SG2 ADM - Telefonica UK / CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partners Inbox CR4306 ATPI Key Decision Record

Instructions for using Key Decision Record 1. Replace the default field values, manually for those in brackets [ ] and using the variables tab for those in angle brackets < >: a. On the Variables tab , enter values for the first six fields listed. Once entered on that tab, fields are automatically updated on each tab. b. On the Variables tab , enter a value for the 'Template version' ONLY when updating a template, not when updating a document created from the template. c. On the Document Control tab, update all fields surrounded by brackets [ ]. 4. If changes to the organization logo, copyright, date or pagination required, select View -> Header and Footer -> Custom Header or Custom Footer, and edit values as needed. 5. When creating a template from this template, to provide instructions for the template users: Add, Delete or Update instruction text as appropriate. 6. Important : Do not update the following text enclosed in angle brackets < > on ANY tab. These are automatically updated on ALL tabs using the Variables tab: -Project Name/Subproject Name: -Project Manager Name: -Document Type/Title: -Confidentiality -Revision Status -Template version Instructions for using Evaluation Sheet Introduction 1 The Alternative Evaluation Table of the forms contains Evaluation Parameters. Project team can identify parametes according to the situation. For Exam, Paramaters may be -Standard,Guideline & Framework compliance -Additional Effort Required -Additional Sk ill Required -Additional Facility Required -Quality Improvement -Maintenance Improvement -Extendibility Improvement -Performance Improvement -Customer Satisfection -Complexity -Technology Limitations The weightage of each Evaluation Parameter can be decided as per the situation, Ensure the summation should be 100%. Typically,The alternative with the HIGHEST score shall be chosen as the final decision but many times lesser scoring alterenative is also selcted based on cost-benefit, risk profile. Refer to OPAL IMSP445 Key Decisions Procedure Appendix A-Matters,In case there are project specific needs, <this can be entered as a comment in the parameter> Here project can define the guideline for rank ing evaluation parameters and their corresponding score considered for scoring For Exam, For Additional Cost Required Parameter: Positively-High - additional cost is < -10% of the total original; Positively-Med - additional cost is between -3% ~ -10% of the total original; Positively-Low - additional cost is between 0% ~ - 3% of the total original; None -> No Cost Impact; Negatively-Low -> additional cost is between 0% ~ 3% of the total original; Negatively-Med -> additional cost is between 3% ~ 10% of the total original; Negatively-High -> additional cost is > 10% of the total original; This is a 7 point scale system. Positive-High - (+3) Positive-Med- (+2) Positive-Low- (+1) None - (0) Negative-Low- (-1) Negative-Med- (-2) Negative-High- (-3) There are multiple methods possible for evaluating alternative solutions against the established criteria. From these methods, in a given situation, an appropriate method will be selected. Typical evaluation methods may be paper-based or hands-on and include but are not restricted to (a) Simulations, (b) Trade Studies, (c) Surveys, (d) Testing, (e) User Review and comment, (f)Cost studies, (g)Business opportunity studies, (h)Extrapolations based on field experience and prototypes (i) Six Hat Think ing, (j) Brainstorming, (k ) Expert Judgement / Delphi, (l) Design of Experiments. Brainstorming Brainstorming is a process for developing creative solutions to problems. It work s by focusing on a problem, and then deliberately coming up with as many solutions as possible and by pushing the ideas as far as possible. One of the reasons it is so effective is that the brainstormers not only come up with new ideas in a session, but also spark off from associations with other people's ideas by developing and refining them. Six Hat Thinking The 'Six Think ing Hats' is a quick , simple and powerful technique to improve your think ing. It does this by encouraging you to recognize what type of think ing you are using, and to apply different types of think ing to the subject. Survey Survey is the procedure of acquiring information about every member of a given group. It can be formal or informal collection of public opinion from a particular team. Simulations Simulation is the imitation of some real thing, state of affairs, or process. The act of simulating something generally entails representing certain k ey characteristics or behaviours of a selected physical or abstract system.Simulation is used in many contexts, including the modeling of natural systems or human systems in order to gain insight into their functioning. Other contexts include simulation of technology for performance optimization, safety engineering, testing, training and education. Simulation can be used to show the eventual real effects of alternative conditions and courses of action. Trade Studies A trade study or trade-off study is the activity of a multidisciplinary team to identify the most balanced technical solutions among a set of proposed viable solutions (FAA 2006). These viable solutions are judged by their satisfaction of a series of measures or cost functions. These measures describe the desirable characteristics of a solution. They may be conflicting or even mutually exclusive. Trade studies are commonly used in the design of aerospace and automotive vehicles and the software selection process (Phillips et al 2002) to find the configuration that best meets conflicting performance requirements. Summary While carrying out the Key Decision Process, the following activities will be performed: 1. Identify all the potential criteria for evaluation 2. Select the criteria from Org recommendation list 3. Assign relative rank ing for selected criteria and number of maximum points each criterion could be assigned, depending upon how closely the criterion contributed to fulfilling the objective. 4. Identify alternative solutions. 5. Award number of points to each alternative against each criterion using an appropriate method 6. Sum up the scores for all the alternatives and sort them in ascending order 7. Alternative with highest score will be selected. 8. Discuss and finalize the highest scoring alternative. Confidentiality: Revision Status: N/A Current

