CSUN Spring 2006 IS431 Wednesday 630PM Team Chen, Chris and Ed
part of class CSUN Spring 2006 IS431 Wednesday 630PM.
Note: Please do not modify this document if you are not a member of the class group. Thanks.
Group assignment
Sections
Executive Summary[]
Betterloans is in the very competitive loan business. Sometimes things are slow, and sometimes they are hectic. It is on those occasions that loan processors get very busy and have difficulties talking back and forth with brokers about missing documents.
As a result, some of the brokers feel that betterloans is not treating them well, and loan procesors feel stress becuase they are too busy.
Our consulting firm was selected to come up with a solution to this twofold problem.
Nalin DeSilva, the IT Director of Betterloans, hase tried to speed up the process of each loan by adding more staff. However, more people would be more space is needed for each additional worker. Another idea kicked around was hiring another person just to handle the incoming faxes. Ultimately, we came up with three candidate solutions to improve the loan document retrieval system.
We feel that a new system development would be the best option to help increase the speed of getting things updated. A new database would the best way to handle all the incoming fax and emails. Addition units of software and hardware would be a good way to efficiently help the flow information.
Several candidate solutions was considersed before we decided on one. Under this solution we would need no new hardware. Software needed is a new program to be coded. This candidate solution would cost a total of $23,800. The whole project would take 4.5 months to be created and 23 days for implementation. The lifetime of this proposal is 3 years, but the system may last much longer. After the system is implemented it would take less than 18 months for the system to recover the cost and start to make a profit. Because of cost and time, it is in the company's best interest to consider our candidate solution.
Background[]
The Old System
Under the old system, a customer would go on the internet and fill out the application and sent it in to one of the processors, who would look at the aplication. The processor would look at the application and call you if more information is needed. the customer would either mail or fax the information to the processor; where it will have to be manually entered in to the computer. The broker would also go through this long process of getting a loan processed. As you can see, this process is a long and tedious where it took a much longer time and work to it processed before it can be audited for approval. If the audit is not up to par, the application is sent back to processing to get more informtion. When it is sent back to processing, the processing of getting more information is started all over again.
As all of you who have taken a loan, you should know how long the process of waiting to hear the approval of the loan is. It can take up to weeks before gettng a reply from the lender of the status of the loan. The reason is not that more information is needed in processing the loan for it to be complete, but the time it takes to get the information to the processor to process the loan. For example a fax could be send at 9:00 AM and it would not be updated til 2:00 PM. This is part due to other things that could be going; other loans being processed, etc. As you can see, there is a 5 hour gap just to be notify that the information is sent in and be checked off. This long gap of time needs to be severly shorten or eliminated altogether. This is where our proposal system comes in and changes all of this.
Project Plan[]
Business Problem
Betterloans has a opportunty to increase their customers by developing a new strategy. The first way is to get more people to get loans from them. Currently now, Betterloans has kept good competitive interest rates with competitors. Being a smaller lending firm, it has done extremely well against giants such as Countrywide Home Loans. However, as the business heads towards the world of tomorrow, so does the speed of getting loans approved and out too.
Business Problem[]
Many of you who own a home must know the long process of getting an update from your lender or broker. Betterloans is currently starting to have a problem of updating brokers and customers with their status of their loans. Under the old system, a clerk would have to manually update each loan as it comes in while working on other files. This task of updating the loans are usually put off til a later time when they are not so busy. This gap in time from the time the document was sent and the time it took to update is becoming larger and larger. Sometimes it would take half a day just to know if your document was recieved or not. This problem can not be ignored any longer for the sake of future deals with brokers and customers.
Secondly, Betterloans has internal problems with paper documents. As one document is recieved it is reviewed by a clerk. The clerk then sends the physical paper to another clerk for more cross checking. After this, it is sent to another clerk and so on. This process of physically sending the document from one clerk to another can take any time from one minute to 20 minutes depending where the next clerk is. This is more time taken to process and more time added to update.
