FEASIBILITY

STUDY

Asset Management System

For

Sigma Pensions Limited

June 9th, 2017

Prepared By

Hauwa Mauludatu Abdullahi

(16220316005)

MIT 1
SAMS Feasibility Study
Revision Sheet

Revision Sheet

Release No. Date Revision Description

Rev. 0 27/05/17 1st Draft Feasibility Report
Rev. 1 02/6/2017 Additional Use Case Diagram
Rev. 2 09/6/2017 Additional Class Diagram From Use Case

Page i
SAMS Feasibility Study

FEASIBILITY STUDY

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page #
1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION...........................................................................................2
1.1 Purpose............................................................................................................................2
1.2 Scope................................................................................................................................2
1.3 System Overview............................................................................................................2
1.4 Project References..........................................................................................................3
1.5 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations...................................................................4
1.6 Overview of the Remainder of the document..............................................................4
2.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY.........................................................................................7
2.1 Environment...................................................................................................................7
2.1.1 Organizations Involved...........................................................................................................................7
2.1.2 Input/output.............................................................................................................................................7
2.1.3 Processing...............................................................................................................................................8
2.1.4 Security...................................................................................................................................................8
2.1.5 System Interaction..................................................................................................................................8
2.1.6 Physical Environment.............................................................................................................................9
2.2 Current Functional Procedures....................................................................................9
2.3 Functional Objectives..................................................................................................11
2.4 Performance Objectives...............................................................................................11
2.5 Assumptions and Constraints.....................................................................................12
2.6 Methodology.................................................................................................................12
2.7 Evaluation Criteria......................................................................................................13
2.8 Recommendation..........................................................................................................14
3.0 PROPOSED SYSTEM....................................................................................................16
3.1 Description of Proposed System..................................................................................16
3.2 Improvements...............................................................................................................19
3.3 Time and Resource Costs............................................................................................19
3.4 Impacts..........................................................................................................................20
3.4.1 Equipment Impacts...............................................................................................................................20
3.4.2 Software Impacts...................................................................................................................................20
3.4.3 Organizational Impacts.........................................................................................................................21
3.4.4 Operational Impacts..............................................................................................................................21
3.4.5 Developmental Impacts........................................................................................................................22
3.4.6 Office Facility Impacts..........................................................................................................................23
3.4.7 Security and Privacy Impacts...............................................................................................................23

Page ii
SAMS Feasibility Study

3.5 Rationale for Recommendations.................................................................................23

4.0 ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS...........................................................................................26
4.1 Description of SysAid Asset Management Solution..................................................26
4.2 Description of ServiceNow Asset Managemnt Solution............................................26
4.3 Description of ManageEngine AssetExplorer................................................................27

Page iii
SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1
 SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1 Purpose
The purpose of this study is to establish a recommendation as to whether or not it is worth
carrying on with the requirement engineering and system development process for the asset
management system for sigma pensions. This study will lead to a decision as to whether to go
ahead or not with the requirement gathering or to re-strategize. This Feasibility study tests the
proposed system according to its workability, ability to meet needs and effective use of the
resources. It is also intended to identify the potential problems that exist in the current system.
Other reasons for which the feasibility study is carried out include;
To creates focus for the project work.
To streamline the alternative options available to the business.
To help identify new opportunities available to the business.
To identify reasons not to proceed.
To affords the entity with valuable information for a go/no go decision criteria.
To identify the weakness of a proposed system early hence affords the entity the
opportunity to mitigate and increase the probability of success.
To provide documentation that the idea was thoroughly investigated.

1.2 Scope
The scope of the study covers the effect the asset management system will have on current and
future asset management processes and procedures of sigma pensions, it determines how effective
the proposed system is likely to be as well as its technical and economic efficiencies. The study
will also likely examine the social implications of the proposed system and other alternative
solutions.

1.3 System Overview

The development of the Sigma Asset Management System (SAMS) will be the sole responsibility
of the Usman Danfodio University MIT student, and assigned the product code (P0001),
Categorized under development Projects
The system will seek to automate the processes of asset management for the company, In
addition. Its Major application, includes maintaining a record of the entities (Sigma Pensions)
assets at net book value. Amortization and Depreciation of Non-current assets Tangible and
intangible. The system needs to be secure enough to store financial records of the entity
General support system: The system should also provide support for various categories of users
some of which include API and network support, web access. Active Directory Authentication
Support and an ability to be integrated with other applications of the client.

