Rephrase Tufs
Running head: CASE STUDY ABOUT TUFS 1
CASE STUDY ABOUT TUFS 2
Should Northern have invested in TUFS?
The Northern insurance company investment in the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) is controversial. The company had identified the potential of the system to have the positive impact of the anticipated benefits, but it failed to have the proper plan of implementing the idea. The Northern insurance company should not have had the hurry in the investing in the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) with the failure to plan to get the system deployment within the company to meet the anticipated benefits. The company was not ready to invest in the system and push to get the undertaking of projects within the company got the implementation of an application that saw the company make some loses. The idea of getting to develop or rather have an investment should get the concerned group through the undertaking of the initiative to assess the business opportunity for all articulated areas that the investment project will get to address and have the major effect. The investment in the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) would have had the Northern insurance company stand the chance of boosting the company underwriting process and the further way of the acquisition of the e-business capabilities. The Northern Insurance Company current system takes to provide the same mentioned anticipated actions to get to benefit from the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS). From the basis of operations, the Northern insurance company staff takes to apply still the current system for the underwriting and could only apply the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) for clarification purposes. It gets to mean that the features of the TUFS are similar to the capabilities of the current system. It then projects out that the Northern insurance company should not have had the intention to invest in the application because the projected benefits were not defined and on the implementation of the application, it gets shown out clearly how useless the system is to the company. The phase of analysis could have seen the through conduct of feasibility relating to the company requirements and the capabilities of the system to provide the better understanding of identifying the appropriate system to get invested (Ardagna, 2012).
What Went Wrong With The TUFS Investment And What Can Be Done To Prevent These Problems In The Future?
The TUFS investment failed to show the potential opportunity for the Northern insurance company to invest as of the reasons from the beginning of the understanding of the case, the failure to define the requirements for the company. There was no feasibility undertaken for identification of the requirements that gets to define the issues that the system to get invested was to address. The project development team got too many assumptions relating to the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) and the intended benefit of the system to the company. The clear definition of requirements provides a clear understanding of the development team to design the correct system of which the company project team failed to get the task at home (Sage, & Rouse, 2009).
During the implementation of the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS), the development team terribly failed to involve the stakeholders in the development process. It should get understood that stakeholder’s participation in the system development is crucial as they are the end decision makers within the company and furthermore are the financier of the project. They could have had the contribution to the determination of the requirements, and they could be willing to continue with the funding till the system gets shaped.
The inadequacy of the technical operation abilities and experience plus the skills of the staff had the failure to apply the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) within the company. The employees had no motivation to the use of the system since they had less knowledge and the understanding of the system operation. During the implementation of the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS), there was no training conducted to have the staff get to learn on the application of the system, and this got the staff turning down the usage of the application.
The unrealistic expectation definition and the failure of involving the essential parties in the development and implementation of the application within the company were another prominent reason for the failure of the system. The staff thought the system was to ease their work instead the application was complicated only applied for the clarification of the task undertaken by the current system. The failure to involve the essential parties got the staff to lack the knowledge of the application of the system and the errors related to the system were to be human-oriented. The system might meet the available expectations as per its capability, and the exaggerations get the management in doubt of the system meeting the defined capabilities.
The mitigation should get the conduct training for the staff and the entire company stakeholders about the benefits of the system to have the support and the positive attitude towards the use of the application. According to Pieterse (2012), the company should get to involve the stakeholders in all activities relating to the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS) investment project. The changing of the company management should be the other option in the case of the current failing to show the competency. Also, the company should get to fill the loops within the system by revisiting and working on the steps skipped during the development of the application.
What Does Northern Need to Do to Realize the Benefits That get Projected For TUFS?
The Northern Company should get to have the involvement of the application users in the implementation of the system. The process should get the conduct of training to the employees to have the better understanding and the skills plus the experience of using the system. The company should once more get to have the collaboration from the all respective departments within the company promotion to the application of the system, and this should also get to involve the shift to the system that the rely on the current system. The modules of the system should get defined clearly for the clear understanding of the capabilities that the system can get to meet. The expectations of the systems should get set accordingly, and a proper plan should get defined for the implementation of the system within the company. The success will depend on the application of the professional techniques of implementing the system and to some extend the technical support provision.
How Can They Measure These Benefits?
The measure of the benefits can get defined by the end user satisfaction to the application of the system for the undertaking of the defined tasks. The assessment of the system application relation skills and attitude by the audits of the end users, employees, and other stakeholder gets to give the measuring framework of the system benefits (Kellyne, 2006). The system impact to the overall company system will get to define the success and the failure of it within the company. The growth in the company business operations provides evidence to the positive impact of the system on the company, and this can get used as a measure of benefits related to the Technical Underwriting Financial System (TUFS). Also, the consideration of the system end user adoption may act as a primary system benefits measures. Furthermore, the other related measures may be the delivery of quality service, the meeting of the Northern insurance company governance criteria. (Remenyi, Money, Bannister, & Remenyi, 2007).
Ardagna, C. A. (2012). Business system management and engineering: From open issues to applications. Berlin: Springer.
http://www.ittoolkit.com/how-to-it/operations/end-user-training.html
Kellyne, W. (2006). The Learning Impact Measurement Framework (Nov 06). Media Tec Publishing Inc.
Pieterse, M.; (2012), Critical success factors in information technology projects; UJ Library and Information Centre.
Remenyi, D., Money, A. H., Bannister, F., & Remenyi, D. (2007). The effective measurement and management of ICT costs and benefits. Oxford: CIMA.
Sage, A. P., & Rouse, W. B. (2009). Handbook of systems engineering and management. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons.
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? Order now!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!
