|
Program Conversion - Mainframes - Business Rules
While the programmers have, at this stage, set up table search controls,
imported data, defined navigation menus, and laid out operational screens,
there is almost no wiring behind the instrument panel. It is likely
that, out of the 18 month original deadline, the first 18 months were
spent defining schema, the next 18 months creating the foundations, and
the system is now at the beginning of 'Year 4'.
The system has been in 'production' for, say, 18 months, although only by
managers running ad-hoc queries. This has created an experienced
user community that are now 'bought in' to the new system. A new
set of 'read only' users are getting accustomed to the web interface,
the menu navigation, and the search screens, although they still apply
updates through the old system. Given that the newer system has
improved search functionality, it is often convenient to 'find' records
using the web based forms, then pull the found records up on the mainframe
for editing. While still not a complete system, it has already
impacted productivity.
It is unlikely that automated conversion tools are going to be of much
help in this phase. First, certain design conventions will have
emerged that are kind of 'obvious': things that work a particular way,
a way which bears no resemblance to the prototype. Second, security
will have been split off into to the menu functionality and 'search'
functionality will have been placed in a separate container, so to speak,
so the code that is left is primarily for CRUD (CReate, Update, and Delete).
Third, it will be obvious that the original forms were so small that what
existed in separate screens will now be consolidated, perhaps at two levels.
At one level, fewer forms will have more fields each. At another,
'separate' screens in the prototype program will now exist as divider
tabs in a controlling form. The user will no longer be forced
to page from screen to screen to update one field in a large table.
They will be able to select the relevant tab, make their edit, and commit
their change more or less directly.
At this point in the migration neither the schedule and budget bear a
resemblance to the original plan. More than likely, a project manager
or two has moved on. Despite what appear to be missed objectives,
something of substantial value is in place and operating. Had the
plan for hiring programmers and technical writers at day one been followed,
it is likely that a lot more money would have been spent, and none of the
resulting work would have been usable.
Since the original budget plans are pretty much shot, the people authorizing
spending may want to reduce the scope of the project until certain elements
are in full production. Since the database is usable and the query tools
are usable, there are a couple of pathways to follow: one is the 'core' pathway,
the other the 'peripheral'.
In the 'core' scenario, the complex application with the most transactional
activity is converted. Master tables that can still be updated using
mainframe screens are updated through that path and synchronized overnight.
The transactional tables in the host system are no longer imported, and the
order entry or billing or accounts receivable system runs on the web host.
Master table maintenance programming is taken care of later.
In the 'periphery' scenario the master table maintenance forms are converted
from the tables with fewest dependencies onwards. In short, a table of zip
codes has no dependencies so it's maintenance is completed first, followed
by the city table that has to validate against the zip code table. The
customer table program is converted next. The system does not go into
production at this point, since these tables don't 'flow in reverse' to the
mainframe. However, many of these are sufficiently trivial that they
are moved out of the way fairly quickly. The hard, complex (and
expensive) work is deferred to later budget cycles.
This approach creates some flexibility in the timelines, management can 'dial in'
as much talent as they can afford, and is available.
While the person authorizing funding would be horrified at schedule slippages, the
point of this pathway is to limit the downside risk.  Work that gets done 'stays
done', and a rush to put bodies in cubicles before work is ready for them is avoided.
Users aren't led down the garden path; they are as aware as anyone else as to development
progress, because they're involved. Effort is made from the beginning to make
an incomplete system as usable as possible, reaping some benefits for investments
as they are made.
For those that feel like their system is way overdue for an
upgrade, please call 210-734-5575 for free initial consultation.
Or, eMail us at
Info@ResourceLogic.net
|
|