2
 SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

The business entity is currently undergoing a series of major cooperate reconstruction with one of
its main objectives being to go 100% paperless this means the reduction of use of paper in order
to curb wastage and improve efficiency and effectiveness of its processes. As the asset
management System will be digitally based this reduces the need for keeping hard copy
documents associated with asset management e.g. Noncurrent asset schedules document etc.

1.4 Project References

Some references used in preparation of this document include:
Plan for Systems Analysis and Design - Feasibility Report (2007). Retrieved from:
https://www.sqa.org.uk/e-learning/SDM02CD/page_12.htm
K. Schwalbe, Information Technology Project Management, 3rd ed. Boston: Course
Technology, 2004.
Feasibility study software engineering (2009). Retrieved
from:http://softwarefeasibilitystudy.blogspot.com.ng/2009/07/feasibility-study-software-
engineering.html
The Purpose of a Project Feasibility Study(2011)Retrieved from:
http://blog.method123.com/2011/06/09/the-purpose-of-a-project-feasibility-study/#!
prettyPhoto
System requirements (2016) Retrieved from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_requirements
Application Security(2017) Retrieved from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_security
B. Korewar and B. Bhosale feasibility report class notes
ManageEngine Asset Explorer Features (2017) Retrieved from:
https://www.manageengine.com/products/asset-explorer/?
utm_source=pcmag&utm_medium=ppc&utm_term=Jun16&utm_content=AE&utm_camp
aign=AEReview
SysAid Features(2017) Retrieved from: https://www.sysaid.com/it-service-management-
software/it-asset-management
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Feasibility Study Template (2000)

1.5 Definitions, Acronyms and Abbreviations

A list of some of the acronyms and abbreviations used in this document and the meaning of each.
ASM Asset Management System.
SASM Sigma Asset Management System.

3
 SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

Acquisition cost cost of purchasing an asset.

Depreciation/amortization reduction in the value of an asset(tangible/non-tangible
respectively) due to its usage
NBV Net book Value. (Acquisition cost Less Accumulated Depreciation) The book
value of the asset in entities accounting records
NCA Non-Current Assets Assets lasting more than a year also called fixed assets
CA Current Assets assets lasting between 0 to 12months also Known as Non-Fixed
assets
Entity The business entity for which the application system is being developed.
Intranet Network within the organization
Internet Network outside the organization i.e. on the World Wide Web.
Authentication The process or action of verifying the identity of a user or process.
Authorization The process of giving access rights to a user or process to perform
actions
RDBMS Relational Database Management System.
IDE Integrated Development Environment.
UAT User Acceptance Testing.
SQL Injection (SQLi) an injection attack wherein an attacker can execute malicious
SQL statements (also commonly referred to as a malicious payload) that control a web
application's database server.
IASB International Accounting Standards Board.
IFRS International Financial Reporting Standards.
API Application Programming Interface.

1.6 Overview of the Remainder of the document

The remainder of this document presents the results of a feasibility study carried out to identify
the most feasible alternative of cause of action for the development and implementation of an
automated system of asset management for the entity Sigma Pensions. It details whether or not a
development project should be undertaken and the reasons for that decision. It outlines items as;
An Introduction/Management Summary
Background
Outline of the proposed solution
Methodology/method of analysis employed
Overview of alternatives solutions
Conclusions
And recommendations

4
SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

5
SAMS Feasibility Study 2.0 Management
Summary

2.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

6
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

2.0 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

2.1 Environment

2.1.1 Organizations Involved

The Project will be sponsored and developed by the student, the users of the system include the
employees and staff of sigma pensions especially those in the Finance department and the
department in charge of procurement of assets for the company. The project will be hosted within
the servers of the company, accessible online over the internet or offline within the intranet of the
entity, dependent on the wishes and needs of the organization.

2.1.2 Input/output

Input Requirements
Interaction with Entity's internal computer systems

Configuration settings and parameters, invocation of utility applications of the

entitys computer system.