Problem Statement Table[]
| Brief Statements of Problem, Opportunity, or Directive | Urgency | Visibility | Annual Benefits | Priority or Rank | Proposed Solution |
| 1. Brokers are frustrated that they don't get feedback when they send required loan documentation | ASAP | High | Unknown | 1 | New Development |
| 2. Loan processors are spending a lot of time on the phone coordinating receiving of documents and providing confirmation | 2 Months | High | $8,000 | 2 | New Development |
| 3. Loans take too long to process because of unfilled document requirements. | ASAP | High | $20,000 | 2 | New Development |
| 4. Wholesale buyers require documents in electronic format | 9 Months | Low | Unknown | 3 | New Development |
Problems, Opportunities, Objectives, and Constraints Matrix (see page 207)
| Causes and Effects Analysis | System Inprovement Objectives | ||
| Problem or opportunity | Causes and Effects | System Objective | System Constraint |
| 1. Brokers are frustrated that they don't get feedback when they send required loan documentation | 1. The website does not provide feedback as to which document has been received and which is still outstanding
2. The loan origination system does not currently store the files in an electronic format 3. Loan processors have to manually update which document has been received, and that can take a lot of time. 4. One of the effects is that it makes the brokers and the loan processor waste time playing phone tag. |
1. Make the status of the loan document available as soon as the faxed document is received by betterloans. | 1. The system must work within the current website and current loan origination system. |
Problems, Opportunities, Objectives, and Constraints Matrix
| Causes and Effects Analysis | System Inprovement Objectives | ||
| Problem or opportunity | Causes and Effects | System Objective | System Constraint |
| 2. Loan processors are spending a lot of time on the phone coordinating receiving of documents and providing confirmation | 1. The current system is manual and relies on loan processors being available when the broker send in the fax.
2. Loan processors spend a lot of time checking messages, returning phone calls |
1. The system needs to free the loan officers from having to spend time on the phone. | No constraint |
Problems, Opportunities, Objectives, and Constraints Matrix
| Causes and Effects Analysis | System Inprovement Objectives | ||
| Problem or opportunity | Causes and Effects | System Objective | System Constraint |
| 3. Loans take too long to process because of unfilled document requirements. | 1. Sometimes the loans need to close within a short time frame and it takes a lot of time to collect all the documents, making it difficult to meet the deadline. 2. Brokers and borrowers would be happier with betterloans if the loan turnaround time was shorter | 1. Make the broker be in charge of the speed of collecting and submitting the requirement documents. | No Constraints |
Problems, Opportunities, Objectives, and Constraints Matrix
| Causes and Effects Analysis | System Inprovement Objectives | ||
| Problem or opportunity | Causes and Effects | System Objective | System Constraint |
| Wholesale buyers require documents in electronic format | Documents will have to be scanned at some point | System should make the loan document files available | Actual images of the loan document must be able to be retrieved by an automated system through the loan origination system |
Project Scope[]
The Project will encompass the required loan documents automatic retrieval system at Betterloans. The project will interact with the current website, the current loan origination system, as well as the existing fax, email, and file systems.
Next, we will analyze how the company update the status of loans as the loans are getting completed or remain incomplete due to lack of information. This analysis for this will show us what software and hardware is needed to improve the system.
We will see how the documents are converted and stored in the file system, as well as linked with the loan origination software and their status displayed to the broker in the website interface.
System Objective[]
The current system needs to elimiate the need for the loan pocessor to be involved in the receiving and sorting of the faxes of loan documentation. The Brokers must ger immediate confirmation that the documents have been received, so they are better able to experite the loan process.
It is understood that in some instances, the documents will arrive by standard mail. In this case, the loan processor needs to be able to scan the documents using office scanners to place the documents in the system.
The system needs to release staff from performing this function, as well as empower brokers to be more proactive with gathering and sending in the required loan documentation.
The entire system needs to be automated, so that if a loan document is needed for a loan, the broker, in conjunction with the system, will be able to provide the document without involving the loan processor at all.
