In system implementation strategies, which approach runs the old system and the new system concurrently for a defined period to reduce risk?
-
Aparallel
-
Bpilot
-
Cphased
-
Ddirect
-
ENone of the above
Answer
Correct Answer: parallel
Explanation
Introduction / Context:Choosing the right cutover strategy balances risk, cost, and speed. Running systems concurrently is a classic way to compare outputs and provide a safety net during transition.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Objective: minimize risk of service interruption.
- Both legacy and new systems can be operated simultaneously.
Concept / Approach:Parallel implementation runs both systems at the same time, enabling reconciliation of outputs and rapid rollback if issues arise. It costs more (dual operations) but reduces risk.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Match description (both systems active) to the named approach → parallel.Contrast with alternatives: pilot (limited site), phased (module-by-module), direct (instant cutover).Verification / Alternative check:Cutover plans and reconciliation scripts are hallmarks of parallel conversions.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:Pilot limits scope to one site; phased limits scope to components; direct swaps immediately with higher risk.
Common Pitfalls:Underestimating data synchronization and dual maintenance; ensure clear reconciliation procedures and timeframe.
Final Answer:parallel