Essentials of System Analysis and Design 4th Edition Valacich Solutions Manual download
Essentials of System Analysis and Design 4th Edition Valacich Solutions Manual download
https://testbankdeal.com/product/essentials-of-system-analysis-
and-design-4th-edition-valacich-solutions-manual/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/essentials-of-systems-analysis-and-
design-6th-edition-valacich-solutions-manual/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/essentials-of-systems-analysis-and-
design-5th-edition-valacich-solutions-manual/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/essentials-of-systems-analysis-and-
design-5th-edition-valacich-test-bank/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/principles-of-web-design-the-web-
warrior-series-6th-edition-sklar-solutions-manual/
Project Management Achieving Competitive Advantage 4th
Edition Pinto Solutions Manual
https://testbankdeal.com/product/project-management-achieving-
competitive-advantage-4th-edition-pinto-solutions-manual/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/advanced-engineering-mathematics-2nd-
edition-greenberg-solutions-manual/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/american-government-brief-
version-11th-edition-wilson-test-bank/
https://testbankdeal.com/product/astronomy-today-9th-edition-chaisson-
test-bank/
CDN ED Biology Exploring the Diversity of Life 2nd Edition
Russell Solutions Manual
https://testbankdeal.com/product/cdn-ed-biology-exploring-the-
diversity-of-life-2nd-edition-russell-solutions-manual/
Chapter 6 Structuring System Requirements: Process Modeling 1
Chapter 6
Structuring System Requirements:
Process Modeling
Chapter Overview
This chapter continues the discussion of systems analysis, introducing students to
requirements structuring. Specifically, students are introduced to process modeling and
logic modeling. Although there are several methods and techniques available for
process modeling, this chapter focuses on Data-flow Diagrams (DFDs) because they
have been popular for many years, especially in the structured analysis and design
literature. Also, many CASE tools have incorporated DFDs into their sets of system
development tools and techniques.
Structured English and decision tables are the two logic models presented in this
chapter. The chapter discusses how Structured English statements are used to
represent the basic constructs in structured programming: sequence, choice, and
repetition. Decision tables are discussed in reference to how they can represent more
complicated processing logic than simple Structured English statements.
Instructional Objectives
Specific student learning objectives are included at the beginning of the chapter. From
an instructor’s point of view, the objectives of this chapter are to:
2. Teach students data-flow diagram symbols and the mechanical rules necessary for
them to create accurate and well-structured process models.
5. Explain and demonstrate the differences among the four types of DFDs: current
physical, current logical, new physical, and new logical.
6. Illustrate how data-flow diagrams can be used as tools to support systems analysis.
8. Demonstrate how decision tables can be used to represent the logic of choice in
conditional statements.
Classroom Ideas
1. Use Figures 6–2 and 6–6 to illustrate the basic DFD symbols and the correct and
incorrect ways to draw the diagrams. Use Figure 6–3 to demonstrate the problem
with trying to include sources/sinks inside the system being modeled.
2. Once you have taught the basics of drawing DFDs, have students complete
Problems and Exercises 1 through 3 and 8 as in-class exercises that you can then
go over in class.
3. Figures 6–4, 6–5, 6–7, 6–8, and 6–9 can be used in class to teach decomposition.
These can be followed with students completing Problems and Exercises 4 and 10
in-class.
6. Use a CASE tool in class to demonstrate other ways to model processes other than
DFDs. Have students compare and contrast these alternative methods with DFDs.
7. Using a CASE tool that supports DFDs, show in class how the tool provides for
decomposition and balancing and how DFDs are linked to the CASE repository.
Later, when teaching Chapter 6, you can show how the repository links DFDs and
entity-relationship diagrams.
8. Use a CASE tool in class to show how the tool checks for completeness,
consistency, and other elements of analysis as discussed in the chapter.
10. Work through both decision table examples contained in the text, using Figures 6–
14 and 6–15, then work through Figures 6–16 and 6–17.
