DOCSLIB.ORG

Information Architecture Documentation Version: 225 Date: February 7, 2020 Author: the SEAS Vendor Submitted To: AHCA FX Project Management

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Information Architecture Documentation Version: 225 Date: February 7, 2020 Author: the SEAS Vendor Submitted To: AHCA FX Project Management AHCA Florida Health Care Connections (FX) T-2: Information Architecture Documentation Version: 225 Date: February 7, 2020 Author: The SEAS Vendor Submitted To: AHCA FX Project Management Revision History DATE VERSION DESCRIPTION AUTHOR JP Dahdouh 5/15/18 001 T-2: Information Architecture initial draft version Rich Cefola Paul Moore 6/12/18 002 T-2: Information Architecture first revision Rich Cefola 6/19/18 003 T-2: Information Architecture first revision Paul Moore T-2: Information Architecture approved baseline 6/20/18 100 Sean Gibbs version T-2: Information Architecture annual deliverable 7/29/2019 101 Barry McConnell refresh T-2: Information Architecture approved annual 8/26/2019 200 Carol Williams deliverable refresh Joanna Redding T-2: Information Architecture Quarterly deliverable 1/24/2020 201 Dave Schiller refresh Steve Ruszkowski Joanna Redding T-2: Information Architecture Quarterly deliverable Dave Schiller 2/6/2020 202 refresh updated to address Agency comments Steve Ruszkowski Barry McConnell T-2: Information Architecture approved quarterly 2/7/2020 225 Eric Steinkuehler deliverable refresh Modifications to the approved baseline version (100) of this artifact must be made in accordance with the Change Management process that is part of the SEAS Management Plan. Quality Review History DATE REVIEWER COMMENTS 5/15/2018 Sean Gibbs QA Submission Review 6/15/2018 Sean Gibbs QA Submission Review 6/19/2018 Sean Gibbs QA Submission Review 7/26/2019 Carol Williams QA Submission Review Agency for Health Care Administration Page ii Strategic Enterprise Advisory Services T-2: Information Architecture Documentation 1/24/2020 Eric Steinkuehler QA Submission Review 2/5/202 Eric Steinkuehler QA resubmission review Agency for Health Care Administration Page iii Strategic Enterprise Advisory Services T-2: Information Architecture Documentation Table of Contents Section 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Scope Statement ........................................................................................................ 2 1.4 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................. 2 1.5 Referenced Documents .............................................................................................. 3 1.6 Strategic Topic Inventory ............................................................................................ 3 Section 2 Roles and Responsibilities ...................................................................................... 6 Section 3 Information Architecture Framework ........................................................................ 7 3.1 Government Information Factory ................................................................................. 9 3.1.1 Cornerstone Elements ....................................................................................... 11 3.1.2 MITA Integration ................................................................................................ 21 3.2 Data Modeling ........................................................................................................... 22 3.2.1 Modeling Strategy .............................................................................................. 22 3.2.2 Modeling Methodologies .................................................................................... 22 3.2.3 Model Access .................................................................................................... 23 3.3 MITA Data Dimensions ............................................................................................. 23 3.4 Use of Data Model Standards and Reference Sources ............................................. 26 Section 4 FX Conceptual Data Model.................................................................................... 28 4.1 FX Conceptual Data Model Approach ....................................................................... 28 4.2 FX Conceptual Data Model Content .......................................................................... 29 4.3 FX Conceptual Data Model Responsibility ................................................................ 30 Section 5 Logical Data Models .............................................................................................. 32 5.1 FX Logical Data Model Characteristics ..................................................................... 32 5.2 FX Logical Data Model Content ................................................................................ 33 5.3 FX Logical Data Model Responsibility ....................................................................... 34 Section 6 Information Capabilty Matrix .................................................................................. 36 6.1 Information Capability Matrix Overview ..................................................................... 36 Agency for Health Care Administration Page iv Strategic Enterprise Advisory Services T-2: Information Architecture Documentation 6.2 2018 ICM Documentation ......................................................................................... 39 Section 7 Maintenance Approach .......................................................................................... 41 7.1 Inputs and Outputs.................................................................................................... 