introduction - karenlouiseeportfolio.weebly.com · web viewwhilst the definition remains...

Solution Evaluation

A project to evaluate various solutions for a distributed team that needs to communicate, collaborate and share files.

Unit Code IFN612

Unit Title Emerging Technologies for Information Practice

Students DE PALO, Maria Antonia (Toni) (N9915281)

DUNN, Ryan (N9886427)

EYRE, Karen (N9758887)

Due Date Sunday, 10 June 2018

Statement of Originality

By submitting this assignment, we are aware of the University rule that students must not

act in a manner which constitutes academic dishonesty, as stated and explained in the

QUT Manual of Policies and Procedures. We confirm that this work represents our effort;

we have viewed the final version and it does not contain plagiarised material.

Student Number Name Signature

N9915281 DE PALO,Toni

N9886427 DUNN,Ryan

N9758887 EYRE,Karen

Solution Evaluation Page i

Executive Summary

Key Findings

In order to enhance virtual team effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group

projects in offices across Australia, the ATO needs to select a technology which focuses

on communication, file sharing and collaborative and private spaces.

Based upon the identified users, the solution must meet the following organisational and

user requirements:

Organisational Requirements Group conferencing, instant messaging

and private forum platforms.

Shared workspaces, calendars and to-

do lists.

Online meeting tools (visual and

auditory).

Information and content sharing, such

as text, photographs or web displays.

Negotiating, problem solving and team

decision making.

Privacy and security.

User Requirements Simplicity/Intuitiveness

Reliability

Accessibility

Security

Speed and Synchronicity

Real or Near Time Data

Recommendation

RKT Consultants have evaluated eight market-leading communication and collaboration

technologies. Based upon the ATO’s specific needs, it is recommended that Office 365 be selected as the recommended software. Extending the existing Microsoft Office

enterprise installation to Office 365 will provide all required functionally (though additional,

modular applications) at a marginal cost impact. Further, as Microsoft Office software is

already used throughout the ATO, Office 365 will provide a familiar interface with which

users should become quickly accustomed.

Solution Evaluation Page ii

Contents

Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1

Background........................................................................................................................ 2

Context.............................................................................................................................2

Problem Statement..........................................................................................................3

Implications......................................................................................................................4

Organisational Requirements...........................................................................................4

User Requirements..........................................................................................................5

Discussion..........................................................................................................................6

Collaboration....................................................................................................................6

Communication................................................................................................................9

File Sharing....................................................................................................................11

Recommendation.............................................................................................................13

Conclusion........................................................................................................................15

References........................................................................................................................... i

Appendix A: User Persona 1........................................................................................... iv

Appendix B: User Persona 2............................................................................................v

Appendix C: User Persona 3...........................................................................................vi

Solution Evaluation Page iii

Introduction

Norbert Wiener (1988) stated that “we have modified our environment so radically that we

must modify ourselves in order to exist in the new environment.” Technology, talent

acquisition and the emergence of a global economy (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010) has

changed the economic landscape. Globalisation has led to business operations acting as

a homogenous worldwide market (Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood, 2017) with employees for

these businesses no longer being confined to one geographical location. The removal of

these geographic boundaries and the continuous emergence of new technology

supporting this new environment has created new challenges for organisations. Creating

and maintaining an efficient team now requires its own strategy underpinned by

technology (Lepsinger & DeRosa, 2010).

This report will provide evaluation, comparisons and recommendations about suitable

technology that support the organisation in its daily activities. The report takes into

consideration the dispersed workforce, emerging technologies and the specific areas of

reduced efficiency and, through in-depth analysis, will provide a recommendation that will

focus on:

Communication

File Sharing

Collaborative and Private Spaces

Whilst the report will discuss the analysis and comparison of technology in relation to the

above focus areas, the overall recommendation will look at the most comprehensive and

suitable solutions and compare these against a more singular solution. This report will

provide options for consideration based on best practice, expandability and workforce

capability. Financial conditions were considered in the evaluations however the

organisation did not set a specified limit. Notwithstanding the unlimited budget and

considering the organisation is a government agency, recommendations provided have

considered the short and long term financial implications ensuing the technology

recommended is sustainable and financially viable under public scrutiny.

Solution Evaluation Page 1

Background

Context

RKT Consultants have been briefed to offer an inexpensive technology solution for trial by

the Australian Taxation Office (“ATO”), who want to enhance virtual team effectiveness

and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across Australia.

