating programming items. The real contrasts between the Agile and Waterfall
strategy is outlined below:
Pros Cons
Agile
Approach
 Agile strategy is highly centered on the
group joint effort. There will be no
nearness of any sort of rouge
components that may lead to failure of
project.
 Through the assistance of this approach
a product improvement turn out to be
substantially simpler and faster than
others (Abrahamsson et al. 2017).
Notwithstanding to repeat business
event this approach is useful.
 For overseeing cost however this stands
 The cost required for the development
of the product is not predictable.
 This approach is hard to understand
and it is suitable only for large projects
and small projects cannot be executed
through this strategy.
 The timing for this approach is
problematic (Ashmore et al. 2018).
 Through this technique, system can be
developed successfully if required
resources are made available by the

10BUSINESS ANALYSIS
less demanding. Independent companies
can without much of a stretch manage
the cost of this approach.
 The customers can look at the progress
and it likewise offers proposal in each
progression.
client.
Waterfall
Approach
 This approach is simple, basic and
effortlessly justifiable by the
developers.
 All stages of the waterfall approach are
documented precisely and can be
actualized independently.
 It gives high level of vision to the
developers (Dingsoyr et al. 2018).
 The phases in this approach are
developed individually hence there is no
requirement of customer engagement at
later phases.
 This approach provide clear control
over the due date when the work is
being circulated.
 This approach is not adaptable because
of its inflexibility amid the
development stages and no
requirements can be effortlessly
changed.
 Within the stages, the progress cannot
be effortlessly recognized.
 The use of this model is very costly
than the others.
 The challenges, issues, bottlenecks can
be recognized toward the finish of the
development cycle and not during the
progress.
 If the assumptions for project are
observed to be not right at that point,
the evaluated finish time may surpass
and the project may not meet the

11BUSINESS ANALYSIS
estimated time.
Task 2.09 Video Transcript
This assignment is related to the Medigood National Health Insurance system to propose
a new system for their business activities. In the Assignment 1, I have analysed the case study in
detailed manner for identifying the existing issues within the present system. I have identified the
stakeholders associated with the business for determining the requirements efficiently. I
presented the analysis of stakeholders along with their roles and interests in context to the
Medigood case study. I developed the document reflecting the system vision for illustrating the
benefits to the business from implementation of the new information system. I have prepared the
AS-IS process design activity to demonstrate the existing system. I have determined the flow of
processes within the organization along with it I developed a Product Backlog statement from the
perspective of each user. MoSCoW analysis was being done by me to demonstrate the
requirements according to priority. I also developed five use cases to demonstrate the
requirements that will be fulfilled by the new information system.
To start with Assignment 2, I have developed a work breakdown structure so that the
required activities can be completed for this assignment. I developed the “TO-BE” design
process in context to the case study of Medigood Health system with the help of BPMN
diagramming tool. Next, I analyzed the impact of new system on the business and presented
discussion to demonstrate the plan for change management for implementing the new system. I
also developed two screen designs from two must user stories being identified in Assignment 1.
After that I have determined the acceptance criteria for the designed interfaces from the user
stories. An architecture diagram has also been prepared by me to illustrate the architecture of

12BUSINESS ANALYSIS
new information system and I have prepared an executive summary with processes that has been
undertaken to choose a suitable supplier to develop the new information system. In the last
section of this assignment I have presented the comparison between Agile and Waterfall
approach to demonstrate the key differences as per their advantages and disadvantages.

13BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Bibliography
Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J. and Warsta, J., 2017. Agile software development
methods: Review and analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08439.
Ashmore, S., Townsend, A., DeMarie, S. and Mennecke, B., 2018. An exploratory examination
of modes of interaction and work in waterfall and agile teams. International Journal of Agile
Systems and Management, 11(1), pp.67-102.
Cuppen, E., 2016. 15 Stakeholder Analysis. Foresight in Organizations: Methods and Tools,
p.208.
De Thurah, A., Stengaard‐Pedersen, K., Axelsen, M., Fredberg, U., Schougaard, L.M., Hjollund,
N.H., Pfeiffer‐Jensen, M., Laurberg, T.B., Tarp, U., Lomborg, K. and Maribo, T., 2018. Tele‐
Health Followup Strategy for Tight Control of Disease Activity in Rheumatoid Arthritis: Results
of a Randomized Controlled Trial. Arthritis care & research, 70(3), pp.353-360.
Dingsoyr, T., Dyba, T., Gjertsen, M., Jacobsen, A.O., Mathisen, T.E., Nordfjord, J.O., Røe, K.
and Strand, K., 2018. Key Lessons from Tailoring Agile Methods for Large-Scale Software
Development. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.05118.
Fleisher, C. S., & Bensoussan, B. E. (2015). Business and competitive analysis: effective
application of new and classic methods. FT Press.
Goetsch, D.L. and Davis, S.B., 2014. Quality management for organizational excellence. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: pearson.
Gollenia, L.A., 2016. Business transformation management methodology. Routledge.

14BUSINESS ANALYSIS
Hajri, I., Goknil, A. and Briand, L., 2017. A change management approach in product lines for
use case-driven development and testing. In 23rd International Working Conference on
Requirements Engineering: Foundation for software Quality (REFSQ 2017).
Khan, A.S., Oracle America Inc, 2016. System and method for automatically generating XML
schema for validating XML input documents. U.S. Patent 9,286,275.
Mahadevan, L., Kettinger, W.J. and Meservy, T.O., 2015. Running on Hybrid: Control Changes
when Introducing an Agile Methodology in a Traditional" Waterfall" System Development
Environment. CAIS, 36, p.5.
Maslennikov, V.V. and Kalinina, I.A., 2015. Analysis of satisfaction of consumers of public
services. International Business Management, 9(6), pp.1141-1146.
Missonier, S. and Loufrani-Fedida, S., 2014. Stakeholder analysis and engagement in projects:
From stakeholder relational perspective to stakeholder relational ontology. International Journal
of Project Management, 32(7), pp.1108-1122.
Mitsuyuki, T., Hiekata, K., Goto, T. and Moser, B., 2017. Evaluation of Project Architecture in
Software Development Mixing Waterfall and Agile by Using Process Simulation. Journal of
Industrial Integration and Management, 2(02), p.1750007.
Satzinger, J.W., Jackson, R.B. and Burd, S.D., 2011. Systems analysis and design in a changing
world. Cengage learning.
Serrador, P. and Pinto, J.K., 2015. Does Agile work?—A quantitative analysis of agile project
success. International Journal of Project Management, 33(5), pp.1040-1051.