ComputerScienceExpert
$18/per page/
Case Study , need help with a 2 page case study ( plus title pace and reference page) on The Role of the Operating Manager in Information Systems
Case Study Title Date
Course
Instructor Introduction
An introduction is used to let the reader know: The main entity or entities involved
The major question or issue being analyzed Introductions for case studies in this course should be one paragraph in length. Background
This is a brief overview of the main problems or questions involved. Historical information can be
used as long as it has a direct bearing on the items being analyzed. Provide enough description
that a reader that is unfamiliar with the case will understand the context of your analysis. For this
course, background information should be two to three paragraphs in length, maximum. Discussion
The discussion includes an analysis of each problem or question. The analysis can include: The problem or question and its impact on the main entities involved. How the problem or question is linked to the topics we have discussed or read to
this point. How the problem or question is linked to best practices in industry. A solution or multiple solutions and an evaluation of those solutions. In this course the case studies will have at least one major problem or question. There may be
secondary problems or questions but there will be, at most, one or two secondary issues. Use as
much space as necessary to provide a rational analysis but if there are more than four or five
paragraphs for a given question the analysis needs to be reviewed and made more concise. Conclusion
Summarize your solutions and describe how those solutions improve the current situation or
resolve the problems in the case. The conclusion should be one to two paragraphs. PAGE 2 References
All references must be properly cited and referenced using APA format. Refer to the syllabus for
tutorials and resources on using APA format. PAGE 3
Paper needs to analyze the case study below based on
the questions and answers in the Template provided. Case Study 1 Midsouth Chamber of Commerce (A): The
Role of the Operating Manager in Information Systems
It was 7:30 P.M. on September 22, 2006, and Leon Lassiter, Vice President of Marketing
with the Midsouth Chamber of Commerce (MSCC), was still in his office, reflecting on the
day’s frustrations. Lassiter had met with four territory managers, his marketing support
supervisor, and a number of other members of his staff. All were upset about their lack of
access to the new computer system and the problems they were having using their old
systems. Lassiter had assured them that the problems were being addressed. He stressed
that patience was needed during the ongoing conversion to the new system.
Now, during his private moment, Lassiter was beginning to recognize the problems and
complexities he faced with the system conversion. The work of his marketing staff, who
were unable to access the new computer system to handle their accounts, had ground to a
halt. Even worse, something had happened to the data in most of the workstations, which
meant that conference registrations and other functions had to be done manually. These
inconveniences, however, were minor compared to Lassiter’s uneasy feeling that there were
problems with Midsouth’s whole approach to the management of information technology.
Lassiter knew that time was of the essence and that he might have to step in and manage
the conversion, even though he had no information technology background. He wondered
what he should do next. Background of the MSCC
In the early 1900s, economic development in the Midsouth area was highly dependent on
transportation systems. As a result of legislative decisions, many communities in the
Midsouth area could not gain access to reasonable transportation services, thus retarding
business and economic development. With no one to represent their concerns to the state
government, a group of powerful businesspeople formed the MSCC to lobby the
legislature on the issue of transportation access.
The MSCC dealt with this single issue until the 1930s, when its charter was changed to
include a broader range of issues affecting the business community, including state
banking laws, transportation, industrial development, and business taxes. By the mid1990s, the MSCC, under the new leadership of President Jack Wallingford, became an
aggressive advocacy organization for the business community. The broadening of MSCC’s role brought substantial change to the organization. In 1988
the MSCC had a staff of 14, a membership of 3,000 businesses and individuals, and an
annual budget of $1,720,000. Over the years, the MSCC had been able to develop a
reserve account of just over $1.5 million.
By 2000, the staff had grown to 24, the $1.5 million cash reserve had been drawn down
to $250,000, and membership had dropped to 2,300, largely because of the loss of some
major manufacturers in the region, the bursting of the Internet bubble, and the resulting
economic slowdown. The reserve reduction, supported by the Board of Directors, had
fueled considerable internal growth in terms of staff and capabilities. During this time,
the MSCC also moved into larger offices and upgraded their workstations.