Proposal and Justification[]
To meet the requirements for the System Objectives of the Papeless Fax System at Betterloans, we suggest that a new information system be added to the company. Existing fax servers are able to receive documents. Currently, these faxes must be manually viewed and sorted, then applied to the correct loan, and the loan origination system must be updated manually. The new system should be able to "pick up" the faxed document, identify which loan it is related to, then identify which existing document requirement it is fulfiling, then mark that requirement as fulfilled, convert the fax attachment as an image, store that image on a file server, and store the lation of the file in a database system for easy retrieval by the loan origination system as well as by other systems.
There are two advantages over the existing process: First, brokers will no longer have to wait for a lengthy manual process. Rather, they will be able to see the documentation requirements updated live onthe system. This will encourage them and increae their willingness to do business with betterloans. Second, the loan processors will have less work, and thus will be able to take on additional responsibilites. This will enable management to more effectively utilize existing staff.
System Modeling[]
DFD for Loan Document Receiver[]
Logical DFD for current system[]
System: Fax System @ Better Loan
Entities: -Broker
Data Flows
Input -Form
Processes:
1.0 Receive Form
2.0 Scan Form
Data Store:
-Loan File -Image File
Logical DFD for new system[]
NEW SYSTEM
System Outline
System: Fax Server @ BetterLoan
Entities: -Customer
-Broker
-Clerk
-Website
Dataflows: Input Output
-Mail -No Barcode Attachment
-Fax -Update Website
-Create Barcode
|
Processes: 1.0-Get Mail 2.0-Get Fax 2.1-Receive Fax 2.2-Check Barcode 3.0-Get E-mail 3.1-Get E-mail 3.2-Check Attachment 3.3-Check Barcode 4.0-Generate Barcode 5.0-Convert to Image 5.1-Retrieve Mail 5.2-Get File 5.3-Get Attachment 5.4-Convert to Image 5.5-Attach Barcode 6.0-Update 6.1-Detect File 6.2-Process File 6.3-No Process File 7.0-Retrieve Document Status |
DataStores: -Fax -Image Repository -Loan System |
Physical DFD for new system[]
ERD for Loan Document Receiver[]
ERD[]
- should match the number of data store entities.
Relational Data Model[]
| PK = red | ||||||||
| FK = blue | ||||||||
| Tables | ||||||||
| Customer | Customer ID | Customer Name | Customer Address | Customer City | Customer City | Customer State | Customer Zip | Website ID |
| Broker | Broker ID | Broker Name | Broker Address | Broker City | Broker State | Broker Zip | Website ID | |
| Website | Website ID | Website name | ||||||
| Loan | Loan ID | Document Number | File Nme | File Path | Website ID | |||
| E-Mail ID | E-Mail Address | E-Mail Date | E-Mail Time | E-Mail Attachment | Website ID | |||
| Fax | Fax ID | Fax Number | Fax Date | Fax Time | ||||
| Clerk | Employee ID | Employee Name | ||||||
| Mail ID | Mail Name | Mail Address | Mail City | Mail State | Mail Zip | |||
| Image Repository | Barcode | Document Number | Directory Number | |||||
| Send Mail | Customer ID | Employee ID | ||||||
| Store | Mail ID | Employee ID | ||||||
| Send Fax | Fax ID | Broker ID | ||||||
| Update | Barcode | Loan ID | ||||||
| Convert | Barcode | Fax ID | ||||||
| Convert | Barcode | E-Mail ID | ||||||
| Convert | Barcode | Mail ID | ||||||
Data Dictionary[]
| Data Dictonary | ||||
| Customer | ||||
| Attributes | Types | Size | Description | Authorization |
| Customer ID | Numeric | 7 | Identifier | Loan Processor |
| Customer Name | Text | 30 | Customer First, Last Name | Loan Processor |
| Customer Address | Text | 40 | Home Address | Loan Processor |
| Customer City | Text | 20 | Location | Loan Processor |
| Customer State | Text | 2 | State | Loan Processor |
| Customer Zip | Numeric | 5 | Zipcode | Loan Processor |
| Clerk | ||||
| Employee ID | Numeric | 8 | Identifier | HR Department |