2 3 Trigger to Make DAR 1 Criteria of Evaluation Parameters 1

a)

Scoring Scale

Evaluation Methods

Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 1 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 2 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 3 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 4 of 25

SG2 ADM - Telefonica UK / CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partners Inbox CR4306 ATPI Key Decision Record
Refer to the Instructions Tab on the use of these variables. Do not delete them on this or any other tab. Variables Organization/Project Name: SG2 ADM - Telefonica UK / CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partners Inbox Project Manager Name: Nagesh Babu D Sundarraj Document Type/Title: CR4306 ATPI Key Decision Record Confidentiality: N/A Revision Status: Current Template version: 1.0 1.1 About this document This form provides the triggers and evaluation method to do key decision making.Project team can select one of methods and evauate 1.2 Who Should Use this Document This document should be used by project team and other relevant stakeholders while doing key decision making.

Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 5 of 25

SG2 ADM - Telefonica UK / CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partners Inbox CR4306 ATPI Key Decision Record
General Information Decision No:1 Participant: Alok Choudhury,Vinay K Kancharla, Paul Flaherty,Martin Jones, David Cox Decision Analysis Start Date: 25/01/2012 Decision Analysis End Date: 06/02/2012 Situation/Problem Statement: As part of the CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partner Inbox project, there is a requirement to generate a SOS(Source of Sale) report using the new ATPI application. The structure of the report format is quite complex and the additional requirement is it must be downloadable as a CSV file for reference. Assumptions:

Because of the nature of complexity involved here to implement this reporting functinality and also the respective impact to the schedule and effort of the project, Evaluation Information: Description/Rationale of Alternative1: Implement this reporting functionality using Java/J2ee technologies. Supporting evidence (if any): Description/Rationale of Alternative2: Implement this reporting functionality using a library called as "Display tag Supporting evidence (if any): Description/Rationale of Alternative3: Supporting evidence (if any):

Alternative Evaluation Technique/ Methods: Simulations Brainstorming User Review and comment Cost studies

Surveys Business opportunity studies

Six Hat Thinking

Trade Studies

Expert Judgement / Delphi

Alternative Evaluation Table: Evaluation Weightage Rank for Alternatives: (please refer to the definition below) Parameters: (Provide a Alternative 1 Alternative 2 weightage Rank Value Score Rank percentage 60 Positive-Low Complexity 1 60.00 PositiveHigh Additional Effort 30 Positive-Med 2 120.00 PositiveRequired High Extendibility 10 Positive-Med 2 120.00 PositiveImprovement High

Total Score

100.00%

300.00

540.00

Definition of Weight : Provide Weightage of each identified parameter. Ensure sum of all paramters weightage should be 100% Definition of Parameter Rank : Positive-High-3, Positive-Medium-2, Positive-Low-1, None-0, Negative-Low- (-1),Negative-Med - (-2), Negativ-High - (-3) Final Decision Information: Accepted solution: Finally the accepted solution was the altenative 2, i.e. to use library called as "Display tag Library" which is an open source suit of custom tags , that give some features like exporting the data in CSV,PDF,Excel etc format. Potential risks associated with implementing the recommended solution: As the opensource software is approved by IBM UK Geo team, there no risk related to licencing or use of this product. Any Additional Comment: Rejected Alternative: Any Additional Comment:

Measurements: Cost to perform evaluation

Estimated value of doing evaluation

Participants signoff: Name of participant Martin Jones

Role in decision-making process Technical Design Architect

Signature Martin Jones 06/02/2012

f Trading Partners Inbox

n Jones, David Cox

, there is a requirement to generate a ucture of the report format is quite complex and or reference.

reporting functinality and also the respective

nctionality using Java/J2ee technologies.

nctionality using a library called as "Display tag

Testing Extrapolation s based on field experience and prototypes Design of Experiments

s: (please refer to the definition below) Alternative 2 Value Score 3 180.00 3 3 180.00 180.00

540.00

aramters weightage should be 100%

called as "Display tag Library" which is an open e data in CSV,PDF,Excel etc format.

solution: e no risk related to licencing or use of this product.

Signature Martin Jones 06/02/2012

SG2 ADM - Telefonica UK / CR4306 - Automation of Trading Partners Inbox CR4306 ATPI Key Decision Record
Confidentiality: Revision Status: N/A Current

Document Revision History Changes to this document are summarized in the following table in reverse chronological order (latest
Revision Date Created/Updated by Short Description of Changes

[1.0]

[mm/dd/yyyy]

[Name]

[Initial Version of the document]

Approvals This document has been approved by the following people via email.
Name Function Date of approval Signature

[Name]

[Funciton]

[mm/dd/yyyy]

[Signature]

Template Revision History This revision history is to be updated by WW- OPAL-Content -Team only. Changes to this template are summarized in the following table in reverse chronological order (latest version first).
Revision Date Created/Updated by Short Description of Changes

1.0

Sep-11

Content -Team

Initial Version of the document

Document Source: The latest version of this controlled document is stored in [this location]. Template version: 1.0

Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 19 of 25

n of Trading Partners Inbox

Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 20 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 21 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 22 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 23 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 24 of 25

 Copyright IBM Corp. 1987, 2008. All rights reserved.

Issue Date:5/31/2013 Page 25 of 25