Developing and testing an implementation plan: HSC Enterprise Computing Enterprise Project
“Develop an implementation plan and test its feasibility for an enterprise computing system, including design thinking, thinking and design tools including storyboards, Gantt chart and decision tree, risk analysis, hardware and software integration, training, preferred system implementation method and methodology for testing the system”
An implementation plan uses design thinking, storyboards, a Gantt chart and decision trees, a risk analysis, a plan for hardware and software integration, training, a justified implementation method (direct, parallel, phased or pilot) and a testing methodology with normal, boundary and invalid data. Test its feasibility technically, economically, operationally, against the schedule and legally.
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
You need to develop a complete implementation plan for an enterprise computing system and test whether it is feasible. NESA lists the elements it must include. This is exactly what your own Enterprise Project documentation should show.
The answer
Elements of an implementation plan
- Design thinking: keep users at the centre, prototype and test ideas with them before full rollout.
- Thinking and design tools:
- Storyboards: sequences of screens or user interactions, used to check the design and plan training.
- Gantt chart: schedule of implementation tasks, dependencies and milestones.
- Decision tree: business rules and decision logic the system follows.
- Risk analysis: list risks, rate likelihood and impact (often on a risk matrix), and plan responses (avoid, reduce, transfer, accept) with contingency plans.
- Hardware and software integration: how new hardware, software, networks and existing systems connect, including data conversion from the old system.
- Training: who needs training, how (sessions, guides, videos) and when.
- Preferred system implementation method: direct, parallel, phased or pilot, justified by risk, cost and context.
- Methodology for testing the system: what will be tested, how, with what test data and by whom.
Implementation methods
- Direct (cut-over): switch completely on a set date. Cheapest and fastest; highest risk.
- Parallel: run old and new together and compare. Safest; most expensive and double work.
- Phased: introduce one module or function at a time. Manages risk and training; slower, needs interim integration.
- Pilot: one site or group first, then everyone. Real-world testing with limited impact; slower full rollout.
Testing methodology
- Levels: unit testing (each part), integration testing (parts together), system testing (the whole), acceptance testing (by the client and users).
- Test data: normal (valid), boundary (at the edge of valid ranges) and abnormal or invalid data, each with expected results.
- Records: a test table of test, data, expected result, actual result and action taken.
Testing feasibility
Check that the plan is achievable:
- Technical: do the hardware, software and skills exist?
- Economic: does it fit the budget, and do benefits justify costs?
- Operational: will people use it, and does it fit how the organisation works?
- Schedule: can it be done in time?
- Legal and ethical: privacy, security, accessibility.
Risk analysis extract for a school's new digital attendance system.
| Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Response |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wi-Fi outage during roll call | Medium | High | Offline mode that syncs later; paper backup roll |
| Teachers not trained in time | Medium | Medium | Training in staff meeting two weeks before launch; quick guide |
| Data import errors from the old system | Low | High | Test import with one year group first; parallel run for two weeks |
Implementation method: pilot with Year 7 for two weeks (with a parallel paper roll), then direct launch for all year groups.
- Naming an implementation method without justifying it
- Link it to the risk and context.
- Listing risks without likelihood, impact and response
- A risk analysis needs all three.
- Forgetting feasibility
- The content point says to test the plan's feasibility.
Practice questions
Original practice questions graded from foundation to exam level, each with a full worked solution. Try them before revealing the solution.
foundation4 marksDescribe the four system implementation methods and give one disadvantage of each.Show worked solution →
- Direct: the old system stops and the new one starts immediately. Disadvantage: if the new system fails, there is no fallback.
- Parallel: both systems run together for a time. Disadvantage: double workload and cost.
- Phased: the new system is introduced one part (module) at a time. Disadvantage: takes longer, and old and new parts must work together in the meantime.
- Pilot: one site or group uses the new system first. Disadvantage: the pilot group may not represent all users, and the full rollout is delayed.
Marking guide: 1 mark per method with a disadvantage.
core4 marksA hospital is replacing its patient appointment system across five clinics. Recommend an implementation method and justify it.Show worked solution →
Recommendation: pilot, then phased by clinic (or pilot with a short parallel period at the pilot clinic).
Appointments are critical, so a direct changeover risks missed or double-booked patients if the system fails. Running a pilot at one clinic lets problems be found and fixed with limited impact, and staff there become experienced users who can help train others. Running old and new in parallel briefly at the pilot clinic allows bookings to be checked against the old system. Once stable, rolling out clinic by clinic spreads training and support.
A full parallel rollout across all five clinics would be too labour-intensive for busy staff.
Marking guide: 1 mark for a suitable method, 2 marks for justification linked to risk and context, 1 mark for rejecting an alternative with a reason.
exam7 marksDevelop an implementation plan for a new online ordering system for a family-owned bakery, and explain how you would test its feasibility.Show worked solution →
- Design thinking and tools
- Interview the owners and customers (empathise), define the need (pre-orders for collection to reduce queues), and storyboard the customer ordering screens and the staff order-list screen. A decision tree sets rules (orders placed after 3 pm are for the day after tomorrow; custom cakes need 48 hours).
- Gantt chart
- Four weeks: configure platform (week 1), load products and photos (week 2), test and train (week 3), launch and review (week 4), with a milestone for owner sign-off.
- Risk analysis
- Risks include the internet dropping on a busy morning (medium likelihood, high impact: keep a printed order list backup), staff not checking orders (medium, high: tablet alert with sound), and payment security (low, high: use a reputable payment provider). Each risk has an owner and response.
- Hardware and software integration
- A tablet in the kitchen, the online store platform, the payment gateway and the existing point-of-sale system (daily sales export).
- Training
- A 30-minute session and a one-page guide for staff, with a week of shadowing.
- Implementation method
- Pilot with regular customers for one week, then direct launch to everyone (low cost and the bakery can still take walk-in orders if it fails).
- Testing methodology
- Test each feature with normal, boundary and invalid data (orders at 2.59 pm and 3.01 pm, zero quantity), then acceptance testing by the owners.
- Feasibility
- Technical: platform supports all features; economic: subscription fits budget; operational: staff can use it after training; schedule: achievable in four weeks; legal: privacy policy and secure payments in place. If any fails, adjust the plan.
Marking guide: 1 mark each for design tools, Gantt chart, risk analysis, integration, training, implementation method and testing (up to 6 marks), 1 mark for feasibility across several criteria.