IS480 Team wiki: 2015T1 A3xy FinalWiki
|Main Wiki||Midterm Wiki||Final Wiki|
Final Presentation Slides
Current Progress : 100%
Current Iteration : 12
12th Nov - 23rd Nov
Below is the scope of our project and the functionalities :
Feedback from students :
Average scores of the students against an expert user (our group member)
- Team with highest score had 292 points
- Team with lowest scores had 203 points
- Assuming 300 is the best score a team can have, all teams scored over 68%
- Top 5 teams received prizes since they scored above 90% (>=270 points)
Below are some pictures from the lab session :
Below are the reasons for high and low schedule metrics for the iterations :
Below are the bug points distribution for each iteration:
Below is the distribution of bugs based on their severity for each iteration:
|Team is unfamiliar with technologies used.||Project will be potentially delayed due to incorrect estimates.||High||High||Team members will research and guide each others. Project manager will allocate more time to this task.|
|Delay in development due to downtime of server.||Front-end and IBM BPM implementation not possible if the server is down.||Low||High||Coordinate with the client on a regular basis to modify the schedule if required.|
|Failure to factor in minor coding tasks due to lack of experience.||Project will be potentially delayed as these minor tasks need to be performed.||Medium||Medium||PM has to work closely with the Back-End and front-end lead developers and bridge the gap between business process and technical components.|
Quality of Product
There should be some evidence of work.
|Project Management||Project schedule|
|Project Overview||Project Description|
Objective : Compare the usability of the platform between first-time and old users.
The tasks assigned can be found here: A3XY User Test 4 Plan
|Number of Users||12 (6 old users, 6 new users)|
|Venue||SMU school campus|
Brief information on the participants:
Group A (old users)
- Have prior experience of using the platform
- Have worked on the LC process
- Have basic knowledge of Trade Finance from prior usage
Group B (new users)
- Experienced with background in Consumer Internet Banking
- Understand banking terms
- Have not being exposed to the software being used (IBM BPM)
- Time Spent in finishing the LC Application process (in mins)
- Time Spent in finishing the Document Presentation process (in mins)
- Average Time Spent in finishing the Shipping Guarantee, Trust Receipt and Banker’s guarantee processes (in mins)
- Did you understand the full process?
- Was the application easy to use?
- Results for quizzes for both the groups. (Average number of answers answered correctly)
- Group A participants feel that the new interface is a big improvement from the previous version.
- Group A participants feel that the new version provides a more comprehensive flow of the Trade Finance process and its components.
- Group A participants have on average 25% better performance compared to their performance in a previous user test.
- Group A participants have on average 15% better performance compared to the performance of Group B on average.
- All participants found the glossary to be really useful for referencing to the definitions.
- Group B participants do not face the issues that Group A faced in the previous user tests and on average have a 10% better performance for the same processes.
- 12.5% of Group B participants felt that the constant movement between the portal and IBM BPM was confusing
- All participants find individual components of the application easy to use.
Objective : Heuristic Evaluation of the built application.
The tasks assigned can be found here: A3XY User Test 5 Plan
|Number of Users||8|
|Venue||SOE CR 3.4|
Brief information on the participants:
- Have basic knowledge of Trade Finance from prior study
- Students should be able to navigate around the website easily
- Students should understand the requirements for various input fields without additional help
- Students should find the application visually appealing
- Rating based on the student’s experience while navigating the website where 1 is hard and 5 is easy
- Rating based on clarity of requirements for input fields
- Rating based on visual appeal of the website
- In general, participants find it easy to navigate around that website. However, some participants still take some time to understand the jump from trade portal to trade operations
- Participants are able to understand the requirement for all input fields easily.
- Participants find the trade portal visually appealing but there is still room for improvement.
- Some participants feel a requirement for a feature that show a summary of their lc transactions.
" Using this new application, I will be able to more effectively teach Trade Finance to my MITB class. The hands-on use of the tool will help to drive home the main learning points of the course.The tool functions nearly like a “real” Trade Finance system a bank might use, and it implements industry standard message formats, eg; SWIFT and ISO. This is the first FYP project that I am aware of that implements a BPM engine, and it would be useful to demo the application in PMSB. Ngee Ann Poly will also use this application to support their Financial Informatics Diploma course. "
- Professor Alan, Chief Architect for SMU tBank