| Employee Name | Text | 30 | Employee First, Last Name | HR Department |
| Mail ID | Numeric | 8 | Identifier | |
| Mail Name | Text | 30 | Mailer Name | Loan Processor |
| Mail Address | Text | 50 | Mailer Address | Loan Processor |
| Mail City | Text | 20 | Mailer Location | Loan Processor |
| Mail State | Text | 2 | Mailer Location | Loan Processor |
| Mail Zip | Numeric | 5 | Mailer Location | Loan Processor |
| Broker | ||||
| Broker ID | Numeric | 10 | Identifier | Finincial |
| Broker Name | Text | 30 | Broker Name | Finincial |
| Broker Address | Text | 50 | Broker Address | Finincial |
| Broker City | Text | 20 | Broker Location | Finincial |
| Broker State | Text | 2 | Broker Location | Finincial |
| Broker Zip | Numeric | 5 | Broker Location | Finincial |
| Fax | ||||
| Fax ID | Numeric | 10 | Identifier | Loan Processor |
| Fax Number | Numeric | 10 | Phone | Loan Processor |
| Fax Date | Numeric | 6 | Date Sent | Loan Processor |
| Fax Time | Numeric | 4 | Time Sent | Loan Processor |
| E-mail ID | Numeric | 30 | Identifier | Loan Processor |
| E-mail Address | String | 50 | Sender E-mail | Loan Processor |
| E-mail Date | Numeric | 8 | Date Sent | Loan Processor |
| E-mail Time | Numeric | 4 | Time Sent | Loan Processor |
| E-mail Attachment | VarBinary | 2^31-1 | File | Loan Processor |
| Image Repository | ||||
| Barcode | Numeric | 13 | Identifier | System Administrator |
| Document Number | Numeric | 20 | Document Identifier | System Administrator |
| Directory Number | Numeric | 20 | Directory Identigier | System Administrator |
| Loan | ||||
| Loan ID | String | 20 | Identifier | Loan Processor |
| Document Number | Numeric | 30 | Document Identifier | Loan Processor |
| File Name | Text | 20 | File Identifier | Loan Processor |
| File Path | Char | 255 | File Location | Loan Processor |
| Website | ||||
| Website ID | Char | 255 | Identifier | Web Developer |
| Website Name | Text | 30 | Name of Website | Web Developer |
UML Diagrams for Loan Document Receiver[]
Use Case Diagrams[]
Class Diagrams[]
Sequence Diagrams[]
State Charts[]
Candidate Solutions[]
Candidate Systems Matrix[]
The following graph highlights some of the differences between the three proposed systems.
| Candidate Systems Matrix | |||
| Characteristics | Candidate 1 | Candidate 2 | Candidate 3 |
| Effect on Staff | Staff would have reduced handling of forms, but might have to help walk brokers throught the process on their side. | Staff would have reduced handling of forms, and would not have to help brokers. | Same as solution 2 |
| Effect on brokers | More work to upload files, but faster results | Faster response on the website | Faster response on website, no need to print the barcode coversheet. |
| Effect for website administrators | Would have to change website functionality to add file upload features. | No change | Would have to write phone number allocation routine and display phone numbers and emails on the web site. |
| Effect on Existing systems | Moderate impact to website, moderate impact to Loan Origination system database | Almost no impact to website, light impact to mail server, moderate impact to Loan Origination system | Moderate impact on website, medium impact on VOIP and fax system, light impact to mail server, moderate impact to Loan Origination system |
| Application Software | Custom solution | Custom solution + Packaged solution for OCR | Custom solution |
| Method of input | Uploads through web site | Faxes to general number | Faxes to custom numbers |
| Methods of Output | No Changes to existing system, already provides functionality | Same as candidate 1 | Same as candidate 1 |
Feasibility Analysis[]
All three systems can be done to varying degree of satisfaction. The first candiadte, though appearing quite satisfatory, in fact places an unseen burden on brokers, a burden which managment is unable to quantify.