41 7.2 Document Maintenance ............................................................................................ 42 7.2.1 New Model Designs ........................................................................................... 42 7.2.2 Updates to Existing Components ....................................................................... 42 7.3 Data Model Maintenance Process ............................................................................ 42 7.4 Information Capability Matrix Development ............................................................... 43 7.4.1 Traditional ICM Development and Maintenance ................................................. 43 7.4.2 Future ICM Maintenance Strategy ..................................................................... 43 Appendix A – Supporting Documentation ................................................................................ 44 Attachment A - ICM 2018 Update ........................................................................................ 44 Attachment B - FX Conceptual Model Data Dictionary ......................................................... 44 Attachment C - FX Conceptual Model Medicaid Diagram .................................................... 44 Attachment D - FX Conceptual Model Case Management Diagram .................................... 44 Attachment E - FX Conceptual Model Identity and Access Management Diagram .............. 44 Attachment F - Information Architecture Framework ............................................................ 44 Agency for Health Care Administration Page v Strategic Enterprise Advisory Services T-2: Information Architecture Documentation Table of Exhibits Exhibit 1-1: Strategic Topic Inventory Item Sample ................................................................... 5 Exhibit 2-1: Roles and Responsibilities ..................................................................................... 6 Exhibit 3-1: MITA Framework Architectural Components .......................................................... 8 Exhibit 3-2: FX Information Architecture Framework ............................................................... 11 Exhibit 3-3: The Technologist's Burden ................................................................................... 12 Exhibit 3-4: Reference Analytic Architecture ........................................................................... 13 Exhibit 3-5: Architectural Principles ......................................................................................... 16 Exhibit 3-6: Architecture Advocated Positions ......................................................................... 19 Exhibit 3-7: Architectural Ingredients for Success ................................................................... 20 Exhibit 3-8: MITA Data Dimensions ......................................................................................... 24 Exhibit 3-9: Business Area Data Requirements ....................................................................... 26 Exhibit 3-10: Data Modeling Use of Standards – NIEM, HL7 ................................................... 27 Exhibit 4-1: Sample Subset of a Conceptual Data Model ........................................................ 29 Exhibit 6-1: Information Capability Matrix Template ................................................................ 39 Exhibit 7-1: Input and Output Documents ................................................................................ 42 Agency for Health Care Administration Page vi Strategic Enterprise Advisory Services T-2: Information Architecture Documentation Table of Strategic Topics Strategic Topic 4-1: FX Conceptual Data Model Content ........................................................ 30 Strategic
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Design Principles for the Information Architecture of a SMET Education Digital Library
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 459 837 IR 058 373 AUTHOR Dong, Andy; Agogino, Alice M. TITLE Design Principles for the Information Architecture of a SMET Education Digital Library. SPONS AGENCY National Science Foundation, Arlington, VA. PUB DATE 2001-06-00 NOTE 10p.; In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE-CS Joint Conference on Digital Libraries (1st, Roanoke, Virginia, June 24-28, 2001). For entire proceedings, see IR 058 348. Figures may not reproduce well. Also funded by National SMETE Digital Library Program. CONTRACT DUE-0085878 AVAILABLE FROM Association for Computing Machinery, 1515 Broadway, New York NY 10036. Tel: 800-342-6626 (Toll Free); Tel: 212-626-0500; e-mail: [email protected]. For full text: http://wwwl.acm.org/pubs/contents/proceedings/d1/379437/. PUB TYPE Reports - Research (143) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Computer System Design; *Design Requirements; Education; Educational Media; Educational Resources; Educational Technology; *Electronic Libraries; Information Systems; *Instructional Design; Instructional Materials ABSTRACT This implementation paper introduces principles for the information architecture of an educational digital library, principles that address the distinction between designing digital libraries for education and designing digital libraries for information retrieval in general. Design is a key element of any successful product. Good designers and their designs put technology into the hands of the user, making the product's focus comprehensible and tangible through design. As straightforward as this may appear, the design of learning technologies is often masked by the enabling technology. In fact, they often lack an explicitly stated instructional design methodology. While the technologies are important hurdles to overcome, the report advocates learning systems that empower education-driven experiences rather than technology-driven experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: a Review and Framework
    Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: A Review and Framework Item Type Journal Article (On-line/Unpaginated) Authors Trant, Jennifer Citation Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: A Review and Framework 2009-01, 10(1) Journal of Digital Information Journal Journal of Digital Information Download date 02/10/2021 03:25:18 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/105375 Trant, Jennifer (2009) Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: A Review and Framework. Journal of Digital Information 10(1). Studying Social Tagging and Folksonomy: A Review and Framework J. Trant, University of Toronto / Archives & Museum Informatics 158 Lee Ave, Toronto, ON Canada M4E 2P3 jtrant [at] archimuse.com Abstract This paper reviews research into social tagging and folksonomy (as reflected in about 180 sources published through December 2007). Methods of researching the contribution of social tagging and folksonomy are described, and outstanding research questions are presented. This is a new area of research, where theoretical perspectives and relevant research methods are only now being defined. This paper provides a framework for the study of folksonomy, tagging and social tagging systems. Three broad approaches are identified, focusing first, on the folksonomy itself (and the role of tags in indexing and retrieval); secondly, on tagging (and the behaviour of users); and thirdly, on the nature of social tagging systems (as socio-technical frameworks). Keywords: Social tagging, folksonomy, tagging, literature review, research review 1. Introduction User-generated keywords – tags – have been suggested as a lightweight way of enhancing descriptions of on-line information resources, and improving their access through broader indexing. “Social Tagging” refers to the practice of publicly labeling or categorizing resources in a shared, on-line environment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Information Architecture in Designing a Third-Generation Library Web Site
    The Role of Information Architecture in Designing a Third-Generation Library Web Site Jennifer Duncan and Wendy Holliday Library Web sites have evolved over the past decade, from simple pages with a few links to complex sites that provide direct access to hundreds of different resources. In many cases, this evolution occurs with little overall planning, often resulting in Web sites that are hard to manage and difficult for users to navigate.This article outlines the process of using Information Architecture (IA) to redesign a third-generation library Web site from the ground up.The result was a much more usable and cohesive library Web site that meets the needs of a broad range of users. n 2003, the Utah State Univer- had graphically redesigned the Web site sity (USU) Library anticipated a few times, the underlying structure the third major redesign of remained intact. The first and second their Web site. The original levels received a graphic makeover but re- design of the site simply provided basic mained mapped to years of accumulated information about library resources and pages that were not organized coherently. services. Like many library Web sites, it As Louis Rosenfeld, a pioneer in the field had grown over the years in both size and of Information Architecture, suggests, scope. By 2003, the site included several this is a common problem in the current hundred pages and provided access to electronic information environment: hundreds of electronic resources. It had grown without overall planning and it Increased scope, volume, and for- included several different graphic looks, mat types result in great content with “legacy” pages from previous de- ambiguity, muddier information signs existing alongside newer content.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Information Architecture to Evaluate Digital Libraries, the Reference Librarian, 51, 124-134
    FAU Institutional Repository http://purl.fcla.edu/fau/fauir This paper was submitted by the faculty of FAU Libraries. Notice: ©2010 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC. This is an electronic version of an article which is published and may be cited as: Parandjuk, J. C. (2010). Using Information Architecture to Evaluate Digital Libraries, The Reference Librarian, 51, 124-134. doi:10.1080/027638709 The Reference Librarian is available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02763870903579737 The Reference Librarian, 51:124–134, 2010 Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 0276-3877 print/1541-1117 online DOI: 10.1080/02763870903579737 WREF0276-38771541-1117The Reference Librarian,Librarian Vol. 51, No. 2, Feb 2009: pp. 0–0 Using Information Architecture to Evaluate Digital Libraries UsingJ. C. Parandjuk Information Architecture to Evaluate Digital Libraries JOANNE C. PARANDJUK Florida Atlantic University Libraries, Boca Raton, FL Information users face increasing amounts of digital content, some of which is held in digital library collections. Academic librarians have the dual challenge of organizing online library content and instructing users in how to find, evaluate, and use digital information. Information architecture supports evolving library services by bringing best practice principles to digital collection development. Information architects organize content with a user-centered, customer oriented approach that benefits library users in resource discovery. The Publication of Archival, Library & Museum Materials (PALMM),