The project trial group will initially involve a distributed team of three members, located in

Brisbane, Newcastle and Adelaide.

Each team member has their own portfolio of work:

Project Sponsor (located in Newcastle), responsible for high level strategy alignment,

executive presentations, liaison with other dependant areas (IT as infrastructure is

important in this project). Sponsor is also responsible for the management of the

team, its deliverables and its cohesion.

Project Coordinator (located in Brisbane), responsible for the project reporting,

governance and documentation of the project. Secretariat for the Executive Level

working group where all project stakeholders provide input and direction.

Product Owner (located in Adelaide) responsible for working with the business to

understand the problem, develop a set of corporately aligned high level stakeholder

requirements and liaise with developers to build an appropriate solution. The Product

owner refines the stakeholder requirements and in collaboration with multi-functional

delivery teams, provide direction, guidance and governance on the product

development.

RKT Consultants have conducted an initial audit of the group and found the following:

Each member has been provided with a desktop and an iPad by the ATO.

Each member has remote virtual access, virtual private network (VPN) to the system

to enable log in for any device and any location. This network is not always stable

and access may be difficult during peak hours.


Not every member has web camera on desktop (however, each iPad has a web

camera).

Each member is having many meetings in isolation from the team. As such, there is

currently no effective way to communicate decisions, blockers or areas of concern

that may impact others in the team.

Teams are Agile and thereby adopt the practices and ceremonies of this

methodology and require a visual capture of work on hand and its flow through.

Security is imperative and any cloud based program will not allow tax file numbers or

other client information to be stored.

Software currently provided on company devices is Microsoft Window 10, Yammer

through Office 365, and some areas have Jira and Confluence by Altassian.

Problem Statement

DuFrene & Lehman (2016) found that “workers spend approximately 80 percent of their

time working collaboratively, often across 10 or more virtual teams” (p.8). Whilst the

benefits of this mode of working are cost-saving and enable business to draw upon

specialised labour, distributed teams across the world may face problems regarding

culture and language barriers as well as time zone variations; on a technical level, they

also need technology solutions that can help them collaborate efficiently and effectively.

Efficiency problems may also be faced due to user perceptions about communication

technology; Laitinen & Valo (2018) caution “that team members with high levels of

communication technology anxiety can sometimes participate less, send fewer task-

oriented messages, introduce fewer novel topics, and are even rated more poorly by other

team members” (p.13). As such, it is crucial to understand the wants and needs of the

distributed team members who will be using the communication technology, as well as the

operational goals of the company.

Companies often base their decision making for communication use based on their

immediate needs, what they have heard about (usually from marketing) or are already

familiar with using. Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017, p. 11) caution against rushing into

a communication software solution and note some of the challenges faced when selecting

tools for a distributed environment, being:


1. Selection of inappropriate communication tools (synchronous and asynchronous).

2. Problems with adopting and adjusting to suitable tools.

3. Lack of coverage of such tools.

4. Lack of data integration among different tools.

5. Security and privacy issues.

6. Lack of familiarity of tools appropriate for GSD environment.

7. Lack of progress tracking.

Implications

Usmani, Hassan & Mahmood (2017) note that for business “in most cases there is no

proper procedure to select the best tool for the project” (p.16). Additionally, teams may be

resistant to change.

RKT Consultants will need to “evaluate technology on the communication trifecta:

simplicity, reliability, and accessibility” (DuFrene & Lehman, 2016; p.26). Further, the

technology solution “should allow teams members to get connected easily without complex

setup time and steep learning curves, enable members to send messages [safely and

securely] to their intended target, and provide accessibility to the entire team regardless of

location and time zone. Collaborative technology must also archive messages for timely

retrieval” (ibid).

Organisational Requirements

Distributed teams need technology solutions for the following communication needs:

1. Group conferencing, instant messaging and private forum platforms.

2. Shared workspaces, calendars and to-do lists.

3. Online meeting tools (visual and auditory).

4. Information and content sharing, such as text, photographs or web displays.

5. Negotiating, problem solving and team decision making.

6. Privacy and security.

Laitinen & Valo, (2018), further note that virtual communication platforms that offer these

solutions assist efficiency and efficacy in a distributed team “because they provide auditory

and/or visual connections between team members” (p.13). Given that team members are


also working across geographical and time differences, the platform must also provide

options for synchronous and asynchronous communication.