Interaction with other applications of the entity

Relational Data in formats such as excel, xml, csv, etc.
Data import via web APIs.
Interaction with users (Employees of the Entity)

The information entered into a computer system, e.g. typed text, mouse click, etc.

Output Requirements
Interaction with Entity's internal computer systems

Configuration settings and output parameters, invocation of utility applications of

the entitys computer system.

Interaction with other applications of the entity

Relational Data in formats such as excel, xml, csv, etc.
Data Export via web APIs.
Interaction with users (Employees of the Entity)

7
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

The information retrieved from computer system monitor, and information printed
out from the system.

2.1.3 Processing
Minimum system Requirements of the proposed system include

Requirements
Windows
Operating system Windows Server 2003 or Higher
CPU Pentium processor at 90 MHz or higher
Memory 16 MB RAM
Hard drive 80 MB available in the hard disk
.

2.1.4 Security
Some security requirements of the proposed system include
The need for an authentication an authorization mechanism the will allow for data
manipulation of only privileged users and restrict access to un-authorized persons
The SAMS will not allow for embedded commands in data provided by users that force
the system to manipulate information stored in database table i.e. the application should
not be vulnerable to SQL injection attacks
Audit Log support to keep track of changes made by authorized users.
Configuration management: Restricting unauthorized access to administration
environment and configuration stores etc.
Session management

2.1.5 System Interaction

Interaction with Entity's internal computer systems

Interaction with other applications of the entity

Interaction with users (Employees of the Entity)

2.1.6 Physical Environment

The current system consists of a collection of paper documents and files and accounts staff that
carry out complex accounting valuation tasks manually with the use of tools as calculators and

8
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

accounting policy documents as guide. The process involves manual asset record management
(manually registering assets in asset schedule) and manual tracking of net book value of the asset.
(Manually tracking and offsetting accumulated depreciation from asset acquisition cost or carrying
amount). The reporting process of net assets is also manual as accounting staff need to sieve
through long ledgers of asset registers to spool out the data and information needed for preparing
the companys financial statements and for management decision making.

2.2 Current Functional Procedures

Sigma Pensions currently manages all the asset manually with each type of asset managed in a
different way, this has proved to be a tedious and difficult process that exhausts enormous time
and manpower resources. The current system performs asset management activities in the
following forms:

Assets are manually entered into the entitys asset schedule depending on the class of the
asset.
In this case the current system performs the day to day activities in the following ways.
The assets are recorded manually and their required data is hot property kept
Financial treatment of assets such as depreciation, amortization, impairment and
revaluation are carried out manually by finance staff and the net book values and
accumulated depreciation of the assets are recorded manually as such data
becomes available. This can often take weeks and months depending on the
volume of assets owned by the entity as it is carried out on either per asset basis as
in the case of depreciation or per class basis as in the case of revaluation
Assets Information i.e. the date of acquisition, depreciation/amortization policy,
net book value, accumulated depreciation tax written down values, disposal values,
disposal date, gains on disposal etc. are then manually recorded for each asset or
asset class.
The current system requires excess cost on manpower and limits the productivity of
finance staff that might otherwise be put to other productive activities of the entity. In
addition a high volume of work is involved and requires staff with deep understanding of
the accounting standards as it related to the recording of companies current and non-
current assets, Valuation of assets etc. Hence requires staffs with expert skills

Generally, the existing system performs all the aspects of asset management and control manually.
Hence it will be in the interest of the organization to automate the process in order to reduce the
costs incurred by the company.

9
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

2.3 Functional Objectives

The main objective of the proposed system is to develop a new computerized or automated
system (Sigma Asset Management System), To effectively and efficiently manage and control all
fixed, Non-current and non-fixed current assets of the entity in an easy, reliable and sustainable
fashion and incurring little cost to the entity.

