S.

No Template Name
1 Approach Alternatives and Recommendation
2 Review comment incorporated
1.0
Version Number Remarks
1.0 Initial version
1.0 Baselined
1.0
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Overview
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation
Overview
This document may be used to facilitate and document the results of formal decision analysis. It is also
useful for less critical decisions as it prompts the documentation of the alternatives and the criteria used
to make the selection.
If following formal decision analysis, refer to the Decision Analysis and Recommendation procedure and
the Decision Analysis and Resolution Guidelines in EDGE. The procedure contains the steps for formal
decision analysis. The guidelines will aid in determining if formal decision analysis is required. However,
it does not limit the use of decision analysis and resolution outside the guidelines stated.
Most fields are required for formal decision analysis, as indicated in the Help Text. For convenience the
cells that should not be altered have been locked and the worksheet has been protected. This level of
protection will not allow new rows to be added or existing rows to be deleted. To make these or other
changes, the sheet can be unprotected without a password by selecting the Protection option from the
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2475 of 2481
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Appr Alt Recom
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation
Save Date:
Project:
Issue Owner
Decision Analysis Team
Decision Analysis Meeting(s)
Meeting
Date
23/03/2009
Decision Analysis Audience & Communications
Overview
Solution Criteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Business Requirements (Goals and Objectives)
Delivery wanted to have a fixed bid management system with more dyanamic and scalable rather being revenue regonication tool.
Team collected the requirement and compared with existing tool. Decision to be taken, whether we need to go for new
development or Enhance the existing tool to match the requirement.
Meeting Description Meeting Location
Dyanamic and Scalable tool
Minimal code changes
Project Progress Tracking
Easy integration with other tools
Comparision & Brainstroming Session Tele
APPs and ITO Delivery, finance , CIO DH & DL
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2476 of 2481
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Appr Alt Recom
1.
2.
3.
4.
Solution Criteria Ranking
Criteria
Number
Brief Criteria
Description
Reqmt 1 Reqmt 2 Reqmt 3 Reqmt 4 Rank
1
Dyanamic and
Scalable tool
4 2 2 1 9
2
Minimal code
changes
0 1 1 4 6
3
Project Progress
Tracking
4 1 1 1 7
4
Easy integration with
other tools
1 1 1 4 7
5 0 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 0 0 0
Degree of Variance
4
3
2
1
0
Alternative Solutions
Almost Meets
Somewhat Meets
Does Not Meet
FINANCE:
Effort estimation in terms of pricing
Forecast Report
SALES:
Revenue recognition based on percentage of work completed
Inputs entered by PM has to be reflected in the project progress reports
Allow changes on a project that has been created / an IRF has already been raised
Design Changes should be minimal
Description
Exceeds
Meets
DELIVERY:
Revenue recognition to be based on the milestones
Project progress tracker for all the projects
Multiple baseline facility and ability to track on all baselines
Profitability reports (Gross Margins) to be provided
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2477 of 2481
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Appr Alt Recom
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Evaluation Method
1.
2.
Evaluation of Alternatives
Rank Alt. 1 Alt. 2 Alt. 3 Alt. 4
Score 1 4
9 Weighted Score 9 36 0 0
Score 1 3
6 Weighted Score 9 27 0 0
Score 1 3
7 Weighted Score 9 27 0 0
Score 2 2
7 Weighted Score 18 18 0 0
Score
0 Weighted Score 0 0 0 0
Minimal code changes
Easy integration with other tools
Project Progress Tracking
0
Solution Criteria
Dyanamic and Scalable tool
Pros: Finance requirement is already available
Cons: Project Progress Tracking, control reports need to be coding, Code changes will be more
Cons:
Ranking
Enhancing existing tool
Cons: Finance functionality to be taken care.
Pros: Project Prggress Tracking control reports are already available. Code changes will be more
Pros:
New development
Pros:
Cons:
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2478 of 2481
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Appr Alt Recom
Score
0 Weighted Score 0 0 0 0
Score
0
Weighted Score
0 0 0 0
Total 45 108 0 0
Degree of Variance
4
3
2
1
0
Almost Meets
Somewhat Meets
Does Not Meet
Meets
0
Description
Exceeds
0
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2479 of 2481
Approach Alternatives and Recommendation EDS Internal Appr Alt Recom
Recommendation
Risks
Communicated to: On:
Date
Agreement
This Approach Alternatives and Recommendation has been reviewed and agreed to by:
Name: Date:
Name: Date:
Degree of reusing the existing components to fit into the new architecture
DH, DM, Stakeholders,
Enhancing existing tool is the Optimal solution. Deck prepared and presented to All leadership team in kick off meeting.
Availability of resources with the new skill set
230253737.xls.ms_office
Template Version 1.2 - Approved 17 August 2009
Copyright 2009 EDS, an HP Company. All rights reserved.
Page 2480 of 2481
MphasiS Internal
Copyright 2009 MphasiS an EDS Company . All rights Reserved.