In the early 2000s the MSCC was considered the most powerful business advocacy
organization in the Midsouth area and one of the most innovative chambers of commerce
in terms of its approaches and techniques in dealing with problems facing the business
community. The greatest problem facing the management of the MSCC at the time was
the growing concern that its aggressive growth might have to be curtailed because it
could no longer fund its annual operating budget. Leon Lassiter
In mid-2000, Wallingford was faced with a serious dilemma. The MSCC was projecting a
$330,000 deficit for the 2001 fiscal year. Wallingford realized he was going to have to
reduce both the number of staff and the number of programs or find some way to grow
revenue more aggressively in the organization. Wallingford asked his Vice President of
Public Affairs and Operations, Ed Wilson, to find someone new to lead the sales and
marketing function.
Leon Lassiter came to the MSCC in December 2000 with 12 years of experience in sales
management and marketing with American Brands, where he had recently turned down a
promotion to regional sales manager. The MSCC, he reasoned, offered more of an
opportunity to have an impact than at American Brands. As Vice President of Marketing
and Membership, Lassiter reported directly to Wallingford. After settling in to the
organization, he initiated a thorough review of all programs, departments, and processes.
He found that the marketing support functions were better coordinated and managed than
the sales functions. Additionally, although the MSCC had purchased workstations for
sales and marketing and had installed some custom software, the information system was
quite limited in capability. Due to concerns over security, no staff member had access to
all the data necessary to operate the marketing and sales activities of the MSCC. Each
workstation was equipped to perform particular functions with the needed data resident
on the workstation. With his analysis completed, Lassiter began to develop an entirely
new sales and marketing process based on measurable goals, documented operating
procedures, and regular training programs. He knew that eventually a new information
system would have to be developed. Information Technology Use at the MSCC
The Marketing and Sales Division For a few years, Lassiter was able to operate his organization’s tasks with the existing
set of individual workstations, all of which were connected to a print server. The
marketing division’s primary information technology activities were to track the
activity occurring in membership. Primary uses included:
• Developing the membership database • Developing the prospective member database • Making daily changes to both databases • Generating a series of letters for personalized mail contact • Generating prospect and member lists and labels by industry sector, firm size
(sales, employment), zip code, mailing designator, and other criteria
• Processing call-record activity by the territory managers • Tracking member activities and concerns through a comment field • Creating audit trails for reviewing changes • General word processing EXHIBIT 1 MSCC Organizational Structure The marketing support area performed most of the computing tasks for the marketing
division via their local workstations. They filled all requests for labels, lists, and
changes from the sales and marketing staff. Requested changes to the member database
sometimes backed up as much as two or three days. Lassiter felt this was unacceptable
and hoped to achieve a two-hour turnaround on member-change activity.
Four territory managers, a marketing support supervisor, and five clerical people staffed
the marketing division. The territory managers generated 75 to 80 call records per day
that required database changes, letters, and invoice processing. These requests were
processed by the clerical staff. In addition, the clerical staff processed commissions on
membership sales, member cancellations, and general database maintenance. The
clerical staff also prepared special-letter requests from the territory managers and
performed all normal secretarial duties. Operations Division Ed Wilson managed the operations division. Eight managers and support staff worked
in operations. This group was responsible for providing financial information and
insuring accounting controls. The operations staff maintained:
• The general ledger system • Fund balances • Accrual accounting functions • Payment history tracking • Commission schedules • Membership cancellation tracking • Report generation Wilson also planned to be able to track legislative bills from their introduction, through
their demise in committee or chamber, their passage, or their veto by the governor. This
information would be keyed into the system, updated as changes occurred, printed, and
sent to selected staff members on a daily basis. Human Resources Division
The human resources division, with two managers and two support staff, was
responsible for developing a conference and seminar tracking and reporting mechanism
that would also have the capability of printing out badges for conference or seminar
attendees. The division also maintained personnel records. Changing Times
By 2002, as a result of Lassiter’s marketing and sales reorganization and Wilson’s
aggressive management of expenses, the MSCC was experiencing solid financial growth.