10
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

Other functional objectives of the new system will include;

To effectively and efficiently manage and control all fixed, Non-current and non-fixed
current assets of the entity.
To cater for the needs of all classes of users of the system e.g. Administrative, Financial,
and Procurement etc.
To classify assets appropriately and accordingly
To apply uniform accounting policies to all classes of assets across periods.
To provide a comprehensive and well organized database of assets for management
information and decision making.
To provide a system that is easy to manage, operate by all users.
To improve the reliability, maintainability, and integrity of accounting data as it relates to
companys assets.
To provide a secure, up-to-date pool of data, capable of at all times determining the net
assets of the entity.
To quickly identify and write down obsolete and fully depreciated items from the asset
register.
To identify and trace additions and subtractions to asset list by keeping an audit log of
changes and modifications

2.4 Performance Objectives

Performance objectives of the new system includes;
Reduced labor costs of finance staffs.
Reduced stationary costs.
Reduced Time wasted in asset management control and valuation.
Improved management information services and management decision making through
accurate real time information.
Better compliance with accounting regulations as set by accounting bodies.

2.5 Assumptions and Constraints

Assumptions
It is assumed that the business entity is a going concern and will continue to use the
proposed solution in perpetuity. Hence alternative solutions are compared for suitability
and sustainability over a perpetual basis.

11
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

Another assumption is that most inputs to the system are entered into the system from
primary sources i.e. the users of the system.
That the processing requirements of the system is static and does not change over time.
That all output is in a predetermined format acceptable by all users of the system i.e all
users have uniform output expectations.
That the business entity will wish to minimize costs and maximize the benefits of the
proposed system
That all data pertaining to the proposed system and alternative systems are readily
available for decision making on an effective and efficient course of action.
That hardware and technology employed is static and does not change over time.
That software and operating system (operating environment) remains constant over the
operational life of the proposed solution.

Constraints/limitations
Limitation in the availability of Resource, financial to carry out adequate feasibility studies.
Unavailability of adequate and appropriate data for analysis of alternatives.
Lack of management buy in or buy in of some other stakeholder groups such as
employees.
Wide communication gap between users and solution providers.

2.6 Methodology
The methodology employed or strategy used in carrying out the feasibility analysis of the
proposed system includes and is not limited to survey of the operations of the organization,
modeling of its processes with and without the proposed system, benchmarking its performance
with competitors and other business entities that employ an automated asset management system,
observation of its activities and processes, interview of finance, administration and procurement
staff etc. to evaluate the proposed system to arrive at a feasible alternative.

2.7 Evaluation Criteria

The applicable criteria likely to be employed in determining the most attractive system option
include;
Operational feasibility: It indicates that the system is operationally feasible as it is very
easy for the End users to operate it. It examines:
Performance
Information
Economy
control
efficiency

12
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

Information
services
Market Feasibility: how sellable will the software be and will the employees of the entity
be likely to buy into the idea. It evaluates this based on the following criteria:
Hardware and software Requirements.
Suitability of production technology.
Availability and suitability of the system to meet user requirements.
System inputs/outputs and processing requirements
Financial/Economic Feasibility: The cost savings of additions that are likely to happen
as a result of the development project. This entails a Cost-Benefit analysis of the
alternatives and looks at such items of costs as:
Estimate the total capital requirements.
Estimate equity and credit needs.
Budget expected costs and returns from savings
Organizational/Managerial Feasibility: This looks at how the alternatives will affect or
impact on the stakeholders involved in the business and the development of the proposed
system
Business Structure of the entity.
Owners of the entity and other stakeholders and their likely needs.
Environmental feasibility: Examines the business environment to assess the impact of
the proposed system to environmental dynamics.
Environmental impact and their assessment
Legal feasibility: Looks at laws and regulations affecting the alternative and how those
affect the development of the proposed system. Answers the questions:
Is the project legally feasible?
What are the Legal requirements?

Other evaluation criteria include;

Priority
Development time
Ease of use

2.8 Recommendation
The results of the feasibility study carried out indicates that it would be in the best interest of the
entity Sigma Pensions to undertake the development project as this will likely reduce its overall
costs in the long run, reduce processing time for existing and new asset management, will likely be
easier to use for accounting staff as it does not require the deep expertise or understanding of
accounting policies as not going ahead with the development time might likely result in
information integrity issues for assets as valuations can be subjective depending on who is
carrying it out and might likely lead to the employment of different accounting policies for

13
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

different assets either within or outside the same asset class as each accounting staff will likely
select an accounting policy he/she is most comfortable with, Hence comparison based on
produced data with the existing system is likely to be unreliable. Failure to go ahead with the
project as earlier indicated might likely lead to increased labor costs, reduced productivity and
time wastage. There is always the risk that information is delayed and might not be available as at
when due.

