Analysis of Queensland Health Project using COBIT and COSO Frameworks

This report analyzes the Queensland Health project failure, focusing on the implementation of the COBIT and COSO frameworks. It examines the project's shortcomings, particularly in the context of its System Development Life Cycle (SDLC), specifically the planning and system analysis phases. The study highlights the failure's root cause: the unsupported LATTICE system used for payroll. The report also considers the roles of stakeholders, such as IBM and CorpTech, and their impact on the project's outcome. Furthermore, the report provides a set of recommendations, including the importance of rigorous project requirements analysis, timeline considerations, experienced leadership, selection of appropriate stakeholders, and transparent communication. The conclusion emphasizes the need for robust frameworks, maintenance, and controls for any future projects within Queensland.

Accounting
Information
Systems

Table of Contents
 Introduction
 COBIT and COSO Framework
 Implementation of Frameworks
 System Development Life Cycle
 Summary of Findings
 Recommendations
 Conclusion
 References

Introduction
 Queensland Health project failure is
analyzed to implement COBIT and
COSO framework.
 The first two phases, Planning and
System analysis, of System
Development Life Cycle is evaluated
from the Queensland Health study.

COBIT and COSO
Framework

Implementation of COBIT 5
Frameworks

Implementation of COSO
Frameworks 2013

System Development Life
Cycle
 Planning phase- The planning of project
was done incorrectly and it was
delayed and over budgeted.
 System Analysis and requirements- The
reasons of project failure was due to
inefficiency in LATTICE system.

Summary of Findings
 The main reason of the failure of
Queensland Health implementation
project was due to the unsupported
LATTICE system used for paying the
employees of Queensland Health.
 The IBM and CorpTech were the
stakeholders however they were not
effective to provide benefit to the
implementation of the new payroll
system

Recommendations
 Analysis of the project requirements
 Time consideration
 Experienced In-charge for the project
 Choosing the right stakeholder/partner
 Sharing of good and bad new

Conclusion
 Therefore, the above discussions
conclude that to implement a new
project or any type of project within
Queensland, they require accurate
frameworks, and maintenance and
controls.

References
 Alavi, H., 2017. Risk Management Techniques and their Application to Documentary Discrepancy
in Letter of Credit Transaction. European Journal of Economic Studies, (6), pp.4-17.
 Bartens, Y., De Haes, S., Lamoen, Y., Schulte, F. and Voss, S., 2015, January. On the way to a
minimum baseline in IT governance: using expert views for selective implementation of COBIT 5.
In System Sciences (HICSS), 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 4554-4563).
IEEE.
 Boyle, J.F., Gramling, A.A., Hermanson, D.R. and Hermanson, H.M., 2015. Audit committee
material weaknesses in smaller reporting companies: still struggling. Journal of Forensic &
Investigative Accounting, 7(1), pp.110-121.
 Fang, L.L., Valverde-Pérez, B., Damgaard, A., Plósz, B.G. and Rygaard, M., 2015. Life Cycle
Assessment as Decision Support Tool for Development of a Ressource Recovery Technology.
In 9th IWA Symposium on Systems Analysis and Integrated Assessment (Watermatex 2015).
 Islam, K., CH, A.R., Bilal, A.R. and Ilyas, M.U.H.A.M.M.A.D., 2017. Accounting Information Systems:
Traditions and Future Directions (By Using AIS in Traditional Organizations). The Journal of
Internet Banking and Commerce, 22(2), pp.1-13.
 Modi, H.S., Singh, N.K. and Chauhan, H.P., 2017. Comprehensive Analysis of Software
Development Life Cycle Models.

THANK YOU