While the two men were primarily responsible for the success, Wilson and Lassiter
clashed on numerous occasions. Lassiter felt that much of the territory managers’ work
and marketing support activities could be automated to provide the MSCC with a
significant reduction in labor and allied costs. Lassiter believed that a fulltime systems
analyst should be hired to meet the growing information needs of the MSCC. Wilson, on
the other hand, was worried about the cost of the MSCC’s information systems. In the
past, the MSCC had hired a consultant, Nolan Vassici, to make recommendations on
hardware and software and to develop the custom software used by each division. Wilson
felt that continuing to hire Vassici whenever additional or corrective work was needed
was the best option. He did not want to increase the number of employees. Wilson knew
that as a small, nonprofit agency, MSCC had limited funds for the expansion of
computing capabilities. Adding a full-time systems analyst to the staff would make it
significantly more difficult to respond to growing staff demands in other areas.
Continuing the relationship with Vassici provided Wilson with the ability to specify exactly what Vassici worked on and what should be tabled until there was the time and
budget for it.
Although Lassiter and Wilson continued to clash, Lassiter understood Wilson’s desire to
control costs in light of the limited resources of the MSCC. Lassiter knew that the slowly
growing computer sophistication of the staff would explode once the tap was fully
opened. However, Lassiter felt that the demand could be dealt with effectively once the
MSCC determined the extent of the staff’s needs.
In early 2003, Lassiter and Wilson joined forces on a concept by which the MSCC would
offer a health insurance program to its members, now more than 4,500 businesses and
individuals. Although the proposal was eventually rejected by the Board of Directors,
Wilson and Lassiter, as a result of the study, recognized that there were many revenueproducing opportunities the MSCC could pursue that would require a much higher level
of information systems use. Wilson soon hired a systems analyst to increase the MSCC’s
capabilities.
Simon Kovecki, a young computer science graduate with no experience in a membership
organization like the MSCC or with accounting software, joined the MSCC in June 2003
and spent his first three months on the job learning the organization and its computing
systems. He worked exceptionally long hours as he struggled to understand software for
which there was no documentation. Calls to Vassici for help were useless because his
business had closed.
Through early 2004, Wilson continued to manage the computer systems and, with the
help of Kovecki, upgraded the hardware in the workstations. With Kovecki’s constant
attention, the software continued to work relatively well. In 2005 Wilson, with Kovecki’s
assistance, developed an online legislative information system on a workstation that was
considered state of the art in the chamber of commerce industry. With this application and
the growth in members and types of computer applications, the MSCC senior
management began to worry about the separation of systems for membership and
marketing, finance, conferences, and other applications which required frequent data
reentry.
With 2005 dues revenue approaching $2.8 million and approximately 4,750 member
firms, the MSCC was among the largest statewide chambers of commerce in the country.
The staff had swelled to 42 and the financial reserve was nearly $2.6 million. Although
Lassiter felt some satisfaction with the MSCC’s growth and financial strength, he was
bothered with the lack of forethought as to how the MSCC might develop a
comprehensive plan to use information for the future. Wilson, too, recognized the value
of information systems to an organization in the business of gathering, analyzing, and
using information to affect legislative outcomes. Catalyst for Change
By 2005, the MSCC had reached a point where some organizational changes had to
occur. Wallingford, at the urging of the Board of Directors, assigned Lassiter the
additional areas of communications, graphic arts, and printing operations. Controller duties were assigned to Harry Taska, and Jeff Hedges, the new Vice President of Public
Finance, was assigned responsibility for computer operations. Wilson, nearing retirement,
retained his public affairs activities and was asked to focus his efforts on developing an
important public affairs project.
Just after the staff changes took place, Kovecki confided to Lassiter that he was
disappointed by the changes in staff responsibility. He felt he should have been elevated
to manager of information systems and given additional staff. Hedges, who had little
computer background, was also in charge of research on various issues of interest to the
members of the MSCC as well as oversight of the Controller’s function. Kovecki was
concerned that Hedges would not have the time to manage the growing computer
operations properly.
Lassiter shared Kovecki’s concern over the lack of top management attention to the
information systems area. His concern led him to send out requests for information to a
number of firms servicing the software needs of organizations like the MSCC. Primarily
interested in sales and marketing software, he focused on software from Cameo, MEI
Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, Connecticut Business and Industry
Association, TelePro 2000, and Data Link. Lassiter sent the information he received from
these vendors to other senior managers but received little response. Wilson was involved
in his new project, Taska was learning his new duties as Controller, and Hedges had little
time to examine the computer activities.