| Feasibility Analysis Matrix | ||||
| Feasibility Criteria | Weight | Candidate 1 | Candidate 2 | Candidate 3 |
| Operational Feasibility | 25% | Least amount of work, but requires the brokers to do more work. This will not be popular with management, since they are trying to cater to brokers, claiming that the system will save them time | Supports all required functionality and all parties benefit | Supports all required functionality, same as candidate 2 |
| Score 50 | Score 100 | Score 100 | ||
| Technical Feasibility | 25% | There is nothing difficult about creating this system. Website upload forms are easy and robust. | The only component that cannot easily be handled by simple tools is the OCR function, but quality vendors exist and one such ocr software will be used. Also, this type of work is basic for normal programmers, and should not cause any difficulties. | The VOIP component might be difficult to implement. There are few if any other companies doing this, so it is an untried approach. |
| Score 100 | Score 95 | Score 70 | ||
| Economic Feasibility
Payback period Net present Value Detailed calculations |
40% |
Cost Approx $8,000
|
Cost Approx $46,000
|
Cost Approx $64,000
|
| Score 100 | Score 90 | Score 70 | ||
| Schedule Feasibility | 10% | About 2 months | About 3 months | About 5 months |
| Score 100 | Score 100 | Score 100 | ||
| Ranking | 100% | 84% | 89% | 74% |
Cost-Benefit Analysis[]
Summary[]
There is a large unknown in the analysis: the cost of not satisfying the brokers. If, for example, the system is too hard to use (as might very well be the case with candidate 1), or brokers don't feel they can trust their information to a fax system, not understanding how the barcode is read (as candidate 2 proposes), or brokers get confused by the notion of dynamic fax number allocation (as candidate 3 would do), then brokers might take their deals elsewhere, or reduce the number of deals they bring to betterloans. So the most important factor is to make sure that brokers are satisfied with the new system.
We find that all three candidate have little in the way of annual costs, since the system is utilizing existing company assets such as servers.
The system costs may seem rather large for candidates 2 and 3, but this setup needs to last 3 years with little to no intervention, so needs to be built correctly, so the design and programming boosts the cost up front, but the benefit is a low annual cost.
Estimated Costs for candidate 1[]
Development Costs[]
| Personnel | ||
| 1 | System Analysts (50hrs at $50/hr) | $2,500 |
| 1 | Programmer (50hrs at $50/hr) | $2,500 |
| Hardware and software | ||
| 0 | None | $0 |
| Total | $5,000 | |
Maintenance Costs[]
| Personnel | ||
| 1 | Programmer/Analyst (10hrs at 50/hrs) | $500 |
| Expenses | ||
| 0 | None | $0 |
| Total | $500 | |
Estimated Costs for candidate 2[]
Development Costs[]
| Personnel | ||
| 2 | System Analysts (100hrs at $50/hr) | $10,000 |
| 2 | Programmer (330hrs at $50/hr) | $33,000 |
| Hardware and software | ||
| 1 | Barcode OCR Software COM Componenent | $300 |
| Total | $43,300 | |
Maintenance Costs[]
| Personnel | ||
| 2 | Programmer Analyst(10hrs at $50/hr) | $1000 |
| Expenses | ||
| 0 | None | $0 |
| Total | $1000 | |
Estimated Costs for candidate 3[]
| Personnel | ||
| 2 | System Analysts (100hrs at $50/hr) | $10,000 |
| 2 | Programmer (200hrs at $50/hr) | $20,000 |
| 1 | VOIP System Programmer (40hrs at $300/hr) | $12,000 |
| 1 | VOIP System Engineer (5hrs at $500/hr) | $2,500 |
| Hardware and software | ||
| 1 | Brooktrout Faxcard | $6,000 |
| Total | $50,500 | |
Maintenance Costs[]
| Personnel | ||
| 1 | Programmer Analyst(20hrs at $50/hr) | $1000 |
| Expenses | ||
| 1 | 10 Block fax lines on fractional T-1 Circuit | $6,000 |
| Total | $6,500 | |
Payback Analysis[]
We notice during the payback analysis that all three systems will become profitable during their lifespan. We note, however, that candidate three is close to the end of life limit, and could potentially suffer unforeseen costs that render it insolvent. We thus urge caution in evaluationg candidate 3.
