CMGT 445 Week 5 Implementation Plan Rev
Implementation Plan Review
CMGT/445
10/27/2014
Implementation Plan Review
MATTHEW BUTTACAVOLI After looking over Matthew’s Implementation plan I can see that it is well thought out and comprehensive. Every area of the assignment was followed. I think that the portion of the paper that stands out is the great deal of thought and precision that is in the project timeline. The timeline is very in depth and even allows for a small window of extra time, if needed. Areas of improvement would be more detail on the scope items. Had questions about who would create test/automation scripts, for example. Project budgets are typically broken down by SDLC phase in my experience as well as by line item. The only thing that I can see that needs improvement would be spelling and grammar. If this were actually being presented to a company’s CEO, it would not look very good with punctuation and grammar errors in it.
Robert Smith
After reviewing Roberts’s content minus a couple area’s is well thought out and well organized. Project looks to be scoped out very well and all the major milestones are laid out. Project is full of detail and information a company would require when looking at a project. The scope does not tell us how many computers are considered in scope to know if the project timelines are realistic. Timelines of project seem very compressed and unrealistic because lack of scope clarity. Robert’s project plan should not be missing a budget; even if you have not worked through all the numbers, you should have something as a placeholder. Couple keys points; I do not believe programmers can complete a new software in ten days, unless you are paying them close to $200 a month.
JOSH PHILLIPS
When reviewing Josh’s Implementation plan it is evident that he put a lot of time and effort into the assignment. It is very difficult to pick any one area that he did not do very well. I think that the area that I see as standing out the most would be the utilization of graphs
CMGT/445
10/27/2014
Implementation Plan Review
MATTHEW BUTTACAVOLI After looking over Matthew’s Implementation plan I can see that it is well thought out and comprehensive. Every area of the assignment was followed. I think that the portion of the paper that stands out is the great deal of thought and precision that is in the project timeline. The timeline is very in depth and even allows for a small window of extra time, if needed. Areas of improvement would be more detail on the scope items. Had questions about who would create test/automation scripts, for example. Project budgets are typically broken down by SDLC phase in my experience as well as by line item. The only thing that I can see that needs improvement would be spelling and grammar. If this were actually being presented to a company’s CEO, it would not look very good with punctuation and grammar errors in it.
Robert Smith
After reviewing Roberts’s content minus a couple area’s is well thought out and well organized. Project looks to be scoped out very well and all the major milestones are laid out. Project is full of detail and information a company would require when looking at a project. The scope does not tell us how many computers are considered in scope to know if the project timelines are realistic. Timelines of project seem very compressed and unrealistic because lack of scope clarity. Robert’s project plan should not be missing a budget; even if you have not worked through all the numbers, you should have something as a placeholder. Couple keys points; I do not believe programmers can complete a new software in ten days, unless you are paying them close to $200 a month.
JOSH PHILLIPS
When reviewing Josh’s Implementation plan it is evident that he put a lot of time and effort into the assignment. It is very difficult to pick any one area that he did not do very well. I think that the area that I see as standing out the most would be the utilization of graphs