Cloud Computing Data Storage System

Running head: project plan 1
DESIGN & DEVELOPMENT OF A CLOUD COMPUTING DATA STORAGE SYSTEM IN
CIVIL SERVICE FAST STREAM UNITED KINGDOM
Student name
Affiliation
Supervisor’s name
Date of submission

Running head: project plan 2
1.0. Scope statement
The section presents a brief description of the project objectives, deliverables, priorities,
milestones, technical requirements, limits and exclusions (Heagney, 2016).
1.1. Project brief
1.2. Int
rod
uct
ion
The civil service fast stream platform that enables talented individuals in United Kingdom and
across Europe motivated to work in civil service to submit their applications. It is a public
agency that enables future leaders to be identified and engaged in solving future leadership
problems through apprenticeship and internships.
1.3. Business case
Over the years the agency have been receiving thousands of application across the country and
abroad which has seen the urgency of improving its data storage system to cope up with
increasing needs. The project future focus is to improve its data storage system in order to
increase data security, storage capacity, and improve easily accessibility of stored data. Users can
upload their details more easily at convenient places with any aided gadgets.
1.4. Project objectives
Project client Civil service fast stream United Kingdom
Project management team: XYN communications
Project estimated budget $18,950
Project duration: 6months Starting 2/06/2018 to 31/11/2018
Goal of the project To develop a cloud computing data storage
system for the civil service fast stream UK

Running head: project plan 3
To achieve the goal of the project the following objectives will be set:
i. To develop a cloud data storage computing system that will increase storage capacity of
the company information.
ii. To design an easy uploading cloud computing system that will improve accessibility and
efficiency in application process.
iii. To develop a cloud computing data system that synchronizes with other devices to
increase accessibility of the company services.
1.5. Deliverables for the project
Deliverables provide the key activities to be achieved in implementing the project (Hedman,
2013). The deliverable will include: documenting project charter/plan, sourcing a system
development provider, design of the system, piloting of the system, training users, project
execution, monitoring/control/evaluations, and project closure.
1.6. Project priorities
The project priorities will be on delivering a storage system aided using cloud computing
mechanism that increases accessibility and capacity of storage. The organization priority is
govern by the need to increase storage space.
1.7. Project milestones
Milestones represents the key commencement periods for the various project deliverables
(Kendrick, 2013). Table 1 shows a summary of the project milestones.

Running head: project plan 4
Table 1 Project milestones
Project deliverable Time scheduled to begin
Documenting the project charter/plan 2nd June 2018
Sourcing for a system development provider 10th June 2018
Designing of the system 16th June 2018
Piloting of the system 15th July 2018
Training users 25th July 2018
Project executions and implementation 1st August 2018
Monitoring/controls/evaluations 1st October 2018
Project closure 15th November 2018
1.8. Technical requirements
Technical requirements represent skills, equipment’s and tools needed to deliver the project
deliverables (Gido & Clements, 2014). They will include: system developer, information
technology expert, system analysts, computer related infrastructures and accessories, training
consumables, finances and internet service provider.
1.9. Limits and exclusions

Running head: project plan 5
It represents the in-scope and out-scopes items of the projects (Cleland, 2013). The project team
will limit its function on sourcing, designing, developing, and training users on the proposed
system delivery. It will not engage on matters regarding contract management and training the
members of public on the use of the new system.
2.0. Project work breakdown structure (WBS)
WBS is a scheduling tool used to divide project into smaller units and packages to facilitate
resource and time allocation (Burke, 2013). The timing on the various activities in WBS was
derived using the PERT formula using the three times (pessimistic (a), optimistic (b), most likely
time (c). Estimates based on pessimistic view were done followed by optimistic view and then
average of the two times. Figure 1 presents the work breakdown structure for the project.

Running head: project plan 6
Figure 1 Work breakdown structure
ID Task
Mode
Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
0 Software
Development
106.25 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 10/30/18
1 Scope 8 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 6/12/18
7 Analysis/Software
Requirements
6 days Wed 6/13/18 Wed 6/20/18 1
17 Design 30 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 8/13/18 7
25 Development 60 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 10/15/18 7,17
32 Testing 10 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 8/6/18 25
48 Training 6 days Mon 7/23/18 Tue 7/31/18 25,32
57 Documentation 14 days Mon 7/23/18 Fri 8/10/18 48
67 Pilot 5 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 7/9/18 57
74 Deployment 15 days Tue 10/9/18 Tue 10/30/18 67
81 Post
Implementation
Review
4 days Tue 10/16/18 Mon 10/22/18 48,74
86 Project closure 2 days Mon 10/22/18 Wed 10/24/18 81
S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W
May 6, '18 May 13, '18 May 20, '18 May 27, '18

Running head: project plan 7
3.0. Project Gantt chart and critical path
The Gantt chart represents a diagrammatical illustration of the project activities in reference to
time allocated to them (Bourne, 2015). It is derived from the work breakdown structure. The
critical path indicated in red represents the shortest time to achieve the desired outcome. Figure 2
and 3 shows Gantt chart 1 and critical path method for the project.

