Information Systems for Business Managers
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Waterfall Vs Agile Projects
PROJECT COST MANAGEMENT A study of Waterfall Model vs Agile Model In submission for CI6204 SOFTWARE PROJECT MANAGEMENT AY 17/18 Sem 1 Submitted by: CHENG Shuyun (G1701268F) NAH Zheng Xiang, Philson (G1701513D) XUE Fei (G1701182G) Abstract In today’s competitive business environment, organizations require IT systems that constantly evolve to meet their ever-changing requirements. This has led many organizations to favor Agile Models over traditional Waterfall Models for software development. However, there appears to be a lack of understanding of how conventional PMBOK processes apply to these Agile Models. In this paper, we have analyzed the differences in Project Cost Management processes between Waterfall and Agile models, and found them to have fundamentally different priorities. The Waterfall Model aims to complete all the specified functionalities, while the Agile Model works on a ROI maximization approach. We then used the FBI Sentinel case study to examine the practical implications of the different approaches. In practice, the Waterfall Model’s sequential approach to development lead to greater project rigidity and inflexible timelines, while the Agile Model allowed for re-prioritization of requirements to deliver the features that matter most to users. Further analysis of the case study allowed us to tease out 3 major benefits of the Agile Model for Project Cost Management, namely – allowance for change, focus on business value, and predictable costs. 1. Introduction Software development methodologies are constantly evolving due to changing technologies and new demands from users. Today’s dynamic business environment has given rise to emergent organizations that continuously adapt their structures, strategies, and policies to suit new environments (Truex, Baskerville, & Klein, 1999). -
Securities Market Structure and Regulation
INTRODUCTION In beginning this symposium on the structure and regulation of the securities markets, I’m sure we will all keep in mind George Santayana’s caution that: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”1 Although enormous changes have taken place over the past few decades, we keep hearing echoes of the past. When the London Stock Exchange (LSE) switched from floor-based to electronic trading exactly twenty years ago, it decided that the transformation might be too traumatic for its members, so it adopted a hybrid market—an electronic market combined with traditional floor trading. The hybrid market lasted just over four months, at which time the LSE closed its floor for trading in equities. Will the New York Stock Exchange’s experience with its new hybrid market be the same or different? The Consolidated Limited Order Book (CLOB), which I expect will be discussed today, was first proposed to the SEC thirty years ago by Professor Peake, one of today’s speakers, in 1976, a year after Congress told the SEC to create a national market system. The CLOB, which would execute investors’ orders electronically under a rule of time and price priority, seemed to him the best way to assure best execution of investors’ orders throughout the national market system. In 1978, the SEC told the exchanges to create a CLOB. A year later the Commission had second thoughts: it feared that a CLOB would lead to the elimination of exchange trading floors by inexorably forcing all trading into a fully automated trading system. -
Stock Exchanges at the Crossroads
Fordham Law Review Volume 74 Issue 5 Article 2 2006 Stock Exchanges at the Crossroads Andreas M. Fleckner Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Andreas M. Fleckner, Stock Exchanges at the Crossroads, 74 Fordham L. Rev. 2541 (2006). Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol74/iss5/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Fordham Law Review by an authorized editor of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Stock Exchanges at the Crossroads Cover Page Footnote [email protected]. For very helpful discussions, suggestions, and general critique, I am grateful to Howell E. Jackson as well as to Stavros Gkantinis, Apostolos Gkoutzinis, and Noah D. Levin. The normal disclaimers apply. An earlier version of this Article has been a discussion paper of the John M. Olin Center's Program on Corporate Governance, Working Papers, http://www.law.harvard.edu/programs/ olin_center/corporate_governance/papers.htm (last visited Mar. 6, 2005). This article is available in Fordham Law Review: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/flr/vol74/iss5/2 ARTICLES STOCK EXCHANGES AT THE CROSSROADS Andreas M Fleckner* INTRODUCTION Nemo iudex in sua causa-No one shall judge his own cause. Ancient Rome adhered to this principle,' the greatest writers emphasized it, 2 and the Founding Fathers contemplated it in the early days of the republic: "No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause; because his interest would '3 certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity. -
