Hypothetical question: You are a consultant to large hospital for a new, complex system and
have been asked to begin an information systems requirements planning
activity. You are considering to introduce JAD and RAD as fact-finding
techniques. How are JAD and RAD different from traditional approaches and why
would you recommend one technique versus another in this scenario. How do
you ensure your recommendation is implemented successfully?
Joint Application Development (JAD) is a user oriented
approach to gathering system requirements. Requirements for a complex
information system are determined through group interaction. JAD teams are a
collection of developers, managers, end users and other staff members who form
a structured and focused team led by a formal project leader. As stated by Alexandrou, “The objective is to
analyze the existing system, obtain user input and expectations, and document
the requirements for the new system”1.
Rapid Application Development (RAD) is also a team based
technique. While the goal of a JAD group is to establish the system
requirements, the goal of a RAD group is to complete the entire information
system project. RAD condenses the Systems
Development Life Cycle (SDLC), bringing users in on each step and continues
through the development process. RAD is
composed of four phases: planning, user design, construction, and a final
cutover step. The User Design and
Construction step will have numerous sub-phases cycling between prototype and
user evaluation2.
JAD and RAD are different from traditional approaches in
that they focus on user input when establishing requirements through
collaboration between different groups and (in the case of RAD) during the
development process. Instead of the IT
staff collecting information on requirements and building the system, the
developers and IT groups tasked with creating systems bring the users in on
each stage (Shelly, 2012). Traditional methods have tasked the development
groups with gathering requirements by interviewing users. JAD and RAD also
differ from approaches such as the Waterfall method in that the objective is to
shorten development time while increasing the end user satisfaction1.
In comparing the two as fact finding techniques for a
hospital system, an advantage to the JAD method of requirements gathering is it
can produce accurate results and a greater understanding of the organization’s
goals. A disadvantage to JAD is that the cost is greater than other methods
such as RAD and AGILE, and can become difficult to manage if the group is too
large. Also, a new development plan will need to be established to create the
actual system. An advantage to the RAD
method is that it will result in faster system development as the focus is on
the creation of the system, and end users would have a system they helped
create. However, as noted by Shelly, one inherent risk of RAD
is the risk that the system created will work out great in the immediate future
for the users, but might not be a scalable product that will meet future
business needs. Also, a rapid development cycle may lead to rushed development
and inconsistent quality2.
A hospital system will be very complex, and include patient
medical records, billing and insurance activity, and interface with lab and
pharmacy systems. This will require the cooperation of several groups with
different mind sets, and I would recommend the tighter structured approach of
JAD to gather and establish the system requirements.
On the assumption that I am making recommendations for the
project only, I would ensure the requirements gathering is implemented
successfully by requesting team rosters, and expected completion of
requirements documentation. On the
assumption that I were to continue to be an integral part of the project, I
would ensure the requirements gathering using JAD is completed successfully by taking
on a facilitator role or stepping up as project leader, to ensure the
collaborative interdepartmental sessions remain productive throughout the
project.
2 Shelly, G. B., & Rosenblatt, H. J. (2012). Systems
analysis and design, ninth edition (9th ed.) Boston: Course Technology Cengage
Learning.
