Transaction Processing Systems (TPS): Which characteristic best describes TPS in terms of complexity and computerization of routine, structured activities?

Introduction / Context:
Transaction Processing Systems (TPS) capture, validate, and record high-volume routine transactions such as orders, receipts, payments, and time punches. Because these processes are standardized and rule-driven, TPS are prime candidates for automation and real-time processing in enterprise systems like ERP and POS platforms.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• TPS handle structured, repetitive tasks with well-defined inputs and outputs.
• They operate at the operational level, supporting day-to-day activities.
• Upper management primarily uses summarized dashboards, not TPS screens.

Concept / Approach:
TPS are fairly easy to computerize because business rules can be codified, data validations are formulaic, and workflows are predictable. While TPS can feed summary information upward, providing summaries is not their defining trait; and they are not built specifically for upper executives. By contrast, DSS/ESS focus on summary and strategic insights, whereas TPS focuses on accurate, timely capture of detailed transactions.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Historic adoption of TPS (e.g., bank core systems, inventory control) demonstrates their suitability for early and extensive computerization.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Provides summary information: Possible output, but not defining; TPS focus on detailed transactions.
• Used by upper management: Upper managers consume summaries from MIS/ESS, not raw TPS screens.
• Difficult to computerize: Opposite of reality for structured, rule-based tasks.
• None: Incorrect since one choice is clearly accurate.

Common Pitfalls:
Mixing roles of TPS and MIS; assuming TPS must produce executive summaries rather than feeding them upstream.

Final Answer:
fairly easy to computerize