Temple Law Review Articles
TEMPLE LAW REVIEW © TEMPLE UNIVERSITY OF THE COMMONWEALTH SYSTEM OF HIGHER EDUCATION VOL. 86 NO. 2 WINTER 2014 ARTICLES CASH OF THE TITANS: ARBITRATING CHALLENGES TO EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION Kenneth R. Davis* I. INTRODUCTION It is disturbing how brazenly corporate executives have grabbed ever-bigger compensation packages.1 The facts are stunning. Steve Jobs’s successor at Apple, Tim Cook, pulled in more compensation in 2011 than any other CEO in the United States.2 The figure came to a whopping $378 million, a price tag that must have eaten up the profits from quite a few iPad sales.3 Cook’s pay cut in 2012 to a mere $4.2 million probably did not alarm him since the value of his 2011 stock grants had rocketed to $510 million.4 Larry Ellison, CEO of Oracle, might have felt snubbed when his * Professor of Law and Ethics, Fordham University Graduate School of Business; J.D., University of Toledo, School of Law, 1977; M.A., University of California, Long Beach, 1971; B.A., State University of New York at Binghamton, 1969. My thanks to Professor Brent Horton for his insightful comments, and to Jean, my wife, a magician of a librarian, who, with the tap of her finger, can transform murky databases into fonts of illumination. 1. Although this Article focuses primarily on CEO compensation, the pay levels of other high-ranking managers are also often inflated and are therefore a matter of concern. See infra Part II.C.1 for a discussion of In re The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. Shareholder Litigation, where the compensation of managers was tied to a percentage of revenues. -
The FBI's Counterterrorism Program
U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation Report to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States: The FBI’s Counterterrorism Program Since September 2001 April 14, 2004 Report to The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States The FBI’s Counterterrorism Program Since September 2001 TABLETABLE OF OFCONTENTS CONTENTS I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................11 II FBI ORGANIZATIONAL CHART................................................. 3 III TIMELINE OF SIGNIFICANT REFORMS AND INITIATIVES SINCE 9/11/01.......................................................... 4 IV INTRODUCTION......................................................................................66 V PRIORITIZATION....................................................................................77 The New Priorities.........................................................................................77 1 Protect the United States from Terrorist Attack..........................................77 2 Protect the United States Against Foreign Intelligence Operations and Espionage........................................................................................77 3 Protect the United States Against Cyber-based Attacks and High-Technology Crimes..................................................................88 4 Combat Public Corruption at all Levels.......................................................88 5 Protect Civil Rights......................................................................................88 -
A Business Lawyer's Bibliography: Books Every Dealmaker Should Read
585 A Business Lawyer’s Bibliography: Books Every Dealmaker Should Read Robert C. Illig Introduction There exists today in America’s libraries and bookstores a superb if underappreciated resource for those interested in teaching or learning about business law. Academic historians and contemporary financial journalists have amassed a huge and varied collection of books that tell the story of how, why and for whom our modern business world operates. For those not currently on the front line of legal practice, these books offer a quick and meaningful way in. They help the reader obtain something not included in the typical three-year tour of the law school classroom—a sense of the context of our practice. Although the typical law school curriculum places an appropriately heavy emphasis on theory and doctrine, the importance of a solid grounding in context should not be underestimated. The best business lawyers provide not only legal analysis and deal execution. We offer wisdom and counsel. When we cast ourselves in the role of technocrats, as Ronald Gilson would have us do, we allow our advice to be defined downward and ultimately commoditized.1 Yet the best of us strive to be much more than legal engineers, and our advice much more than a mere commodity. When we master context, we rise to the level of counselors—purveyors of judgment, caution and insight. The question, then, for young attorneys or those who lack experience in a particular field is how best to attain the prudence and judgment that are the promise of our profession. For some, insight is gained through youthful immersion in a family business or other enterprise or experience. -