Running head: project plan 8
Figure 2: Gantt chart 1
ID Task
Mode
Task Name Duration Start Finish Predecessors
0 Software
Development
106.25 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 10/30/18
1 Scope 8 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 6/12/18
7 Analysis/Software
Requirements
6 days Wed 6/13/18 Wed 6/20/18 1
17 Design 30 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 8/13/18 7
25 Development 60 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 10/15/18 7,17
32 Testing 10 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 8/6/18 25
48 Training 6 days Mon 7/23/18 Tue 7/31/18 25,32
57 Documentation 14 days Mon 7/23/18 Fri 8/10/18 48
67 Pilot 5 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 7/9/18 57
74 Deployment 15 days Tue 10/9/18 Tue 10/30/18 67
81 Post
Implementation
Review
4 days Tue 10/16/18 Mon 10/22/18 48,74
86 Project closure 2 days Mon 10/22/18 Wed 10/24/18 81
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Qtr 2, 2018 Qtr 3, 2018 Qtr 4, 2018

Running head: project plan 9
Figure 3 Critical path method analyses
1 7 17
25 32
48 57 67 74
86
0
81
In figure 3 the critical path is indicated using the red colour (1-7-17-25-32-74-86) and the numbering is based on the task ID indicated in the work breakdown structure (figure 2).

Running head: project plan 10
4.0. Risk management
Project risk management defines the procedure followed to ensure that uncertainties are
identified, assessed and mitigated (Andrew, 2014). The risk management begins with
identification of risks affecting the project. Examples of risks identified include: A= Systems
collapse, B= Non-synchronization with other devices, C= Changes in technology, and D=
Resistance to change among the users
Once the risks have been identified an assessments would be done using the probability/impact
matrix in order to ranking to take place (Bryde, Broquetas & Volm , 2013). Table 2 shows the
probability/impact matrix.
Table 2 probability/impact matrix
Impact
High
Medium
low
Probability low medium high
From table 2 the ranking is summarized as follows: C, B, A, D
Ranking facilitates mitigation measures which are achieved using a risk management register
shown in Table 3. Risks affect project schedule (delays, contingencies, and lag times) strategies
should be put in place to ensure risks do not affect final outcome. Figure 3 (Gantt 2) shows
changes in the Gantt chart to reflect risk treatment strategy.
D A C
B

Running head: project plan 11
Table 3 Risk register
Rank Type of risk Risk definition Causal factor Mitigation
measures
Responsible
person
Probability Impact
1 Changes in
technology (C)
Technology is
dynamic affecting
systems
Technology makes the
current systems
obsolete
Development of
systems that can be
upgraded in future
Systems
developer
High High
2 Non-
synchronization
with other
devices (B)
The system new
system can fail to
perform with other
devices
If the software was not
developed to
accommodate other
devices utility
Proper testing with
other devices needs
to be done
System analyst high Medium
3 System
collapse (A)
The system can
collapse
If proper design and
execution was not done
well
Proper
development and
execution need to
be done
Project
management
team
Medium High
4 Resistance
from users (D)
They may refuse to
utilize the new
service
Lack of ownership of
the users
Poor trainings and
consultations
Project
management
team
Low high

Running head: project plan 12
Figure 3 (Gantt chart 3)
ID Task
Mode
Name Duration Start Finish Successors
0 Software Development 106.25 days?Sat 6/2/18 Tue 10/30/18
1 Scope 8 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 6/12/18 7
7 Analysis/Software
Requirements
6 days Wed 6/13/18 Wed 6/20/18 17,25
17 Design 30 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 8/13/18 25
25 Development 60 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 10/15/18 32,48
32 Testing 10 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 8/6/18 48
48 Training 6 days Mon 7/23/18 Tue 7/31/18 57,81
57 Documentation 14 days Mon 7/23/18 Fri 8/10/18 67
67 Pilot 5 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 7/9/18 74
74 Deployment 15 days Tue 10/9/18 Tue 10/30/18 81
81 Post Implementation
Review
4 days Tue 10/16/18 Mon 10/22/18 86
86 Project closure 2 days? Mon 10/22/18 Wed 10/24/18
6/20
8/6
7/31
10/ 22
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Qtr 2, 2018 Qtr 3, 2018 Qtr 4, 2018
The figure shows that certain time in milestones have been lagged behind in order to allow for contingency planning and creating more developments to ensure that consultation takes place. The pilot study is marked
red to indicate the risk potentiality of the deliverable.