14
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

3.0 PROPOSED SYSTEM

15
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

3.0 PROPOSED SYSTEM

3.1 Description of Proposed System

Sigma Pensions has many fixed and non-fixed assets which are mainly owned and controlled by
the entity. It is charged with the responsibility to manage properly and safely all the assets owned
by it. The assets owned by entity range from the smallest material to the biggest most expensive
physical asset e.g. Land and buildings Assets owned by the entity include computers, laptops,
printers, copy machines, duplicating machines, all ICT materials, buildings, fridges, Ac, fans etc.
These should be managed by this proposed system. Therefore the entity should identify and record
all assets by this asset management software.
The sigma asset management system is intended to replace the current manual system in
existence. The new system will make use of modern computer technologies to automate the
process of asset management and control. The proposed system will comprise of a backend
technology likely a relational database technology capable of ensuring the validity, integrity and
the security of data, the system will also include a middleware technology that will implement
business rules for the system as well as a front end technology with which the system will be
allowed to interface with users. The system is to be hosted in a central networked server from
which all users of the system can connect to it either via the intranet or the internet. The system
will be secured and hence require authentication from connected users. Store audit logs and
employ extensive concepts of session management. The system will allow users register assets as
well as set accounting policies for each item of asset or asset class. The system will employ the
concept of configuration management to allow different categories of users carry out different
functions or tasks. The system is likely to contain a reporting dashboard where reports and data is
likely to be spooled and extracted that will enable management decision making.

16
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

17
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

18
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

3.2 Improvements
The proposed system will be computerized/automated and will improve the effectiveness and
efficiency with which the business entity manages and maintains its current and non-current assets and
offers a much more reliable estimates and data to managers. It offers an easier and faster process of
asset management for users. Provides a comprehensive reporting system with readily available data for
decision makers. It is easier to manage operate and control, offers improved reliability, maintainability
and integrity of data. Better classification and organization of assets, an organized database, and
secured all information related to assets of the entity

3.3 Time and Resource Costs

Costs Requirements
The financial projections for the development of an asset management system for sigma pensions
is shown in the table below. These figures account for projected planning cost, projected
development cost, projected training and projected maintenance cost(web server and hosting
costs) for the proposed system.

The assumptions for these projections are as follows:

All estimates are reliable.

All project milestones are achieved on schedule

All costs are incurred on a per annum and per activity basis.
Measure Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 5 Year Total

Planning costs 100,000 0 0 0 0 100,000
Development Cost Projections For the
2,725,000 0 0 0 0 2,725,000
SAMS
Additional Web Server and IT
22,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 152,000
Hosting/Maintenance
projected training 75,000 0 0 0 0 75,000

Time Requirements
Duration estimates of the proposed system are as shown below:

19
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

Duration
Task Name Start End (days)
Planning 5/20/2017 5/27/2017 7

Feasibility Analysis 5/27/2017 5/31/2017 4

Project Planning 6/1/2017 6/24/2017 23

System Designs 6/25/2017 7/25/2017 30
Implementation 7/26/2017 10/26/2017 92
Testing, Documentation & Maintenance 10/27/2017 11/27/2017 31

3.4 Impacts
The proposed system will have a tremendous impact on the processes of the entity as it is likely to
completely replace the manual methods or processes of asset management and control hence this
will lead to changes In different aspects of entity processes such as equipment used, software
employed, operations, organizational structure and culture, organizational development and
growth, security and privacy of data and information and other facilities. Some of the impacts of
the proposed system will not always be positive as theres likely to be potential problems
particularly inherent to the conversion process from the old system to the new system.

We take a look at the individual impacts of the proposed system to the business entity.

3.4.1 Equipment Impacts

The new system means the organization will have to replace its manual stationary items employed
for asset management for computers with network capability so as to enable users access the
system to the central location within which the proposed system is hosted.

3.4.2 Software Impacts

Server computers will need to be setup with the necessary pre-requisites for the system to be run
successfully. Such pre-requisites might include installation of the necessary compilers and

20
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

frameworks, installation of a relational database management system (RDBMS) and acquisition of

licenses to use some of these softwares and use of IDEs for development purposes etc.

