Explain the trade-offs among selecting between the different types of conversion: direct conversion and parallel conversion; pilot conversion, phased conversion, and simultaneous conversion; modular conversion and whole-system conversion (select one comparison).
Both conversion strategies focus on the way in which users are switched over to the new system. Direct conversion is an abrupt change: the old system is essentially unplugged and the new system is turned on and the users have no choice but to work with the new system. In the parallel conversion strategy, the new system is turned on, but the old system is used simultaneously for a time. The direct strategy is more risky because there is no fall-back if significant system bugs are discovered. With parallel conversion, the old system will still be available if there is a major bug discovered in the new system. In addition, the cost and extra work of using both systems simultaneously must be considered.
ReplyDeleteOne of the major benefits of parallel conversion is that it reduces risk by providing the organization with a fallback positiong or backup plan if major problems with the new system are encountered. Direct conversion doesn't have this strenghth in comparison.
ReplyDeleteEach type of conversion has different trade-offs that can be grouped into the categories of risk, cost, and time. These categories reflect how the new system will be introduced into the organization.
ReplyDeletePhased conversion is a medium risk, a medium cost, and a long time frame compared to simultaneous conversion. Compared to phased conversion and simultaneous conversion, pilot conversion has low risk, medium cost, and requires a medium time frame. The pilot conversion seems to be the overall best conversion because of its low risk, and medium cost and time. If the conversion needed to happen quickly, simultaneous conversion is the fasted but also the most risky and costly.
For the Conversion Modules there are two types of modules conversion; modular and whole-system.
ReplyDeleteThe trade offs of modular include that it is riskier to implement this conversion in that it is rarely done unless there is software is written loosely between modules to accompany it, in which it then becomes easier. It also requires special care to take care and implement this type of conversion because of doing each on e separately, which also includes a extended amount of time.
The second conversion module is the whole-system modular. In this type of conversion the whole system is done at once, which reduces the amount of time to implement and install compared to the modular conversion. the risk with this conversion is with the size and complexity of the organization-wide system. If the system is large and/or complex, the new system may prove to be hard for users of the system.
Although pilot conversion has many advantages, this type of conversion can only be done in organizations that can tolerate the use of different systems in different locations for a period of time. I think that this would be difficult for many people since many workers are unwilling or opposed to change (resistant adopters). Instead, I would see phased conversion as being more advantageous. It allows organizations to introduce the new system in phases. This allows a location to get used to the new system more easily. Although problems can affect the whole organization, it is easier to fix the kinks at one location rather than having problems all over at different locations.
ReplyDeleteThe two types of conversions I will be discussing are direct and parallel conversions. There are many advantages and disadvantages to each type of conversion. Direct conversion is where you switch from the old system to a new system. Parallel conversion on the other hand is where you use both the old system and new system together. A direct system is considered risky where as a parallel system reduces risk.
ReplyDeleteBoth direct and parallel conversions deal with converting over to a new system. Direct conversion is an abrupt change that changes the entire system to the new one, without overlap with the new system. It is a simple conversion, but it is also very risky. Parallel conversion uses the new and old system at the same time to allow data to be inputted into both systems. This allows you to see if the new system is working correctly before the old system is discontinued.
ReplyDelete