Ashford INF 620 Week 6 Final Paper – Business management homework help

Are you stressed by poor grades and tight deadlines? We have your back. We can do this or a different assignment for you at an affordable price. Use customdissertations.org writing services to score better and meet your deadlines.


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper

 

Final Paper

 

The final paper will demonstrate the students’ ability to assimilate, synthesize, and apply the concepts of management information systems; specifically systems analysis, system design, system development, and systems maintenance. The video case is a factual presentation of McGraw-Hill/Irwin’s PRIMIS Information System. 

Focus of the Final Paper

You will need to review the case questions prior to watching McGraw-Hill MIS Video Case: Primis. You may need to install QuickTime or another media player to watch the videos.

You must use critical thinking skills to assimilate and synthesize course concepts that apply to the case questions below. Specific concepts and vocabulary from the course must be integrated into your responses, demonstrating a clear understanding of management information systems vernacular as it applies to each case question.

Final Paper Structure

Analysis

 

  1. Describe the kinds of questions McGraw-Hill might have asked as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea. Be sure to address the needs of the organization, end users (sales representatives, faculty, and students), IT specialists, and the groups involved in producing the finished custom books. 
  2. Assess the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time. Justify why, or why not.

 

Design

 

  1. Process engineering is the design of business processes to achieve competitive advantage in cost, quality, speed, and service.
  2. Evaluate which advantages were driving the development of the Primis system for McGraw-Hill. 
  3. Business customers must perceive that products/services are solutions to their problems. Describe how the Primis system design kept this objective in mind.

 

System Development

 

  1. Assess whether the prototyping would have helped the Primis team. Justify why or why not. 
  2. Conclude why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to back-end systems at McGraw-Hill. 
  3. If you were the project manager for Primis, explain and defend what would you have done differently.

 

Maintenance

 

  1. Part of system maintenance is managing the growing volume of content in the Primis database. Explain the criteria you might use for determining content to add to the database. Since many print textbooks are revised every few years, describe how this process would affect contents in the Primis database.

 

Writing the Final Paper

The Final Paper:

 

  1. Must be 10- to- 12 double-spaced pages in length (not including the title and reference pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  2. Must include a title page with the following:
    1. Title of paper
    2. Student’s name
    3. Course name and number
    4. Instructor’s name
    5. Date submitted
  3. Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.
  4. Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.
  5. Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.
  6. Must use at least three scholarly sources, including a minimum of one from the Ashford University Library, in addition to the text.
  7. Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  8. Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

 

Carefully review the Grading Rubric for the criteria that will be used to evaluate your assignment.

 

Reference:

 

O’Brien, J.A. & Marakas, G.M. (2011). Management Information Systems (10th ed.). New

 

York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin. ISBN: 978-0-07-337681-3

 

 

 

Grading Rubric

 

Total Possible Score: 25.00

 

Describes the Kinds of Questions McGraw-Hill Might Have Asked as Part of Determining the Feasibility of the Primis Idea

 

Total: 2.00

 

Distinguished – Completely describes the kinds of questions that McGraw-Hill might ask as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea and thoroughly addresses the needs of the organization, end users, IT specialists, and the groups involved in producing the finished custom books.

 

Proficient – Describes the kinds of questions that McGraw-Hill might ask as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea and addresses the needs of the organization, end users, IT specialists, and the groups involved in producing the finished custom books. Minor details are missing.

 

Basic – Partially describes the kinds of questions that McGraw-Hill might ask as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea and somewhat addresses the needs of the organization, end users, IT specialists, and the groups involved in producing the finished custom books. Relevant details are missing.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to describe the kinds of questions that McGraw-Hill might ask as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea; however, may not address the needs of the organization, end users, IT specialists, and the groups involved in producing the finished custom books and significant details are missing.

 

Non-Performance – The description of the kinds of questions that McGraw-Hill might ask as part of determining the feasibility of the Primis idea is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Assesses the Likelihood of Implementing the System Given the Information and Justifies Why, Or Why Not

 

Total: 2.00

 

Distinguished – Thoroughly assesses the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time and presents a well-crafted, logical justification.

 

Proficient – Assesses the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time and presents a justification. The assessment or the justification is slightly underdeveloped.