In August 2005, Lassiter attended a national association meeting where a session on
management software led to his discovery of a small software firm called UNITRAK.
The company had developed a software suite that Lassiter was convinced would meet the
MSCC’s needs. He based his assessment on the MSCC’s current and anticipated future
needs for computing capability that had been developed by Kovecki in 2004. (See Exhibit
2.) EXHIBIT 2 MSCC Information Systems Needs Planning the New Information Technology System
Lassiter had identified areas in UNITRAK where he felt this more powerful information
system would allow the MSCC to be more efficient. These improvements would enable
staff members to: • Input special member information into a notes field (not then available) •
Generate telemarketing scripts that would allow “tree scripting” based on various
sales objections (not then available)
•
Utilize a statistical inquiry feature that would provide quantitative analysis of
sales activity figures from all marketing activities (not attempted with the separate
workstation systems)
In addition, the new information systems would allow territory managers to:
•
Access their account information from their workstations rather than asking a staff
member
•
Develop letters and attachments from their workstations, using information in a
central database rather than manually linking information contained in several separate
databases
In a memo to the management group, Lassiter commented, “The UNITRAK system not
only meets our needs now, but it is also powerful enough to provide the MSCC with the
room to grow over the next 5 years.” The software also appeared to be user friendly,
which Lassiter believed was the key to freeing up Kovecki’s time. Lassiter explained the
software to Hedges, who wanted the current accounting software left intact but agreed
that now was the time to move forward in finding a more powerful software solution for
the MSCC’s problems. Hedges also agreed that other modules in the UNITRAK system
could be activated at a later time.
In October 2005, Lassiter contacted Greg Ginder, President of the UNITRAK Software
Corporation, and invited him to the MSCC for a demonstration of the system’s
capabilities. Wilson observed about 30 minutes of the three-hour demonstration and told
Lassiter, “I’ll support it if you want it. It will work for my project for public affairs.”
Hedges agreed that the new system would free up Kovecki’s time and allow him to
become more involved in planning and systems development. Kovecki’s comments were
different. He remarked, “Yeah, the software has its strengths and weaknesses and it
probably would save some of my time. But I don’t like the idea of staff having
uncontrolled access to so much data. It’s not clear what they’ll do with it.” The Proposal
Lassiter decided to move ahead quickly with a proposal to Wallingford and the Board of
Directors. He developed simple flow charts that showed the hours it took to conduct
certain activities, e.g., the staff time new member sales took with the current workstation
arrangement, versus the time it would take with the new software. Lassiter knew that the
Executive Committee of the Board would require considerable justification to approve an
“off-budget” capital expenditure that would significantly reduce reserves. He had also
done some calculations to show that if the new system performed as he hoped, each
territory manager would be able to generate $150,000 in increased sales through
increased contacts. Although Lassiter knew this goal was aggressive and very difficult to justify, he wanted to be able to demonstrate a less-than-six-month payback if challenged
by a member of the Executive Committee.
Lassiter believed that UNITRAK would reduce the price of the software. The software
was new, and UNITRAK had sold it to only one other statewide chamber of commerce
organization, the Northern State Chamber of Commerce. Jeff Fritzly, Vice President of
Marketing and Development of the NSCC, told Lassiter:
We looked at quite a few software packages as well as writing our own custom
software, but our consultant chose the UNITRAK software. We purchased the software
from UNITRAK and got a good discount on the needed new hardware. They have been
very helpful and supportive of our needs.
A week before the Executive Committee meeting, Ginder and Lassiter agreed on a price
for the software. Lassiter was pleased that the price was 30 percent less than Northern
State had paid. With the help of Ginder and a member of the Executive Committee who
headed the local branch office of a computer equipment manufacturer, Lassiter was also
able to achieve an excellent discount on new server hardware. He felt this low cost was
another justification for approval of the project. Lassiter also made it a point to meet with
both Wilson and Hedges to keep them abreast of the negotiation and seek their advice. He
felt that by increasing the level of communication with Hedges and Wilson, he would be
able to gain their interest and support, which he felt was important to the success of the
project.