Download FINAL 9-11 Review Commission Report
UNCLASSIFIED (U) The FBI: Protecting the Homeland in the 21st Century (U) Report of the Congressionally-directed (U) 9/11 Review Commission To (U) The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation By (U) Commissioners Bruce Hoffman Edwin Meese III Timothy J. Roemer (U) March 2015 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED 1 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED (U) TABLE OF CONTENTS (U) Introduction: The 9/11 Review Commission…..……….………........ p. 3 (U) Chapter I: Baseline: The FBI Today…………………………….. p. 15 (U) Chapter II: The Sum of Five Cases………………….……………. p. 38 (U) Chapter III: Anticipating New Threats and Missions…………....... p. 53 (U) Chapter IV: Collaboration and Information Sharing………………. p. 73 (U) Chapter V: New Information Related to the 9/11 Attacks………… p. 100 (U) Key Findings and Recommendations…………………………………. p. 108 (U) Conclusion: ………………………………………………………… p. 118 (U) Appendix A: Briefs Provided by FBI Headquarters’ Divisions.…..… p. 119 (U) Appendix B: Interviews Conducted…………………………………. p. 121 (U) Appendix C: Select FBI Intelligence Program Developments…….… p. 122 (U) Appendix D: Acronyms……………………………………………… p. 124 2 UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED (U) INTRODUCTION THE FBI 9/11 REVIEW COMMISSION (U) The FBI 9/11 Review Commission was established in January 2014 pursuant to a congressional mandate.1 The United States Congress directed the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI, or the “Bureau”) to create a commission with the expertise and scope to conduct a “comprehensive external review of the implementation of the recommendations related to the FBI that were proposed by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (commonly known as the 9/11 Commission).”2 The Review Commission was tasked specifically to report on: 1. -
Why Software Fails By: Robert N
Sponsored By Why Software Fails By: Robert N. Charette Have you heard the one about the disappearing warehouse? One day, it vanished—not from physical view, but from the watchful eyes of a well-known retailer's automated distribution system. A software glitch had somehow erased the warehouse's existence, so that goods destined for the warehouse were rerouted elsewhere, while goods at the warehouse languished. Because the company was in financial trouble and had been shuttering other warehouses to save money, the employees at the "missing" warehouse kept quiet. For three years, nothing arrived or left. Employees were still getting their paychecks, however, because a different computer system handled the payroll. When the software glitch finally came to light, the merchandise in the warehouse was sold off, and upper management told employees to say nothing about the episode. This story has been floating around the information technology industry for 20-some years. It's probably apocryphal, but for those of us in the business, it's entirely plausible. Why? Because episodes like this happen all the time. Last October, for instance, the giant British food retailer J Sainsbury PLC had to write off its US $526 million investment in an automated supply-chain management system. It seems that merchandise was stuck in the company's depots and warehouses and was not getting through to many of its stores. Sainsbury was forced to hire about 3000 additional clerks to stock its shelves manually [see photo, "Market Crash"] This is only one of the latest in a long, dismal history of IT projects gone awry [see table, "Software Hall of Shame" for other notable fiascoes]. -
Testimony of Dr
TESTIMONY OF DR http://hsgac-amend.senate.gov/old_site/050702jaedicke.htm STATEMENT OF DR. ROBERT K. JAEDICKE Before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations The Committee on Government Affairs U.S. Senate May 7, 2002 Chairman Levin, Senator Collins, and Members of the Subcommittee. Good morning, and thank you for the opportunity to address the Subcommittee. My name is Robert Jaedicke. I served as the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of Enron Corporation. As part of an overall restructuring of the Board, I recently resigned as a director, having served since the mid-1980s. Let me briefly tell you about my background. I joined the faculty of the Stanford Graduate School of Business in 1961. I served as Dean of the Business School from 1983 until 1990. At that time, I returned to the faculty of the Business School, and retired in 1992. I. THE AUDIT COMMITTEE OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS Throughout my tenure as Chairman of the Enron Board’s Audit Committee, I was committed to ensuring that it was an effective and actively functioning body. Over the last few years, we undertook to review and strengthen our already vigorous control systems. In 1999, we began a number of initiatives to ensure that we remained a “best practices” Audit Committee. Throughout 2000 and into 2001, our Committee worked with Arthur Andersen to make certain we complied with the recommendations of the Securities and Exchange Commission, the New York Stock Exchange, and the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees. That effort culminated in February 2001, when the Audit Committee drafted a new charter that was approved by the full Board. -