 

Basic – Partially assesses the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time and presents a limited justification. The assessment or justification is underdeveloped.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to assess the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time and present a justification; however, the assessment and the justification are significantly underdeveloped.

 

Non-Performance – The assessment of the likelihood of implementing the system given the information the team had at the time and the justification are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Evaluates Which Advantages Were Driving the Development of the Primis System for McGraw-Hill

 

Total: 2.50

 

Distinguished – Provides a comprehensive evaluation of which advantages were driving the development of the Primis system for McGraw-Hill. Effectively applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional professional or scholarly sources.

 

Proficient – Provides an evaluation of which advantages were driving the development of the Primis system for McGraw-Hill. Applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional professional or scholarly sources, but minor details are missing.

 

Basic – Provides a limited evaluation of which advantages were driving the development of the Primis system for McGraw-Hill. Partially applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional professional or scholarly sources, and relevant details are missing.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to provide an evaluation of which advantages were driving the development of the Primis system for McGraw-Hill; however, vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional professional or scholarly sources are not applied, and significant details are missing.

 

Non-Performance – The evaluation of which advantages were driving the development of the Primis for McGraw-Hill is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Describes How the Primis System Design Managed Customer Perceptions

 

Total: 3.00

 

Distinguished – Thoroughly describes how the Primis system design managed customer perceptions that products or services are solutions to their problems.

 

Proficient – Describes how the Primis system design managed customer perceptions that products or services are solutions to their problems. Minor details are missing.

 

Basic – Vaguely describes how the Primis system design managed customer perceptions that products or services are solutions to their problems. Relevant details are missing.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to describe how the Primis system design managed customer perceptions that products or services are solutions to their problems; however, significant details are missing.

 

Non-Performance – The description of how the Primis system design managed customer perceptions that products/services are solutions to their problems is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Assesses Whether the Prototyping Would Have Helped the Primis Team and Justifies Why Or Why Not

 

Total: 2.50

 

Distinguished – Provides an accurate and comprehensive assessment of whether prototyping would have helped the Primis team and crafts an effective justification that supports the assessment.

 

Proficient – Provides an assessment of whether prototyping would have helped the Primis team and crafts a justification that supports the assessment. Minor details from the assessment or justification are either missing or inaccurate.

 

Basic – Provides a partial assessment of whether prototyping would have helped the Primis team and crafts a limited justification that supports the assessment. Relevant details from the assessment or justification are missing and/or inaccurate.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to provide an assessment of whether prototyping would have helped the Primis team and craft a justification that supports the assessment; however, significant details from the assessment and justification are missing and inaccurate.

 

Non-Performance – The assessment of whether prototyping would have helped the Primis team and the justification for the response are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Concludes Why It Was Important to Consider the Relationship of Primis to Back-End Systems at McGraw-Hill

 

Total: 2.50

 

Distinguished – Offers a comprehensive conclusion of why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to other back-end systems at McGraw-Hill. Effectively applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional scholarly or professional sources.

 

Proficient – Offers a conclusion of why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to other back-end systems at McGraw-Hill. Applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional scholarly or professional sources, but minor details are missing.

 

Basic – Offers a partial conclusion of why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to other back-end systems at McGraw-Hill. Somewhat applies vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional scholarly or professional sources, and relevant details are missing.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to offer a conclusion of why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to other back-end systems at McGraw-Hill; however, vocabulary and course concepts from the text and/or additional scholarly or professional sources are not applied, and significant details are missing.

 

Non-Performance – The conclusion of why it was important to consider the relationship of Primis to other bank-end systems at McGraw-Hill is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Explains and Defends What One Would Have Been Done Differently as the Project Manager for Primis

 

Total: 3.00

 

Distinguished – Clearly and comprehensively explains and defends what would have been done differently as the project manager for Primis.

 

Proficient – Explains and defends what would have been done differently as the project manager for Primis. The explanation or defense is either unclear or missing minor details.

 

Basic – Vaguely explains and defends what would have been done differently as the project manager for Primis. The explanation or defense is unclear and/or missing relevant details.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to explain and defend what would been have done differently as the project manager for Primis; however, the explanation and defense are unclear, and significant details are missing.