User Requirements

Using three persona profiles (refer to Appendix A, B and C for the Persona Posters of

selected users) that are indicative of the users within the team the following requirements

and preferences will form the basis for the recommendation and drive the evaluation to

find the ‘best fit’:

Simplicity/Intuitiveness

Reliability

Accessibility

Security

Speed and Synchronicity

Real or Near Time Data


Discussion

Collaboration

According to the Oxford dictionary (Oxford University Press, 2018) collaboration is the

action of working in collaboration with others to produce something. Whilst the definition

remains unaltered the ‘action’ has transformed over the years as organisations turn to

teams with multiple diverse factors including geography, cultural and generational attitudes

(Bjørn & Ngwenyama, 2009) and as such are required to use Information and

Communication Technology (ICT) as the primary mode for interaction (Chuboda et. al.,

2005). This practice reduces a teams’ ability to develop a shared meaning of context, the

notion of common ground and a sense of normality which is usually built over time and

personal interactions (Cramton, 2001 and Bjørn, & Ngwenyama, 2009).

This section of the report will provide an overview of existing technologies which embrace

the collaboration requirements of the virtual team and will look to provide

recommendations that best manage the multi-generational and temporal aspect of the

team. Using the aforementioned personas as a user profile highlighting their needs and

preferences, the following tools have been explored for consideration.

As with any research, it is imperative to understand the problem and address the need.

The problem statement highlighted the need for the team to have the following

collaborative features:

Synchronous collaboration – real time and immediate.

Privacy and security – whole team or individual use.

Visible management – use of Agile practices requires visual ‘kanban’ or work flow

management tool that is viewable, and updatable. Must provide an audit trail.

Accessible – multi device access with individual sign in details for traceability.

Expandable – given the team numbers increase and decrease depending on the

status of work, the need to add and reduce team members from the tool is

imperative.

Intuitive and easy to use –temporal nature of team requires tool to be ‘easy’ to use

and intuitive enough to require limited pre-training.


Given these specific user requirements and preferences, the following top-rated

collaboration tools were evaluated (Carter, 2017 and Finance Online, 2018, Capterra Inc.

n.d. and GetApp, 2018).

The tables on the next page highlights collaboration that either meet the user requirements

or take into consideration software and licenses already available within the organisation

(denoted with an asterisk). Given that the pilot to implement new and best fit technology is

tailored to the individual needs of a small group, the organisation itself is a large corporate

enterprise. A best practice approach is to work in with natural and existing systems where

possible rather than using bespoke technology to achieve the required future state.

At first glance, the tables would indicate the Same Page as the most suitable technology to

meet all the mandatory criteria needs of the users. This software is available on multiple

devices, is cloud based and thereby portable. It allows for both collaboration through

brainstorming and whiteboard functionality however also provides the users the private

spaces though the audio / video conferencing features accompanied by a chat feature.

The descriptions highlight the ability for expandability in users and there appears to be

adequate support available. Security and privacy requirements would need to be

investigated; however, given that it is a space for collaboration and synchronous

knowledge sharing and not file storage, it meets the overall needs of the users.

Other technologies meet the users brief however there are trade-offs in functionality and

access that will need to be considered in the recommendations. Whilst the appetite of the

team is known, the drivers of the organisation would need to be considered. The above

table does highlight Yammer as not being a suitable option even though it is currently used

by other areas of the organisation. This does highlight and reinforce the need to provide

the team with a tool that specifically promotes group collaboration. A key factor to consider

are the integration points with technology already in use so as to maximise on agreements

such as licensing and subscriptions already in place. Additionally, it can be expected that a

system is already in use all security and privacy requirements have also been considered

and meet the standards of the organisation.