When the Executive Committee of the Board met in November 2005, Lassiter explained
that the MSCC had reached the limit of its current system design, and that an investment
in a central server connected to networked workstations was needed to allow the MSCC
to meet current and future opportunities for growth. During his presentation, Lassiter
said:
While the MSCC has made significant and appropriate investments in the
workstations necessary for the MSCC to increase its operational sophistication, we
have reached the limit of these smaller machines. With the spectacular growth in
revenue we’ve enjoyed over the last five years, our requirements and demands have
increased dramatically. Without an immediate investment in increased capability, the
MSCC’s continued growth and services will be in jeopardy.
In response to challenges from the Executive Committee regarding what the new system
would mean to the bottom line and the MSCC’s reserves, Lassiter responded, “I believe
we will see a 10–15 percent increase in sales and a 20 percent increase in staff
productivity once the new system is operational.” With these assurances and a price that
would consume only 10–15 percent of reserves, the members of the Executive
Committee complimented Lassiter on his work and approved the purchase of the
software. Implementation Greg Ginder of UNITRAK was ecstatic over the decision and promised unlimited support
at no charge to install the new system. But Kovecki continued to express concern about
staff members using the new capabilities of the system. He said:
I know that Lassiter expects this new software to be user friendly, but I’m
uncomfortable with how strongly he feels about training the staff to use as many of the
features as possible. He thinks that training the staff on whatever they want to learn will
make the MSCC more effective, but I disagree. We would be opening Pandora’s box
and we would lose control over what was going on. The last thing we need is for people
to be getting into things they don’t need to be in.
By February 2006, Lassiter had heard nothing regarding the purchase of the new system.
Kovecki told Lassiter that no one had approved the purchase order. Lassiter then
questioned Hedges, who responded that he had heard nothing more and had been busy
with research on issues of interest to the MSCC members. “Go ahead and purchase the
software,” Hedges told Lassiter. “It’s your system anyway.” Although Lassiter tried to
explain that it was not his responsibility to implement the purchase or conversion, he felt
the project would not move forward without his purchasing the software. After signing
the purchase order, Lassiter handed it to Kovecki and said, “You and Hedges are the
project managers. I shouldn’t be involved at this point. It’s up to you guys to complete the
project.”
Near the end of March, Lassiter asked Kovecki how the project was proceeding. Kovecki
stated that the hardware had been delivered but that he was busy with a project of
Wilson’s and didn’t have time to work on the new software. Lassiter went to Wilson to
inquire about the anticipated length of the project Kovecki was working on, and Wilson
indicated it should be finished by mid-April.
Although Lassiter felt uncomfortable about pushing Hedges and Kovecki, he was
beginning to feel that he would have to use his influence to get things moving. Lassiter
held a meeting with his staff, informing them that a new system had been purchased that
would improve operations in several areas. Several staff members expressed concern that
they had not been consulted or informed of the idea before its approval. Specific
questions were asked regarding word processing, new member recruiting, and
commission processing. Lassiter, anticipating that Kovecki had studied the
documentation, asked Kovecki to answer the questions. Kovecki was unable to answer
the questions and indicated he needed more time to study the documentation.
Lassiter set up an appointment with UNITRAK for training for Kovecki and himself.
After a positive training visit, Lassiter asked Kovecki to spend half a day with him to set
up a project flow chart and anticipate potential problems, but May and June passed with
little forward progress on the conversion. Lassiter had told the Executive Committee that
the project would be completed by the end of March 2006, yet little had been
accomplished. Upon Kovecki’s return from a two-week vacation at the end of June, Lassiter asked
Wallingford to intervene and to strongly urge Hedges and Kovecki to complete the
project. Lassiter stated:
It really bothered me that I had to go over Hedges’ head but we were coming up
on the seventh month of what should have been an easy three-month project. It’s partly
my fault because I didn’t establish teamwork up front, nor did I make clear early in the
process the responsibilities of those participating. The Final Phase
With Hedges’ agreement, Lassiter set up two days of staff training for the third week in
August 2006. Kovecki had assured Lassiter that the system would be up by the last day of
training so that the staff could immediately use the new system. Lassiter broke the
training into major segments and had Kovecki set up training sites in two separate
conference rooms for staff. UNITRAK sent a two-person team that would act as proje...