Lecture Notes
As illustrated in Figure 6–1, requirements structuring is the second of the three primary
analysis phases. This chapter introduces students to two methods useful for structuring
requirements: process modeling and logic modeling,
Process Modeling
Process modeling graphically represents the processes that capture, manipulate, store,
and distribute data between a system and its environment and among components
within a system. The data-flow diagram (DFD) is the type of process model discussed
in Chapter 6. During requirements determination, information is collected about the
current and new systems. The project team will structure this information into
meaningful representations of the current and new systems. The requirements
structuring process results in several deliverables, including a context data-flow diagram,
DFDs of the current system, DFDs of the new system, and a thorough description of
each DFD component. The process modeling deliverables are listed in Table 6–1.
CASE tools facilitate the preparation of these diagrams.
Four symbols are used on data-flow diagrams; these symbols represent data flows, data
stores, processes, and source/sinks. The Gane and Sarson symbol set is illustrated in
Figure 6–2 and is the symbol set used in this textbook. A data flow represents data that
are in motion and moving as a unit. A data flow is represented by an arrow on the data-
flow diagram. A database query, sales report, or order are examples of data flows. In
contrast to a data flow, a data store represents data at rest. On a data-flow diagram, a
data store is represented as a rectangle with its right vertical line missing. A notebook,
file folder, or customer database are examples of data stores. A process, represented
as a rectangle with rounded corners, represents the works or actions performed on data.
Sources/sinks are the origin and/or destination of data and are represented on the
data-flow diagram as squares or rectangles. Suppliers, customers, and a bank are
examples. As it relates to sources/sinks, we are not interested in the interactions that
occur between sinks and sources, what a source or sink does with information or how it
operates, how to control or redesign a source or sink, and how to provide sources and
sinks with direct access to stored data. Figure 6–3 contrasts an incorrectly drawn DFD
(a process is shown as a sink) with one that is correctly prepared.
The Hoosier Burger case illustrates the DFD development process. The boundary or
scope of Hoosier Burger’s food-ordering system is represented by a context diagram;
this diagram, illustrated in Figure 6–4, also shows the system’s interactions with its
environment. The context diagram contains only one process labeled “0” and no data
stores. After the context diagram is prepared, a level-0 diagram is drawn. The food-
ordering system’s level-0 diagram is shown in Figure 6–5. The level-0 diagram
represents a system’s major processes, data flows, and data stores at a high level of
detail.
The preparation of data-flow diagrams (DFDs) is governed by a set of rules; these rules
are summarized in Table 6–2. Two additional DFD diagramming rules are that the
inputs to a process are different from the outputs of that process and DFD objects have
unique names. Figure 6–6 shows the incorrect and correct ways to draw data-flow
diagrams. The context diagram is functionally decomposed into finer and finer detail,
resulting in the preparation of several levels of diagrams. A level-n diagram is a DFD that
is the result of n nested decompositions of a series of subprocesses from a process on a
level-0 diagram. Functional decomposition will continue until a subprocess cannot be
exploded into more detail. Primitive DFDs are the lowest level DFDs. The level-1
diagram appearing in Figure 6–7 is a decomposition of Process 1.0 on the level-0
diagram. Figure 6–8 shows a level 1 diagram. Figure 6–9 shows a level-2 diagram.
DFDs should be balanced, meaning that the inputs and outputs to a process are
conserved at the next level of decomposition. Figure 6–10 shows a set of unbalanced
DFDs. Figure 6–11 provides an example of a data-flow splitting. Table 6–3
summarizes four advanced diagramming rules. These rules address splitting composite
data flows into component data flows at the next level, the conservation principle, an
exception to balancing, and minimizing clutter on the DFD.
As mentioned previously, primitive DFDs are the lowest level of diagramming. The
analyst has probably reached the primitive level when she has reduced each process to
a single decision or calculation; each data store represents data about a single entity;
the system user does not care to see any more detail; every data flow does not need to
be split further to show that different data are handled in various ways; each business
form or transaction, computer online display, and report has been shown as a single
data flow; and there is a separate process for each choice on all lowest-level menu
options.