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 Web Basics and Overview
    Chapter 1 Web Basics and Overview The Web is an Internet-based distributed information system. Anyone with a computer connected to the Internet can easily retrieve information by giving a Web address or by simply clicking a mouse button. The Web is a great way to disseminate information and making it available 24/7. Information can also be collected from Web users and customers through online forms. Maintainers and administrators can control and update Web content from anywhere on the Web. All these make the Web a powerful tool for mass communication, e-business and e-commerce. Compared with TV, radio, news papers, and magazines, putting the word out on the Web is relatively simple and inexpensive. But a website is much more than such one-way communication media. It can be a virtual o±ce or store that is always open and supported by workers from anywhere. Web service companies o®er free Web space and tools to generate simple personal or even business Web pages. But, well-designed and professionally implemented websites are much more involved. Even then, expertly produced websites are still much more cost-e®ective than other means of mass communication. For business and commerce, the cost of a website is negligible when compared to building and operating a brick-and-mortar o±ce or store. Once in-place, a website is a store that never closes and that is very attractive. People take great pains in building an o±ce or store to project the right image and to serve the needs 7 8 CHAPTER 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Basically Speaking, Inmon Professes the Snowflake Schema While Kimball Relies on the Star Schema
    What is the main difference between Inmon and Kimball? Basically speaking, Inmon professes the Snowflake Schema while Kimball relies on the Star Schema. According to Ralf Kimball… Kimball views data warehousing as a constituency of data marts. Data marts are focused on delivering business objectives for departments in the organization. And the data warehouse is a conformed dimension of the data marts. Hence a unified view of the enterprise can be obtained from the dimension modeling on a local departmental level. He follows Bottom-up approach i.e. first creates individual Data Marts from the existing sources and then Create Data Warehouse. KIMBALL – First Data Marts – Combined way – Data warehouse. According to Bill Inmon… Inmon beliefs in creating a data warehouse on a subject-by-subject area basis. Hence the development of the data warehouse can start with data from their needs arise. Point-of-sale (POS) data can be added later if management decides it is necessary. He follows Top-down approach i.e. first creates Data Warehouse from the existing sources and then create individual Data Marts. INMON – First Data warehouse – Later – Data Marts. The Main difference is: Kimball: follows Dimensional Modeling. Inmon: follows ER Modeling bye Mayee. Kimball: creating data marts first then combining them up to form a data warehouse. Inmon: creating data warehouse then data marts. What is difference between Views and Materialized Views? Views: •• Stores the SQL statement in the database and let you use it as a table. Every time you access the view, the SQL statement executes. •• This is PSEUDO table that is not stored in the database and it is just a query.
    [Show full text]
  • Using Ontologies for Enterprise Architecture Model Alignment
    Using Ontologies for Enterprise Architecture Model Alignment Gon¸caloAntunes1, Artur Caetano1;2, Marzieh Bakhshandeh1, Rudolf Mayer3, and Jos´eBorbinha1;2 1 Instituto Superior T´ecnico, University of Lisbon, Av. Rovisco Pais 1, 1049-001 Lisboa, Portugal, 2 Information Systems Group, INESC-ID, Rua Alves Redol 9, 1000-029 Lisboa, Portugal, 3 SBA Research, Favoritenstraße 16, 1040 Wien, Austria {goncalo.antunes,artur.caetano}@ist.utl.pt Abstract. One of the primary goals of enterprise architecture aligning the business with the underlying support systems. An architecture de- scription encompasses an heterogeneous spectrum of domains, such as business processes, application components, metrics, people and tech- nological infrastructure. Views express the domain elements and their relationships from the perspective of specific concerns relevant to the system stakeholders. Thus, each view needs to be expressed in the de- scription language that best suits its concerns. However, enterprise ar- chitecture languages often specify meta-models that cross-cut distinct architectural domains. This hinders extensibility and adds complexity to the language. Ob the other hand, describing each domain through a specialized language and then integrating the multiple languages raises challenges at the level of traceability and consistency. This paper pro- poses using ontologies to integrate different enterprise architecture do- mains and to analyse the resulting models. This goal is realized through a core domain-independent language that is extended by several domain- specific languages, each focussing on a set of specific concerns. The ap- proach contributes to the alignment of the different domains while en- suring traceability and model consistency. The proposal is demonstrated through an evaluation scenario that employs ArchiMate as the domain- independent language extended with a set of domain-specific languages.