3.4.3 Organizational Impacts

The proposed system will have numerous impact to the organization or business entity, its
employees especially those charged with asset management functions as well as organizational
learning culture.
For the organization: The proposed system will likely lead to a restructuring of the
organizational processes and procedures. And hence there will be likely need for change
management to be employed else the process of migration to a new system will be riddled with a
lot of problems and challenges which can sometimes lead to a collapse of change efforts of the
management.
For the employees/ Personnel: Especially those charged with asset management a new system
might mean a lot of things ranging from the need to adapt to change and acquire new skills
necessary to employ the new system to loss of jobs due to the reduced need of staffs. Change can
either elicit positive response from employees (where an employee understands why the change
occurs and shares the vision of management towards change) or negative behavior (where an
employee does not buy in to the idea of change). The former will lead to a successful migration to
the proposed system while the latter is detrimental to system implementation.
Skill requirement changes: The whole organization from the top management to the bottom staff
will need to learn to adapt to the new system. This means they will need to acquire the skills
necessary to utilize the new system to the fullest of its capabilities. This might likely result in
trainings for stakeholders and incur training costs.

3.4.4 Operational Impacts

The proposed systems will have numerous effects on operations of the entity some of which
include:
Effect on user operating procedures; User procedures will be replaced to a large
percentage from the manual system to the proposed automated system and hence the
manual process will be replaced by an automated process.
User relationships; This will be more clearly defined as it is easier to establish a hierarchy
of relationships, authorization and privileges with an automated system than with a manual
system.
Source data processing will move from manual to automatic as all operations on original
source data such as depreciation and amortization will be carried out by the automated
system.

21
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

Data entry procedures; Data entry will no longer be a manual process and data can be
obtained from primary sources (i.e. registered/imputed into the system by the AMS Staff)
and secondary sources (i.e. imported from other applications/systems).
Data retention requirements might also change as online automated data and information
is much more capable of staying longer than physical hardcopy data which requires
physical space. Millions of data can be stored on a compacted storage i.e. hard drives
unlike physical storage.
In the same vein retrieval procedures for stored data is likely going to be easier and faster
since data is stored in a structured database that provides for easy retrieval and
manipulation.
Reports can also be generated to stakeholders and decision makers in real time which
makes for effective decision making, storage and communication media for data goes from
manual paper methods to online computer documents and files. It becomes easier and
faster to identify fully depreciated items and obsolete items and replace them in a timely
manner. Processes and report generation can also be scheduled by the new system.
System failure can be much more catastrophic for an automated system than a manual
system hence contingencies such as backup and recovery processes, plans and procedures
need to be adequately put in place to reduce the risks of system failures.

3.4.5 Developmental Impacts

The development project will also have some impact on the business entity. Developmental
impacts, such as listed below are likely to occur.

The intended users of the system need to provide a comprehensive list of requirements for
the new system to the developers as failure to do this will likely create a communication
gap between the users and the developer and hence the development process will fail to
meet user requirements.
The development process will also require users to give ample information of what type of
data needs to be stored and how the structure of the data will need to be in order to
develop databases for the system. Such resources might include copies of the asset register
etc.
A development and a test environment will need to be set up in order to build the new
system, The development environment will strictly be meant for development activities and
be set up to support such, while the test environment will mimic the production
environment and provide a platform to carry out UAT by intended users.
With the increased dependence on technology it has become common occurrence for
nefarious individuals to hack into an entities systems and carry out malicious activities on

22
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

those systems hence it has become important for the development activities to focus on
key privacy and security concerns affecting the proposed system. Hence key security
concerns like session management, authorization and authentication, protection against
SQL injections need to be at the fore front of development activities.

3.4.6 Office Facility Impacts

The development will have little impact on the physical characteristics of the entities place of
business except for a reduction in storage space for hard copy files which will avail the
organization more working space to carry out its business operations.

3.4.7 Security and Privacy Impacts

There are a number of security and privacy factors that may influence the development, design,
and continued operation of the proposed system. Some of these factors include;
The sensitivity of data and information stored.
The degree of confidentiality necessary to handle such information.
Data integrity concerns.
The degree of data redundancy that can be considered acceptable.
The degree of abstraction for each class of user.