 

Non-Performance – The explanation and defense of what would have been done differently as the project manager for Primis are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Explains Criteria For Determining Content to Add to the Database and Describes How Revising Textbooks Every Few Years Would Affect Contents in the Primis Database

 

Total: 2.50

 

Distinguished – Thoroughly explains the criteria for determining content to add to the database and clearly describes how revising textbooks every few years would affect the contents in the Primis database.

 

Proficient – Explains the criteria for determining content to add to the database and describes how revising textbooks every few years would affect the contents in the Primis database. The explanation or description is unclear or missing minor elements.

 

Basic – Briefly explains the criteria for determining content to add to the database and/or minimally describes how revising textbooks every few years would affect the contents in the Primis database. The explanation or description is unclear and/or missing relevant elements.

 

Below Expectations – Attempts to explain the criteria for determining content to add to the database and describe how revising textbooks every few years would affect the contents in the Primis database; however, the explanation and description are unclear and missing significant elements.

 

Non-Performance – The explanation of the criteria for determining content to add to the database and the description of how revising textbooks every few years would affect the contents in the Primis database are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Organization: Introduction, Thesis Statement and Conclusion

 

Total: 1.50

 

Distinguished – The paper is logically organized with a well-written introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion.

 

Proficient – The paper is logically organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. One of these requires improvement.

 

Basic – The paper is organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. One or more of the introduction, thesis statement, and/or conclusion require improvement.

 

Below Expectations – The paper is loosely organized with an introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion. The introduction, thesis statement, and/or conclusion require much improvement.

 

Non-Performance – The introduction, thesis statement, and conclusion are either nonexistent or lack the components described in the assignment instructions.

 

 

 

Creative Thinking: Solving Problems

 

Total: 0.50

 

Distinguished – Develops a logical, consistent plan to solve a problem, identifies consequences of the solution, and can clearly communicate the reason for choosing the solution.

 

Proficient – Carefully chooses among alternatives, and develops a logical, consistent approach to problem solving.

 

Basic – Takes into account and eliminates less acceptable approaches to problem solving.

 

Below Expectations – Takes into account a single approach and uses the approach to problem solving.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

Critical Thinking: Explanation of Issues

 

Total: 0.25

 

Distinguished – Clearly and comprehensively explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering all relevant information necessary for a full understanding.

 

Proficient – Clearly explains in detail the issue to be considered, delivering enough relevant information for an adequate understanding.

 

Basic – Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, delivering minimal information for a basic understanding.

 

Below Expectations – Briefly recognizes the issue to be considered, but may not deliver additional information necessary for a basic understanding.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

Integrative Learning: Connections to Discipline

 

Total: 0.25

 

Distinguished – Autonomously synthesizes or draws conclusions by combining examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.

 

Proficient – Autonomously correlates examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.

 

Basic – Attempts to correlate examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.

 

Below Expectations – When prompted, displays inconsistent examples, facts, or theories from multiple disciplines.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics

 

Total: 0.63

 

Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors, and is very easy to understand.

 

Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors, and is mostly easy to understand.

 

Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors, which may slightly distract the reader.

 

Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors, which distract the reader.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

APA Formatting

 

Total: 0.63

 

Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

 

Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.

 

Basic – Exhibits basic knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.

 

Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

Page Requirement

 

Total: 0.62

 

Distinguished – The length of the paper is equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.

 

Proficient – The length of the paper is nearly equivalent to the required number of correctly formatted pages.

 

Basic – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least three quarters of the required number of correctly formatted pages.

 

Below Expectations – The length of the paper is equivalent to at least one half of the required number of correctly formatted pages. 

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

 

 

 

Resource Requirement

 

Total: 0.62

 

Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

 

Proficient – Uses required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

 

Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.

 

Below Expectations – Uses inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.

 

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

NOTE: PLEASE DO ALL 100% ORIGINAL WORK, NO REUSED PAPERS, NO RECYCLED PAPERS. MY INSTRUCTOR IN THIS CLASS HAS A STRICK PLAGARISM POLICY.

We offer CUSTOM-WRITTEN, CONFIDENTIAL, ORIGINAL, and PRIVATE writing services. Kindly click on the ORDER NOW button to receive an A++ paper from our masters- and PhD writers.

Get a 10% discount on your order using the following coupon code SAVE10


Order a Similar Paper Order a Different Paper