    [Show full text]
  • D-3.1 (D-B.1) the Network of Information: Architecture and Applications
    Objective FP7-ICT-2009-5-257448/D-3.1 Future Networks Project 257448 “SAIL – Scalable and Adaptable Internet Solutions” D-3.1 (D-B.1) The Network of Information: Architecture and Applications Date of preparation: 11-07-31 Revision: 1.0 Start date of Project: 10-08-01 Duration: 13-01-31 Project Coordinator: Thomas Edwall Ericsson AB Document: FP7-ICT-2009-5-257448-SAIL/D-3.1 Date: July 31, 2011 Security: Public Status: Final version Version: 1.0 Document Properties Document Number: D-3.1 Document Title: The Network of Information: Architecture and Applications Document Responsible: Dirk Kutscher (NEC) Document Editor: Petteri P¨oyh¨onen (NSN), Ove Strandberg (NSN) Bengt Ahlgren (SICS), Matteo D. Ambrosio (TI), Erik Axelsson (KTH), Lars Brown (KTH), Christian Dannewitz (UPB), Zoran Despotovic (DoCoMo), Anders E. Eriksson (EAB), Stephen Farrell (TCD), Jelena Frtunikj (DoCoMo), Massimo Gallo (FT), Bj¨orn Gr¨onvall (SICS), Claudio Imbrenda (NEC), Bruno Kauffmann (FT), Dirk Kutscher (NEC), Authors: Anders Lindgren (SICS), Henrik Lundqvist (DoCoMo), Aidan Lynch (TCD), Luca Muscariello (FT), B¨orje Ohlman (EAB), Jean Francois Peltier (FT), Karl-Ake Persson (EAB), Petteri P¨oyh¨onen (NSN), Ove Strandberg (NSN), Patrick Truong (FT), Janne Tuononen (NSN), Vinicio Vercellone (TI), Stefan Weber (TCD) Target Dissemination Level: PU Status of the Document: Final version Version: 1.0 Production Properties: Reviewers: Pedro Aranda (TID), Bj¨orn Levin (SICS) Document History: Revision Date Issued by Description 1.0 2011-07-31 Petteri P¨oyh¨onen Final version Disclaimer: This document has been produced in the context of the SAIL Project. The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Community’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2010–2013) under grant agreement n◦ 257448.
    [Show full text]
  • Information Architecture: a Brief Introduction
    Information Architecture: A brief introduction Samantha Bailey http://baileysorts.com 12/03/03 For the record I’m a librarian who works in digital information spaces. Currently: Vice President, Information Architecture for Wachovia.com (Wachovia Bank) Pioneer in IA: First employee of Argus Associates, spent 5 years there developing their operation & methodology MILS from University of Michigan, 1996 with Amazing push-button Shushing Action! http://www.mcphee.com/amusements/current/11247.html Topics Defining Information Architecture Understanding Information Environments Components of an information architecture Methodology & Deliverables Question: How do you define Information Architecture? What is IA? A trick question or a tricky question? Information Architecture (IA) Interaction Design (ID) Information Design (ID too) User-centered Design (UCD) User-interface Design (UI) Usability/Usability Engineering (UE) What is IA? This is an emerging discipline in an evolving medium. Experts & Gurus disagree on the “right” answer. IMHO: The ongoing discussion is legitimate and healthy—as long as we’re getting work done. What is IA? Christina Wodtke’s SIG-IA survey: content architecture (Polar Bear style) interaction design (Cooper’s About Face) information design (Wurman's Information Architects) What is IA? The art and science of structuring and organizing information systems to help people achieve their goals. Information architects organize content and design navigation systems to help people find and manage information. A Visual
    [Show full text]
  • A Blockchain Implementation Prototype for the Electronic Open Source Traceability of Wood Along the Whole Supply Chain
    sensors Article A Blockchain Implementation Prototype for the Electronic Open Source Traceability of Wood along the Whole Supply Chain Simone Figorilli 1, Francesca Antonucci 1, Corrado Costa 1,* , Federico Pallottino 1 , Luciano Raso 2, Marco Castiglione 2, Edoardo Pinci 2, Davide Del Vecchio 2, Giacomo Colle 3, Andrea Rosario Proto 4 , Giulio Sperandio 1 and Paolo Menesatti 1 1 Consiglio per la Ricerca in Agricoltura e l’Analisi dell’Economia Agraria (CREA)—Centro di Ricerca Ingegneria e Trasformazioni Agroalimentari, Via della Pascolare 16, 00015 Monterotondo, Italy; simone.fi[email protected] (S.F.); [email protected] (F.A.); [email protected] (F.P.); [email protected] (G.S.); [email protected] (P.M.) 2 Microsoft S.r.l., Viale Pasubio 21, 20154 Milano, Italy; [email protected] (L.R.); [email protected] (M.C.); [email protected] (E.P.); [email protected] (D.D.V.) 3 Effetreseizero Srl, Spinoff CREA, Via dei Solteri 37/1, 38121 Trento, Italy; [email protected] 4 Department of AGRARIA, Mediterranean University of Reggio Calabria, Feo di Vito, 89122 Reggio Calabria, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-06-9067-5214; Fax: +39-06-9062-5591 Received: 19 July 2018; Accepted: 14 September 2018; Published: 17 September 2018 Abstract: This is the first work to introduce the use of blockchain technology for the electronic traceability of wood from standing tree to final user. Infotracing integrates the information related to the product quality with those related to the traceability [physical and digital documents (Radio Frequency IDentification—RFID—architecture)] within an online information system whose steps (transactions) can be made safe to evidence of alteration through the blockchain.