Data-flow diagrams are useful for performing gap analysis and for identifying system
inefficiencies. Gap analysis is the process of discovering discrepancies between two or
more sets of data-flow diagrams or discrepancies within a single DFD. Gap analysis
helps identify redundant data flows, data that are captured and not used by the system,
and data that are updated identically in more than one location. CASE tools aid in this
analysis.
The IBM Credit Corporation is used as an example of how DFDs are useful during
business process reengineering. As Figures 6–12 and 6–13 illustrate, data-flow
diagrams made visualizing and analyzing the financing process much easier.
Logic Modeling
Because data-flow diagrams do not show the inner workings of processes, logic models
are useful for showing this internal logic. Decision tables are a popular method for
modeling system logic. In many instances, decision logic is quite complex, and often,
decision tables are best suited for these situations. A decision table is a matrix
representation of the logic of a decision, which specifies the possible conditions for the
decision and resulting actions. A decision table consists of three parts: condition
stubs, action stubs, and rules. A decision table can be simplified by removing
indifferent conditions. Figure 6–14 shows a complex decision table; Figure 6–15
shows the simplified version. The basic procedures for decision table construction are:
(1) name the conditions and the values each condition can assume; (2) name all
possible actions that can occur; (3) list all possible rules; (4) define the actions for each
rule; and (5) simplify the decision table. Figure 6–16 shows a decision table for the
Hoosier Burger’s inventory reordering system; Figure 6–17 shows the simplified table.
The authors use Pine Valley’s WebStore to illustrate process modeling for an electronic
commerce application. This example shows that process modeling for electronic
commerce applications is the same as for more traditional application development
projects. Table 6–4 outlines the WebStore’s system structure and corresponding Level-
0 processes. Figure 6–18 is a Level-0 DFD for the WebStore.
9. Explain what the term DFD consistency means and provide an example.
DFD consistency is the extent to which information contained on one level of a set
of nested data-flow diagrams is also included on other levels. Balancing errors
are one type of consistency violation mentioned in the textbook. For instance, a
payment data flow that appears on a level-1 diagram, but not on the level-0
diagram, is a consistency violation.
10. Explain what the term DFD completeness means and provide an example.
DFD completeness is the extent to which all necessary components of a data-flow
diagram have been included and fully described. A data store that does not have
any data flows coming into or out of it is a completeness violation.
11. How well do DFDs illustrate timing considerations for systems? Explain
your answer.
Timing considerations are not noted on DFDs. For instance indications of whether
a process occurs hourly, daily, weekly, monthly, or yearly are not made.
13. What is the purpose of logic modeling? What techniques are used to model
decision logic and what techniques are used to model temporal logic?
The purpose of logic modeling is to show the rules that govern the behavior of
processes represented in data-flow diagrams. Decision tables model decision
logic. State diagrams model temporal logic.
14. What are the steps in creating a decision table? How do you reduce the size
and complexity of a decision table?
The steps for creating a decision table are: (1) name the conditions and the
values each condition can assume; (2) name all possible actions that can occur;
(3) list all possible rules; (4) define the actions for each rule; and (5) simplify the
decision table. To reduce the size and complexity of a decision table, use
separate, linked decision tables, or use numbers that indicate sequence rather
than Xs where rules and action stubs intersect. Also, the analyst should identify
indifferent conditions and simplify the decision table.
15. What formula is used to calculate the number of rules a decision table must
cover?
To determine the number of rules a decision table must cover, simply determine
the number of values each condition may have and multiply the number of values
for each condition by the number of values for every other condition.