Running head: project plan 13
5.0. Resources
The project budgeting will be based on the bottom up approach where estimates of various
requirements will be done to obtain the final budget for implementing the project (Chen,
2012). Table 4 shows a summary of the budget for the project.
Table 4 Bottom up budget
No. Items charges No of units (Unit/item) Close amounts
($)
1 Training materials Assorted approximations 400
3 Electricity - - 50.
4 Software rights purchase - - 2000
5 Computer Infrastructure Assorted Approximations 6500
6 Training fees 1000
7 Facilitation &implementation
fees
- - 2,000
10 Software rights licensing - - 3,000
11 Miscellaneous expenses - - 1500
12 Internet provider Assorted - 2500
Grand Totals 18950
The resources indicated in table 4 can be linked with work schedules as indicated in Gantt
chart-3

Running head: project plan 14
Gantt-chart-3
ID Task Name Duration Start Finish PredecessorsResource Names
0 Software
Development
106.25
days?
Sat 6/2/18 Tue 10/30/18
1 Scope 8 days Sat 6/2/18 Tue 6/12/18 Facilitation &implementation fees
7 Analysis/Software
Requirements
6 days Wed 6/13/18 Wed 6/20/18 1 Facilitation &implementation fees
,Software rights licensing ,Software
rights purchase17 Design 30 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 8/13/18 7 Computer Infrastructure ,Internet provider
25 Development 60 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 10/15/18 7,17 Internet provider ,Software rights licensing
32 Testing 10 days Mon 7/23/18 Mon 8/6/18 25 Electricity ,Software rights licensing
48 Training 6 days Mon 7/23/18 Tue 7/31/18 25,32 Training fees ,Training materials
57 Documentation 14 days Mon 7/23/18 Fri 8/10/18 48 Facilitation &implementation fees
67 Pilot 5 days Tue 7/3/18 Mon 7/9/18 57 Computer Infrastructure ,Internet provider
74 Deployment 15 days Tue 10/9/18 Tue 10/30/18 67 Facilitation &implementation fees
81 Post
Implementation
Review
4 days Tue 10/16/18 Mon 10/22/18 48,74 Facilitation &implementation fees
86 Project closure 2 days? Mon 10/22/18 Wed 10/24/18 81 Facilitation &implementation fees ,Miscellaneous expenses
6/ 20
8/ 6
7/ 31
10/22
Facilitation &i
Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov
Qtr 2, 2018 Qtr 3, 2018 Qtr 4, 2018

Running head: project plan 15
6.0. Communication plan
Communication plan is an important part of any project execution (Casanueva.C & Castro. J,
2013). It involves identifying the various stakeholders affected directly or directly by the project
outcome (Bourne, 2015). A stakeholder analysis involves a process in which assessments of all
stakeholders involved with the project is done and suitable mechanisms developed to manage
them through a stakeholder list or register. The various stakeholders identified to be affected by
the project include: project sponsor, users, system provider, and system analyst. Once the lists of
stakeholders have been identified with their specific needs, the mode of communication and
frequency of providing the message is also indicated. Table 5 shows a summary of the project
communication plan.

Running head: project plan 16
Table 5 communication plan
Project Audience Nature of
message
Mode of communicating Frequency of
communicating
Person responsible
Project owner The project
performance
and status
Holding formal meetings and reports Weekly basis and
real times
Project Leader
Project teams Project
performance
and progress
reports
Through formal & informal meetings,
reports, memos and reports
Daily, periodic,
occasionally
Team Leader and
project manager
System provider Project progress
and status
reports
Formal meetings Daily and
periodically
Project manager
Employees of the project
owners
Performance of
the project and
how it affects
operations
Formal meetings and reports Daily & real
times
Project manager and
team leaders
Business development
team
Project
performance
and progress
Informal meetings Occasionally Project manager
System analysts Project
performance
and status
Formal meetings and informal meetings Periodically Project manager

Running head: project plan 17
References
Bibliography
Andrew, F. (2014). Effects of risk management in projects. New York: Mc Graw Hill.
Bourne, L. (2015). Making projects work:effective stakeholder and communication management.
New Delhi: CRC press.
Bryde, Broquetas & Volm . (2013). The project benefits of building information modelling.
International Journal of project management, 31(7), 971-980.
Burke, R. (2013). Project management: planning and control tecniques. New Jersey: Wiley
publishers.
Cainelli & Marzetti. (2013). Production and financial linkages in inter-firm networks: structural
variety, risk sharing and resilience. Berlin: Long term economic development.
Casanueva.C & Castro. J. (2013). Informational networks and innovation in mature industrial
clusters. Journal of business research, 66(5), 603-613.
Chen, J. (2012). Procurement activities in projects. Bonville weekly review , 12-78.
Cleland, D. a. (2013). Project management handbook. New York, United States: Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Gido & Clements. (2014). Successful project management. Chicago: Nelson Education.
Heagney, J. (2016). Fundamentals of project management. AMACOM: American management
association .
Hedman, K. (2013). Project management professional exam study guide. Indianapolis: Wiley.
Kendrick, T. (2013). The project management tool kit: 100 tips and techniques for getting the job
done right. . AMACOM Div: American management Assn.

Running head: project plan 18