| Candidate 1 | |||||
| Cash flow description | Year 0 | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total |
| Development costs: | ($5,000) | ||||
| Operation & maintenance cost: | ($500) | ($500) | ($500) | ||
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.953 | 0.909 | 0.866 | |
| Present value of annual costs: | ($5,000) | ($477) | ($1,652) | ($433) | |
| Total present value of lifetime costs: | ($7,562) | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Costs | ($5,000) | ($5,477) | ($7,129) | ($7,562) | |
| Benefits derived from operation of new | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | |
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.87 | |
| Present value of annual benefits: | $28,000 | $26,692 | $25,445 | $24,257 | |
| Total present value of lifetime benefits: | $104,394 | ||||
| NET PRESENT VALUE OF THIS ALTERNATIVE: | $96,832 | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Benefit | $28,000 | $54,692 | $80,137 | $104,394 | |
| Cumulative Annual Benefit-Annual Cost | $23,000 | $49,215 | $73,009 | $96,832 | |
| Candidate 2 | |||||
| Cash flow description | Year 0 | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total |
| Development costs: | ($43,200) | ||||
| Operation & maintenance cost: | ($1,000.00) | ($1,000.00) | ($1,000.00) | ||
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.953 | 0.909 | 0.866 | |
| Present value of annual costs: | ($43,200) | ($953) | ($1,652) | ($866) | |
| Total present value of lifetime costs: | ($46,672) | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Costs | ($43,200) | ($44,153) | ($45,805) | ($46,672) | |
| Benefits derived from operation of new | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | |
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.87 | |
| Present value of annual benefits: | $28,000 | $26,692 | $25,445 | $24,257 | |
| Total present value of lifetime benefits: | $104,394 | ||||
| NET PRESENT VALUE OF THIS ALTERNATIVE: | $57,722 | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Benefit | $28,000 | $54,692 | $80,137 | $104,394 | |
| Cumulative Annual Benefit-Annual Cost | ($15,200) | $10,539 | $34,332 | $57,722 | |
| Candidate 3 | |||||
| Cash flow description | Year 0 | Year 1 | Year 2 | Year 3 | Total |
| Development costs: | ($50,500) | ||||
| Operation & maintenance cost: | ($6,500) | ($6,500) | ($6,500) | ||
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.953 | 0.909 | 0.866 | |
| Present value of annual costs: | ($50,500) | ($6,196) | ($1,652) | ($5,631) | |
| Total present value of lifetime costs: | ($63,979) | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Costs | ($50,500) | ($56,696) | ($58,348) | ($63,979) | |
| Benefits derived from operation of new | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | $28,000 | |
| Discount factors for 10% | 1.00 | 0.95 | 0.91 | 0.87 | |
| Present value of annual benefits: | $28,000 | $26,692 | $25,445 | $24,257 | |
| Total present value of lifetime benefits: | $104,394 | ||||
| NET PRESENT VALUE OF THIS ALTERNATIVE: | $40,415 | ||||
| Cumulative Annual Benefit | $28,000 | $54,692 | $80,137 | $104,394 | |
| Cumulative Annual Benefit-Annual Cost | ($22,500) | ($2,004) | $21,789 | $40,415 | |
ROI Analysis[]
The return on investment analysis is done to show the profitability of each system on a percentage scale.