Payment 0
Customer Point of Sale Store Manager
Management Report
Receipt System
Level-0 Diagram
Problem and Exercise 1
Level-0 Diagram
Receipt 1
Customer Transform
Customer Sales Data
Payment Purchase
Goods Sold
Inventory Data
2 3 4
Update Goods Update Update Sales
Sold File Inventory File Total File
Formatted Goods Sold Amount Formatted Inventory Amount Formatted Sales Total Amount
Sales Totals
5
Goods Sold Amounts Produce Management Report
Management
Reports Store Manager
Receipt
0
Cap & Gown
Student Cap & Gown Purchase Request Order Entry Cap and Gown Order
Company
System
Receipt
Cap and Gown Order Cap & Gown
Student
Company
3
1 Valid Order Information 2 Inventory Data Update
Validate Order Finalize Order
Inventory File
Inventory Status
3. Evaluate your level-0 DFD from Problem and Exercise 2 using the rules for
drawing DFDs in this chapter. Edit your DFD so that it does not break any of
these rules.
Students should go through the rules discussed in this chapter (and presented in
Table 6–2 and Figure 6–6) one at a time and check each of their data-flow
diagrams. Alternatively, if the students are using a CASE tool to create their data-
flow diagrams, the CASE tool may be used to automatically check for errors in the
diagrams. There are no rule violations in the example DFDs, but we cannot verify
that there are no logical problems until we decompose the diagrams to a primitive
level. One obvious missing system capability is how to handle invalid orders;
typically, processes to handle abnormal conditions, like invalid orders, are shown
on primitive or at least low-level diagrams.
4. Choose an example like that in Problem and Exercise 2, and draw a context
diagram. Decompose this diagram until it doesn’t make sense to continue.
Be sure that your diagrams are balanced, as discussed in this chapter.
Students may choose a variety of situations to use for the nth level data-flow
diagrams for this answer. Basically, students should continue the process of
decomposition until they have reached the point where no subprocess can
logically be broken down further (i.e., each process meets the definition of a
primitive process). See the level-1 data-flow diagram for this exercise, which
shows a sample decomposition of the process titled Finalize Order from the level-
0 data-flow diagram provided for Problem and Exercise 3. The (italicized) labels
for processes and sources/sinks without borders represent the origin or
destination of flows that pass between this subsystem and other system
components. Note that the Goods Sold File is a potential black hole or should
possibly be treated as a sink.
Problem and Exercise #4
Level-1 Diagram
Level-1 Diagram
2.3
2.1 2.2
Receipt Receipt Generate
Generate Log Goods Sold
Information For
Receipt Data
Shipping
Validate Order
5. Refer to Figure 6-19 A and B, which contains drafts of a context and a level-
0 DFD for a university class registration system. Identify and explain
potential violations of rules and guidelines on these diagrams.
Some errors and peculiarities in these diagrams include:
• In the level–0 diagram, the data store, Class Roster, does not have
the data flow, Scheduled Classes, flowing into it, rather this data flow
connects processes 2 and 3; thus, these DFDs are not balanced.
• Process 1 appears to accomplish nothing since its inflow and outflow
are identical; such processes are uninteresting and probably
unnecessary; it is possible that this process will become interesting
when it is decomposed, where validation and error handling
processes might appear.
• Process 2 does not appear to need Course Request as input in order
to perform its function, as implied by its name.
• Some students may also wonder if process 3 has input sufficient to
produce its output; for example, where are prior class registrations
kept so that process 3 can determine when a course is full?
6. Why should you develop both logical and physical DFDs for systems? What
advantage is there for drawing a logical DFD before a physical DFD for a
new information system?
Physical data-flow diagrams help you better understand the people and/or
computer systems that are used in the overall system’s processing. Logical data-
flow diagrams help you better understand the essence of the system, the data and
the processes that transform them, regardless of actual physical form. Further,
the new logical data-flow diagrams can then show any additional functionality
necessary in the new system, to indicate which, if any, obsolete components have
been eliminated, and any changes in the logical flow of data between system
components, including different data stores. The data-flow diagrams for the new
physical system can then be constructed with the data-flow diagrams for the new
logical system as a guide.
7. This chapter has shown you how to model, or structure, just one aspect, or
view, of an information system, namely the process view. Why do you think
analysts have different types of diagrams and other documentation to
depict different views (e.g. process, logic, and data) of an information
system?