In summary, whilst Same Page may appear to be the most appropriate tool it does not

integrate with some of the organisation’s key applications such as Microsoft Outlook,


though it does integrate with Jira which is quickly becoming a core application within the

ATO.Table 1: Comparison of Must Have Requirements

Feature

Asa

na

Con

fluen

ce*

Sam

e Pa

ge

Trel

lo*

Go

Mee

ting

Offi

ce 3

65

Yam

mer

*

Cic

so

Spar

k/W

ebE

x*

ScalabilityExpandable to Enterprise

Device and PlatformCloud

Windows

Mac

MobileiOS

Android

FeaturesCooperative Writing

Brainstorming

Synchronous Editing

Discussion Boards

Audio/Video

Chat/Messaging

Integration with Other Apps

Total Number of Apps andSelected Apps used by ATO

138 54 21 187 55 330 71 39

OfficeOneDrive

Jira

OutlookSharePt

JiraTrello

OneDriveJira

Google

JiraGoogle Office OneDrive

SharePt

OfficeOneDriveSharePt

Outlook

SupportPhone

Online

Knowledge Base

Video

Training

Options DocsWebinar

DocsWebinar

DocsWebinarOnline

DocsOnlineOn-Site

All DocsOnline All

SecurityAuthentication Multi Multi Single Multi Unknown Multi Admin Unknown


Table 2: Comparison of Nice to Have Requirements

Feature

Asa

na

Con

fluen

ce*

Sam

e Pa

ge

Trel

lo*

Go

Mee

ting

Offi

ce 3

65

Yam

mer

*

Cic

so

Spar

k/W

ebE

x*

Document Management

Project Management

Task Management

Content Management

Version Control

Communication

Distributed team communication is predominately technology-mediated, and appropriate

communication technologies as well as ways to use technology are essential for

successful virtual team interaction (Laitinen & Valo, 2018). Röcker, (2012) notes that

contemporary workforces are “communication intensive... [team members] have many,

mostly informal, interactions with multiple individuals during the day in order to scan their

environment, to exchange information, and to request or provide advice... Besides the

goal-oriented exchange of task-related information, communication within the workplace

serves also social purposes... the interpersonal exchange of messages, thoughts, and

feelings, which is a compelling requirement for people working in teams” (p.1). Team

communication can be either formal or informal, which have particular characteristics

(Figure 1) that need to be considered when offering a technology solution.

Figure 1: Communication Types and Characteristics for Consideration (Röcker, 2012)

Both formal and informal communication are integral to collaboration, team efficiency and

achieving task outcomes. Mabon (2017) notes that team efficiency is enhanced with media


rich communication: “a media’s ability to communicate shared meaning and process

information without distortion. Low richness referred to communication that takes place

without physical presence; lacking social and visual cues such as body language and

gestures” (p.18).

Distributed teams also require both synchronous and asynchronous communication

technology, to accommodate their differences in time and whether their communication

need is formal or informal. Figure 2 outlines the media richness of communication methods

required by the distributed team to ensure their communication is fit for purpose.

Figure 2: Methods for Communication in Virtual Environments

To deliver on this theory, the proposed technology should deliver a communication

solution like chat, voice conversation or video conferencing. In Table 1, communication is

included in the Discussion Boards, Audio/Video and Chat/Messaging features. Of the

selected technologies, only Same Page, Trello and Office 365 provide support for all three.

File Sharing

Whilst briefly considered alongside other ‘must have’ requirements above, the nature of

the work completed at the ATO, combined with the fact the organisation has a large

physical presence in multiple different locations, mean that file sharing is a particularly


critical functionality which ought to be given more weight when selecting a collaboration

software solution. Accordingly, the following section will look at the file sharing capabilities

of selected software in more details. In the interests of brevity, this section will only

evaluate those solutions which substantially meet the ‘must have’ requirements presented

above; solutions which fail to deliver two or more mandatory features will be excluded.

Additionally, as the ATO recognises the importance of collaboration (considered in more

detail above), potential solutions which cannot provide synchronous editing will also be

excluded. Based on the analysis summarised in Table 1, the discussion here will therefore

be limited to the Asana, Same Page and Office 365 platforms.

At this point it is also useful to recall that the ATO, like most enterprises, operates a

corporate network which already provides authenticated users access to file storage.

Each user is provided networked hard-drive capacity for private use, as well as access to a

common ‘shared’ drive. Both the user’s private and shared drives are accessible from any

terminal connected to the network, either physically (in the office) or (remotely) via the

VPN. The folder structure of the shared network storage device closely mirrors the

organisational structure, with folder permissions strictly controlled by a user’s approved

access group. These groups tend to be hierarchical rather than functional, meaning that

sharing documents between cross-functional team is encumbered. Finally, due to the

cascading nature of access groups (which if not carefully managed, may inadvertently give

a user access to sensitive content beyond what was intended), the security protocols

mean that project teams often find it tedious and difficult to navigate the IT requirements to

established a ‘shared’ space for project work (not to mention that file sharing with an ad-

hoc team is near impossible!). The ATO accordingly need a different solution to support

file sharing between cross-functional, project teams.