    [Show full text]
  • Ontology Languages – a Review
    International Journal of Computer Theory and Engineering, Vol.2, No.6, December, 2010 1793-8201 Ontology Languages – A Review V. Maniraj, Dr.R. Sivakumar 1) Logical Languages Abstract—Ontologies have been becoming a hot research • First order predicate logic topic for the application in artificial intelligence, semantic web, Software Engineering, Library Science and information • Rule based logic Architecture. Ontology is a formal representation of set of concepts within a domain and relationships between those • concepts. It is used to reason about the properties of that Description logic domain and may be used to define the domain. An ontology language is a formal language used to encode the ontologies. A 2) Frame based Languages number of research languages have been designed and released • Similar to relational databases during the past few years by the research community. They are both proprietary and standard based. In this paper a study has 3) Graph based Languages been reported on the different features and issues of these • languages. This paper also addresses the challenges for Semantic network research community in the further development of ontology languages. • Analogy with the web is rationale for the semantic web I. INTRODUCTION Ontology engineering (or ontology building) is a subfield II. BACKGROUND of knowledge engineering that studies the methods and CycL1 in computer science and artificial intelligence is an methodologies for building ontologies. It studies the ontology language used by Doug Lenat’s Cye artificial ontology development process, the ontology life cycle, the intelligence project. Ramanathan V. Guna was instrumental methods and methodologies for building ontologies, and the in the design of the language.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture @Dhbw: Data Warehouse Part I: Introduction to Dwh and Dwh Architecture Andreas Buckenhofer, Daimler Tss About Me
    A company of Daimler AG LECTURE @DHBW: DATA WAREHOUSE PART I: INTRODUCTION TO DWH AND DWH ARCHITECTURE ANDREAS BUCKENHOFER, DAIMLER TSS ABOUT ME Andreas Buckenhofer https://de.linkedin.com/in/buckenhofer Senior DB Professional [email protected] https://twitter.com/ABuckenhofer https://www.doag.org/de/themen/datenbank/in-memory/ Since 2009 at Daimler TSS Department: Big Data http://wwwlehre.dhbw-stuttgart.de/~buckenhofer/ Business Unit: Analytics https://www.xing.com/profile/Andreas_Buckenhofer2 NOT JUST AVERAGE: OUTSTANDING. As a 100% Daimler subsidiary, we give 100 percent, always and never less. We love IT and pull out all the stops to aid Daimler's development with our expertise on its journey into the future. Our objective: We make Daimler the most innovative and digital mobility company. Daimler TSS INTERNAL IT PARTNER FOR DAIMLER + Holistic solutions according to the Daimler guidelines + IT strategy + Security + Architecture + Developing and securing know-how + TSS is a partner who can be trusted with sensitive data As subsidiary: maximum added value for Daimler + Market closeness + Independence + Flexibility (short decision making process, ability to react quickly) Daimler TSS 4 LOCATIONS Daimler TSS Germany 7 locations 1000 employees* Ulm (Headquarters) Daimler TSS China Stuttgart Hub Beijing 10 employees Berlin Karlsruhe Daimler TSS Malaysia Hub Kuala Lumpur 42 employees Daimler TSS India * as of August 2017 Hub Bangalore 22 employees Daimler TSS Data Warehouse / DHBW 5 DWH, BIG DATA, DATA MINING This lecture is
    [Show full text]