3.5 Rationale for Recommendations

From the feasibility study carried out it becomes imperative for a new system of asset
management to be developed as the current system is riddled with problems that makes it
unsustainable. Apart from issues relating to time consumption, redundancy of data and
inefficiencies as a result of inherent human errors of a manual system. The security of data cannot
be guaranteed and the current process results in slow decision making. With the need for change
comes the decision of the most cost effective alternative or course of action. This was done after
carrying out analysis of each individual alternatives (courses of action). The proposed solution
resulted in the most cost effective solution for the entity having the least cost benefit, as well as
giving the entity the ability to control development and the design of the system to suit the
personal needs of the entity as well as those of individual users. The use of proposed system does
not carry heavy penalty or agreement clauses for the privilege to use the system (e.g. License
fees) and ensures the entity has some degree of control over the security of their data. It also
enables the entity to determine the kind of data or information they want to store and apply
accounting policies developed by the entitys accounting system based on the IFRS Conceptual
Framework. Hence the entity will not be strictly restricted to accounting standards issued by the
IASB (IFRS Standards). In addition most off-the-shelf asset management software packages only
focus on a particular class of asset or the other and fails to give a comprehensive package that
caters to all asset types and all asset classes.

23
SAMS Feasibility Study 3.0 Proposed
System

24
SAMS Feasibility Study 4.0 Alternative
Systems

4.0 ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS

25
 SAMS Feasibility Study 4.0 Alternative
Systems

4.0 ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS

A Number of alternative systems (alternative solutions/causes of action) are available to the entity
which could all eliminate the issues and problems that are faced by the entity we take a summary
look at some of these solutions that have been considered in this feasibility study

4.1 Description of SysAid Asset Management Solution

This is a web based IT asset Management software package that supports active directory. It also
supports some advanced features such as Detection of assets on an entitys network, scheduled
asset discovery and remote control. It is integrated with sysAid Helpdesk application software
that makes for easy maintenance and support of client applications. Its key features include;
Hardware & Software Inventory Management
Helpdesk Integration
Patch Management
System Monitoring
Software License Management
Hardware cataloging
Configuration Management Database
The cons of this solution is that it is tailor made to manage only IT based assets and no other
types or classes of assets. SysAid has remote desktop for windows servers only. No depreciation
charged on asset carrying value. It has no mobile app support and an overly tabbed and sectioned
user interface (UI). SysAid asset Management solution also tends to dive deep into an entities
wallet, as the cost implication entails purchasing license per individual user based on the type of
functions and features for each class of user.

4.2 Description of ServiceNow Asset Managemnt Solution

This solution is ideal for business entities that need an all-in-one product for Asset Management
and Help Desk. Unlike the SysAid solution it comes with depreciation and geo location
capabilities. Like the Sysaid solution it can also detect devices on an entities networks. It comes
with user support and gives the ability to track installed software. Service now is cloud-hosted
which means an entity needs not to host it on their premises and employees can access it
anywhere anytime. It allows for incident tracking and provides a platform where users can
customize their reports. The cons of this solution include a Complex Navigation pane. Higher cost
of Asset discovery. No on-premises option i.e. entities can only access it from the cloud with no
option to host from an entities own servers. ServiceNow solution is characterized by a relatively
high upfront cost. And becomes too Complex when selecting plug-ins and solutions.

26
 SAMS Feasibility Study 4.0 Alternative
Systems

4.3 Description of ManageEngine AssetExplorer

ManageEngine AssetExplorer is a web-based IT Asset Management (ITAM) software that helps
an entity monitor and manage assets in its network from acquisition and planning phase to
disposal phase. This is the most affordable of the alternative solutions considered. It is tailor made
for businesses interested in keeping track of all assets and being able to use different discovery
methods, with a focus on reporting. Gives functionality such as depreciation of assets. Supports
active directory integration, has advanced features as network detection. Remote control,
scheduled asset discovery, tracks installed software, User support and available in 29 Languages.
The downside of this particular solution is that One module of a larger system may not be enough
for smaller offices. It has no mobile app support. Remote Control tools are limited, and works for
Windows and Mac machines only. It is also characterized by a poor UI design and the cost
implication of this alternative is made of license fee and an annual maintenance and support Fee
which in the long run might not be so cost effective.

27