Table 3, on the following page, evaluates the file sharing functionality of each potential

solution.

Table 3: File SharingFunctionality of Different Technologies

Functionality Asana Same Page

Office 365

User Interface OS Integration

Web-Based Access

Drag-and-Drop


Functionality Asana Same Page

Office 365

Folder Upload

Document ManagementCommenting/Mark-Up

Version History

Data Recovery

Sharing OptionsShare-by-Link

Read and Read/Write

Folder Permissions

Document Permissions

MiscellaneousDashboard Statistics

Note: Asana and Same Page do not provide file sharing functionality as a native feature

of the software; file sharing is facilitated via integration with other applications such as

Google Docs or Dropbox.

From the table, it is clear that Office 365 is the only technology which provides a native file

sharing solution, though both Asana and Same Page can be integrated with other file

sharing facilities. Given this, all three solutions can provide adequate functionality to meet

ATO business requirements – though the native functionality of Office 365 is an

advantage. Any decision should also be based on user requirements. Here the majority

of user concerns are objective (i.e. reliability, security, synchronicity etc), with all offerings

returning similar results. However, for the subjective/personal user requirements

(specifically, simplicity/intuitiveness), comparing the different solutions with each other is

difficult. However, RKT Consultants note that ATO staff are already familiar with Microsoft

Office applications, thus giving the Office 365 solution a slight advantage in regards to

user-friendliness.


Recommendation

Following from the discussion above, RKT Consultants recommends the selection of the

Office 365 suite of applications to further support team communication and collaboration.

With this solution, the ATO will gain access to a modular software suite, allowing the

disparate business areas and diverse project teams to select the solution which is

appropriate for their given requirements. Adoption of Office 365 will provide the ATO with

the following products:

Email Solutions (Outlook or Exchange)

Document Creation (Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Sway, Publisher, Visio)

Database Tools (Access, SharePoint)

Productivity Tools (Planner, Project, To-Do)

File Storage (OneDrive)

File Sharing (SharePoint)

Communication (Teams, Yammer, Skype)

Reporting (MyAnalytics)

The wide, and at times, overlapping, range of products will provide ATO project teams with

options for various needs. For example, in the collaboration space, it may be sufficient for

a team to provide informal revisions to a document via the ‘Review’ feature native to Word,

or it may be necessary to move to full version control option similar to that provided by

SharePoint. Similarly, the teams’ communication need may be that a video enabled

meeting is required (via Skype), a troubleshooting Wiki page or discussion board be

created (on SharePoint) or that wider stakeholder engagement and involvement be

solicited (via Yammer). The power of Office 365 as a solution is that it offers multiple

applications, providing different project teams flexibility to select the option which is

appropriate for their specific need.

From an organisational perspective, Office 365 also brings benefits. First, the user

interface for each application is built around the familiar Ribbon menu. It is expected that

the similar application design will empower users to quickly adapt to the new tools,

improving take-up across the organisation. This familiar design will also enable Office 365

solutions to be adopted with minimal training. The lower costs is also the second major


benefit of Office 365. Table 4, on the right, summarises the monthly user licence fee for

the considered solutions. In addition to the lower user monthly licence fee, the actual cost

to the ATO may be further mitigated by migrating existing Microsoft Office licences to

Office 365.


Conclusion

To assist the ATO enhance virtual team

effectiveness and efficiency whilst collaborating on group projects in offices across

Australia, RKT Consultants have completed an in-depth analysis of organisational and

user requirements.

Our analysis started with an overview of the operational requirements of the ATO. We

then introduced a theoretical understanding of group-work and collaboration needs to

inform the key organisational requirements of any technology solution. Next, we

referenced user preferences (as documented in key Persona Posters prepared by the

ATO) to identify user requirements. Then, in the discussion section of this report, RKT

Consultants considered a number of leading technology solutions across the themes of

communication, collaboration and file-sharing. A range of market-leading software options

were evaluated against the functionality required. This then informed the

recommendations made in the final section of the report.

The proposed solution, Office 365, will provide the ATO with a modular solution, with

different applications to target specific needs. Built with the familiar office ribbon style

menu, users will also benefit from a familiar, easy-to-use interface – cutting down on

training requirements, and improving take-up rate. Finally, by migrating existing Microsoft

Office licences to the Office 365 product, the implementation costs can be minimised.