The various views (e.g., process, logic, data) of an information system each have
their own unique characteristics and provide the most relevant information to
different information system specialists. This variety is best understood,
expressed, and managed by using diagrams and documentation that are
specifically tailored for each view of the system. For example, data-flow diagrams
are useful for capturing the flow of data through business processes, but they are
not useful for describing the forms and relationships among data. As information
systems become larger and more complex, it becomes even more important to
use the right tool and technique to develop each component of an information
system. One technique that captured all aspects of an information system model
on one diagram or in one notation would likely be too complex for systems
professionals to handle.
8. Consider the DFD in Figure 6–20. List three errors (rule violations) on this
DFD.
Three major errors in Figure 6–20 are:
9. Consider the three DFDs in Figure 6–21. List three errors (rule violations)
on these DFDs.
These diagrams show the decomposition of process P1 on the level-0 diagram.
Three particular logical errors in Figure 6–21 are:
• The data store DS1, not DS2, should be represented on the level-1
diagram.
• Data flow DF3 should be an outflow on the level-1 diagram, and data
flow DF6 should not be on the level-1 diagram.
• Process P1.4.2 has no inputs and is thus a “miracle.”
10. Starting with a context diagram, draw as many nested DFDs as you consider
necessary to represent all the details of the employee hiring system
described in the following narrative. You must draw at least a context
diagram and a level-0 diagram. In drawing these diagrams, if you discover
that the narrative is incomplete, make up reasonable explanations to
complete the story. Supply these extra explanations along with the
diagrams. (The Projects, Inc. narrative is provided in the textbook.)
A suggested context diagram and level-0 diagram are provided below.
Context-Level Diagram
Context-Level Diagram
Interview Schedule
Engineering
Applicant
Manager
Level-0 Diagram
Level-0 Diagram
Year-Old Applications
Applications
New Employee
Employee
Interview
Record
Data
Hiring Decision
Qualified Applicant’s Application
Job
Descriptions
Employees
Job Description
Interview Evaluation
Engineering Applicant
Manager
11. a. Starting with a context diagram, draw as many nested DFDs as you
consider necessary to represent all the details of the system described
in the following narrative. In drawing these diagrams, if you discover
that the narrative is incomplete, make up reasonable explanations to
complete the story. Supply these extra explanations along with the
diagrams. (The Maximum Software narrative is provided in the
textbook.)
b. Analyze the DFDs you created in Part a. What recommendations for
improvements in the help desk system at Maximum can you make based
upon this analysis? Draw new logical DFDs that represent the
requirements you would suggest for an improved help desk system.
Remember, these are to be logical DFDs, so consider improvements
independent of technology that can be used to support the help desk.
The sample context and level-0 data-flow diagrams represent one possible way to
model the help desk process described in this question. In our solution, we have
chosen to include the processes performed by the consultants and operators as
subsystems within the system rather than as sources/sinks; this adds detail, but
allows bottlenecks in these processes to be corrected. Note that the data stores
are repeated in the level-0 diagram, to avoid excessive crossing of data flow lines.
Several processes could be exploded further, but the student would probably
have to make many assumptions to do so.
There are a number of ways that the students could choose to improve this
system. For example, with the current system a customer may have to explain his
problem and/or question over and over to multiple people: an operator and
possibly several consultants. The customer may begin to believe that he is
getting the “run-around” characteristic of a large bureaucracy. One way to avoid
this potential problem is to let the initial operator have access to the customer
problem database so that when the caller is handed off to a consultant the
customer’s already opened problem file will go along with him. In addition, the
operator could have sufficient information and the option to direct the call to the
proper consultant. Alternatively, clients could call the assigned consultant directly
on follow-up calls to an initial call for help.
Ask your students for characteristics of a DFD that imply areas for improvement.
Possible answers are: processes that simply collect and pass on information
rather than transforming data, collecting the same information into several
processes, placing untransformed data into data stores thus causing unknown
delays in processing this data, or cycles or loops that have no apparent
termination.
Context Diagram
Context-Level Diagram
Call
testbankdeal.com