Tech Startups Moving to NYC Out-Of-Town Broker Wave of Digital Companies from Across U.S
20120514-NEWS--0001-NAT-CCI-CN_-- 5/11/2012 7:30 PM Page 1 INSIDE Jamie Dimon’s TOP STORIES $2 billion ‘oops!’ Brooklyn Brewery In the taps new leaders Markets PAGE 2 ® Page 6 VOL. XXVIII, NO. 20 WWW.CRAINSNEWYORK.COM MAY 14-20, 2012 PRICE: $3.00 Tech startups moving to NYC Out-of-town broker Wave of digital companies from across U.S. speed with which we’re able to de- vate investors, and supported with hits a local wall velop products will be accelerated.” incubator labs and other shared PAGE 2 sees Big Apple as base for next-stage growth For decades, New York work spaces, some of them has been known as the sponsored by the city.There’s time to head for the big city. And town companies left when also proximity to hometown Pearson’s test flubs BY MATTHEW FLAMM $2.8B there wasn’t any question which one. they needed to expand and REVENUES for industries like media, adver- could cost it dearly “Our clients are in New York,” couldn’t afford the higher software firm tising, fashion and finance— It took three years and $1 million for said Alex White,chief executive and salaries and rent. But a re- Infor, which all going through digital dis- PAGE 4 moves its HQ the founders of Next Big Sound to co-founder of Next Big Sound, versal is taking place here in June ruptions—and a growing build their company out of an incu- which analyzes data for the music among tech firms:Compa- pool of engineers, as well as Enrollments are up bator lab in Boulder, Colo. -
America's America's
FEATURING: DEALS OF THEYEAR; THE 2004 DERIVATIVES LEADERS JANUARY 2004 TEACHERS’ BET Allison readies his bold lesson plan for TIAA-CREF Plus: BAER MARKET POWER PLAYER Swiss banks are rolling in riches Can Galateri restore Mediobanca’s glow? GROWING PAINS Access doesn’t spell success for EU states COMCAST CEO BRIAN ROBERTS Why do John Chambers, AMERICA’S GeorgeDavid, Michael Dell, Richard Kovacevich, Reuben Mark, Henry McKinnell, BEST Lee Raymond, Dennis Reilley and BrianRoberts all click with investors? See inside CEOS for our exclusive rankings COVERBAND STORYTK INSTITUTIONAL INVESTOR MONTH 2003 HeadTHE univers 55 65/70pt BESTDeck Agaramomd plain 19/21ptsCEOS By lineIN AgaramondA bold 14/21ptMERICA T By Justin Schack Sure, higher earnings and a rising stock price matter most. But in grading CEOs investors also care a lot more than they used to about good governance, as our second annual survey reveals. ometimes good guys finish first. That’s certainly the case right now with chief executive officers. Investors, having lost billions on En- ron Corp., WorldCom, Adelphia Communications Corp., HealthSouth Corp. and other highfliers that Stanked following executive-suite shenanigans, still demand solid growth. But they also want to be sure that the CEOs they invest with don’t play fast and loose with the rules. That point was driven home dramatically last year at the epicenter of American capitalism: the New York Stock Exchange. The Big Board’s own CEO, Richard Grasso, may not have had his hand in the till like some other corporate malefactors, but he did extend it pretty deep into the exchange’s pockets. -
NYSE Move That Never Happened Leaves NYC Still Paying Debt
Bond Case Briefs Municipal Finance Law Since 1971 NYSE Move That Never Happened Leaves NYC Still Paying Debt. ● Project scuttled amid budget shortfalls in wake of recession ● NYC sells bonds Thursday to refinance debt left from deal It was 1998. The Internet bubble was building, day-trading was in full swing and the New York Stock Exchange was given the biggest subsidy in the city’s history to stop it from leaving Wall Street for New Jersey — keeping the Y in the NYSE. The plans for a new home for the world’s biggest stock exchange were shelved after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and a recession that saddled New York with a big deficit. But the city is still paying for more than $60 million of bonds that were left behind. The expense, though tiny for a city with a $92 billion budget and a fraction of what it would have shelled out if the project had gone forward, puts New York among a long line of governments that turned to the $3.8 trillion municipal-bond market to bankroll ill-fated business ventures and became stuck with the debt for years. Rhode Island was burned by a foray into the video-game business. A trash incinerator pushed Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, into financial ruin. And a Detroit suburb saw its dreams of transforming itself into the Hollywood of the Midwest dashed when the debt-financed movie studio was shelved. Such missteps helped fuel a long-simmering backlash against subsidies routinely handed out to corporations by local governments. It reached a new pitch this year, when Amazon.com Inc.