This graph shows the lifetime return on investment of the system
| Total Present Value of Lifetime Benefits | Total Present Value of Lifetime Costs | Return on Investment | |
| Candidate 1 | $96,832 | $7,562 | 1280% |
| Candidate 2 | $57,722 | $46,672 | 123% |
| Candidate 3 | $40,415 | $63,979 | 63% |
The ROI seems spectacular for candidate 1 until one realizes these figures do not include the goodwill of brokers that would be lost if they had to do a lot of file uploads.
Critical Success Factors[]
The Loan Document Receiver system must absolutely meet complete the following three requirements in order to be considered:
- The system must be fully automated, requiring no manual steps from betterloans.com employees
- The system must be available 24/7/365, and handle user error gracefully
- The system must correcly record and store the documents received
Failure to perform any of these steps would mean the system was a failure and should be replaced, or not implemented.
If the system needs human intervention during normal operations, it would not be able to provide instant feedback to the brokers. Also, it would cost more, and indeed, might cost more than the current manual system.
Risk Management[]
The first risk that the new system may face would be not being able to take the fax and e-mail and convert it to an image. This is a major process that needs has to work since the system revolves around getting the fax and e-mail in to an image file. To fix this problem, we will have to look at the software that is converting the file in to an image and may have to configure the software to work better with the extraction process. We will also train the system admin to have proper knowledge on how fix the problem if it ever comes up.
The next problem that maybe seen is the new system will not update the website for the broker to view. This process is necessary for brokers to have instance access to documents that they sent in to offer better support for there clients. To fix this problem, it is mostly the loan system or the website that needs to be configures to sync with each other. This needs to be checked during the first two weeks that the new system is running to make sure that there are no malfunctions or syncing issues.
The last problem would be if the system does go down and to create a back up system that will revert itself to the paper fax. This is not much of a problem but it will slow down the process it will take to update the website and give the broker a longer wait time. If this happen, the whole system will need to be looked at and back up the data to insure there is no corruptions.
Proposed Solution[]
Base on our analysis of many candidate solutions, we concluded that candidate 2 would be the most beneficial to the company. Candidate 2 includes the following components:
Software:
-Barcode OCR Software COM Componenent = $300
Development Cost:
- 2 System Analysts = $43,000
Benefits:
-NPV = $105,000
We are confident that the solution we propose had the fewest adverse effect. We realise it is not the cheapest option, however, we think that few brokers would be willing to upload files on a website. We feel that the barcode solution is great choice and will prove most beneficial without side effects.
Input Output[]
Input[]
The system input consists of the fax cover to be attached to any loan document faxed.
Output[]
The loan brokers are able to look at the screen bage below and see the status of the expected loan docuement required.
Implementation Schedule[]
Gantt Chart[]
Pert Chart[]
Conversion Plan[]
A pilot conversion will be used, as the company can select a few brokers to start using the new system. Once they are comfortable with the system, the rest of the brokers will be brought on board.
Because new brokers will need to be brought to speed on the system as they start doing more loans with betterloans, there will still be a small component of the old system in use for the foreseeable future.
This plan is considered best because it will allow Betterloans to select brokers with whom it has a good relationship and feels will give honest feedback about the system, both positive and negative. As we have been told by Betterloans management, their goal is to increase the appeal of doing business with Betterloans from the broker's perspective.
Furthermore, this plan will allow brokers who are either set in their ways of less technology savvy to be able to send in their loan document via the postal service without impacting overall system effectiveness.
Other Recommendations[]
We feel that in order for this system to be effective, the brokers need to really understand and trust it. We recommend that the betterloans website include a help section about the automated fax system.
We also realize that error may occur. When the fax system is down for any reason, the website should indicate that. This way, brokers will not wonder why the online status of the document is not updated even though a fax was sent in.
In the future, the image repository may need additional hardware space, in order to provide for long term storage of the document images.
We also think that it would be an improvement for the website to be modified to allow the broker to get confimation by email, as well as get a list of oustanding documents by email.
References[]
- betterloans.com
- [1] (brooktrout card) Priced at ebay with 8 ports: around $6000 to $7000