RKT Consultants would like to thank the Australian Tax Office

for the opportunity to prepare this report. We trust the analysis

and recommendations provided by our team has added value

to your organisation, and kindly ask you to consider our

consulting service for future information projects.


Table 4: Monthly User Licence Costs

Asana Same Page Office 365

$8.33 $7.00 $6.00

References

Bjorn, P., & Ngwenyama, O. (2009). Virtual team collaboration: building shared meaning,

resolving breakdowns and creating translucence. Information Systems Journal,

19(3), 227-253.

Carter, Beth. (2017). Online Collaboration tools for virtual teams. Clariant Creative.

Retrieved from: https://www.clariantcreative.com/blog/online-collaboration-tools-for-

virtual-teams

Chudoba, K., Wynn, E., Lu, M., & Watson‐Manheim, M. (2005). How virtual are we?

Measuring virtuality and understanding its impact in a global organization.

Information Systems Journal, 15(4), 279–306. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2575.2005.00200.x

Cramton, Catherine (2001). The mutual knowledge problem and its consequences for

dispersed collaboration. Organization Science, 12(3), 346-371. Retrieved from

https://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=https://search-proquest-

com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/213835456?accountid=13380

D’Angelo, M. (2018). Microsoft Teams Vs. Slack: Which Is Right For Your Business?

Business News Daily. Retrieved from https://www.businessnewsdaily.com/9653-

microsoft-teams-vs-slack.html

Duffy, J. (2018). The Best Business Messaging Apps of 2018. PC Mag Australia.

Retrieved from http://au.pcmag.com/software/50247/guide/the-best-business-

messaging-apps-of-2018

DuFrene, D. D., & Lehman, C. M. (2016). Managing Virtual Teams, Second Edition. New

York, New York [222 East 46th Street, New York, NY 10017]: Business Expert Press.

Farley, J. (2017). Microsoft Teams: The Good, The Bad, The ‘Is It Ready?’ CMS Wire.

Retrieved from https://www.cmswire.com/digital-workplace/microsoft-teams-the-

good-the-bad-the-is-it-ready/

Solution Evaluation Page i

Finance Online (2018). Top 15 online collaboration tools virtual teams.

https://financesonline.com/top-15-online-collaboration-tools-virtual-teams/

GetApp (2018). GetApp Compare. Retrieved from: https://www.getapp.com/collaboration-

software/a/yammer/compare/gotomeeting-vs-jira-vs-microsoft-office-365/

Heath, N. (2018). Microsoft Teams: A Cheat Sheet. Tech Republic. Retrieved from

https://www.techrepublic.com/article/microsoft-teams-the-smart-persons-guide/

Laitinen, K., & Valo, M. (2018). Meanings of communication technology in virtual team

meetings: Framing technology-related interaction. International Journal of Human -

Computer Studies, 111, 12–22. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.10.012

Lepsinger, R., & DeRosa, D. (2010). Virtual team success: a practical guide for working

and leading from a distance. Retrieved from

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/qut/detail.action?docID=589145

Mabon, A. (2017, January 1). A Systematic Literature Review to Identify Best Practices for

Communication in Virtual Teams. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/2016101208/

Oxford University Press (2018). Collaboration. Retrieved from:

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/collaboration

Röcker, C. (2012). Informal Communication and Awareness in Virtual Teams.

Communications in Information Science and Management Engineering, 2(5), 1-15.

Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/17ef/c075fe3086364b7e5f62df01c5fd8b840963.pdf

Usmani, N., Hassan, R., & Mahmood, W. (2017). Impediments to requirement engineering

in distributed team. International Journal of Information Engineering and Electronic

Business, 9(6), 10.

doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/10.5815/ijieeb.2017.06.02

Solution Evaluation Page ii

Wiener, N. (1988). The human use of human beings : cybernetics and society. New York,

N.Y: Da Capo Press. Retrieved from: https://books.google.com.au/books?

id=DydKDgAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=on

epage&q&f=false

Solution Evaluation Page iii

Appendix A: User Persona 1

Solution Evaluation Page iv

Appendix B: User Persona 2

Solution Evaluation Page v

Appendix C: User Persona 3

Solution Evaluation Page vi

introduction - karenlouiseeportfolio.weebly.com · web viewwhilst the definition remains...

Documents