7212019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement Recom.docx

7/21/2019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement
Recommendation of IT Disaste...: UC MegaSearch
eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=11&sid=42cf2ed2-
e96b-41a3-b91e-abb8620e6280%40sdc-v-
sessmgr01&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWI… 1/2
Authors:
Source:
Document Type:
Subject Terms:
NAICS/Industry
Codes:
Abstract:
Analysis of Main Cause Factors and
Improvement Recommendation of IT Disaster
Recovery Problems: A Case Study of XYZ
Organization.
Putra, Esa Pawenang Panjiwa [email protected]
Nazief, Bobby A. A. [email protected]
AIP Conference Proceedings. 2018, Vol. 1977 Issue 1, p1-7. 7p.
Article

*INFORMATION technology management
*EMERGENCY management
*ANALYTIC hierarchy process
*BUSINESS continuity planning
*FOCUS groups
624230 Emergency and Other Relief Services
913190 Other municipal protective services
912190 Other provincial protective services
911290 Other federal protective services
922190 Other Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities
Disruption of Information Technology (IT) can impede the
business of an organization. In this
case, major incidents occurred in XYZ organization in which it
could not restore the services of
business immediately after its data center endured an electrical
outage. The speed of services
restoration depends on how quickly the organization identifies
the incident and how well it is
prepared. Therefore, the top level management of XYZ
organization expects a tactical and
systematic step in anticipating and handling disruptions to all
IT services. Based on these
conditions, this research aimed to study the main factors of IT
disaster recovery problem to
provide recommendations for improvement. The IT disaster
recovery problem can be identified
by 4 (four) factors, which are technology, organization,
environment and individual. In order to
find out the problem, this study used interviews with
respondents who involved in major incident
and information from documents related with service recovery.
In order to know the factors or
sub-factors that significantly affect the recovery of services,
this research used Analytic Hierarchy

Process (AHP) techniques for weighting factors or sub-factors
to obtain influence factor of IT
disaster recovery. The AHP result of the highest weighted factor
is the organization, and the
highest weighted sub-factor is the perception of business
continuity benefit. Recommendations
were formulated based on literature study and then the result of
literature study was validated
through Focus Group Discussion (FGD) and experts. The results
of this research provide
recommendation for improvement of the problems using the
most suitable ITIL approach.
[ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]
1
1
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~AR%20%22Putra%2C%20
Esa%20Pawenang%20Panjiwa%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~AR%20%22Nazief%2C%2
0Bobby%20A.%20A.%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','mdb~~a9h%7C%7Cjdb~~a9hjn
h%7C%7Css~~JN%20%22AIP%20Conference%20Proceedings%
22%7C%7Csl~~jh','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~DE%20%22INFORMATIO
N%20technology%20management%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~DE%20%22EMERGENCY
%20management%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~DE%20%22ANALYTIC%2
0hierarchy%20process%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~DE%20%22BUSINESS%20
continuity%20planning%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~DE%20%22FOCUS%20gro
ups%22%7C%7Csl~~rl','');
javascript:__doLinkPostBack('','ss~~IC%20%22624230%22%7C

%7Csl~~rl','');
%7Csl~~rl','');
%7Csl~~rl','');
%7Csl~~rl','');
%7Csl~~rl','');
7/21/2019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement
Recommendation of IT Disaste...: UC MegaSearch
eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=11&sid=42cf2ed2-
e96b-41a3-b91e-abb8620e6280%40sdc-v-
sessmgr01&bdata=JkF1dGhUeXBlPXNoaWI… 2/2
Author Affiliations:
ISSN:
DOI:
Accession Number:
Database:
Publisher Logo:
Copyright of AIP Conference Proceedings is the property of
American Institute of Physics and its
content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted
to a listserv without the copyright
holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for

individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is
given about the accuracy of the
copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the
material for the full abstract.
(Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)
Faculty of Computer Science, Universitas Indonesia, Depok,
Indonesia
0094-243X
10.1063/1.5042880
130383711
Academic Search Complete
1
Mobile Site EBSCO Support Site Privacy Policy Terms of Use
Copyright Contact Us
powered by EBSCOhost
© 2019 EBSCO Industries, Inc. All rights reserved.
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/[email protected]&vid=11
&mdb=a9h&jdb=a9hjnh&ss=JN+%22AIP+Conference+Proceedi
ngs%22&sl=jh
http://eds.a.ebscohost.com/eds/mobileview/[email protected]&vi
d=11&mobileview=True
http://support.ebsco.com/
https://support.ebscohost.com/ehost/privacy.html
https://support.ebscohost.com/ehost/terms.html
https://support.ebscohost.com/ehost/terms.html#copyright
https://support.ebscohost.com/contact/index.php

7/22/2019 Opinion | Choosing When and How to Die - The New
York Times
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/03/opinion/sunday/choosing-
how-to-die-euthanasia.html 1/5
LETTERS
June 3, 2017
To the Editor:
Re “The Death and Life of John Shields” (“The End” series,
front page, May 28), about a Canadian man with an incurable
disease who orchestrated his final days before a physician-
assisted death:
John Shields gave himself and his loved ones an amazing gift by
planning and attending his own wake. He gave his friends
and family an opportunity to celebrate life and strengthen bonds
in the face of his death. I was struck by how his wife and
loved ones honored his choices and courageously accompanied
him through the end of his life.
American culture teaches us to avoid the topic of death, so most
Americans are deeply uncomfortable discussing death
and dying. But death is a precious part of life, and Mr. Shields’s
story shows us that when we embrace death, grace and
peace — as well as the difficult and painful parts — can be ours
to experience.
SARAH FARR
SILVER SPRING, MD.

The writer is an end-of-life doula.
To the Editor:
I read about John Shields’s last days with particular interest
because my husband, Norman Lindsey, passed away in a
hospice on May 19. The words of Mr. Shields’s doctor, Stefanie
Green, were particularly poignant for me. She said, “Give
people good information and let them do what they think is best
for their family.”
Choosing When and How to Die
https://www.nytimes.com/
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/world/canada/euthanasia-
bill-john-shields-death.html?module=inline
York Times
We did not have that choice. I feel nothing but resentment and
anger toward those in the Connecticut Legislature who
think it their right to prevent us from choosing how to end our
life once told that we have a terminal illness with less than
six months to live. Norman had lung disease, and I watched this
lovely, vigorous, intelligent man lose his ability to walk
even a few steps, use the bathroom, breathe without the aid of
oxygen, read, eat, drink and speak.
As a woman cited in your article asked, “Who owns my life?”

ANITA LINDSEY
RIDGEFIELD, CONN.
To the Editor:
Many readers will be moved by the poignant story of John
Shields, even as it numbs us to the Orwellian language of
euthanasia. The physician who administered a lethal drug to her
patient believes that this is how civilization “treats its
vulnerable” and is a “mark of our humanity.” Patients are now
judged “qualified” for mercy killing as part of “continuum of
care of helping people.”
This so-called continuum has led, in the Netherlands, to the
euthanizing of 66 psychiatric patients from 2011 to 2014,
despite disagreement among independent reviewers in nearly
one-quarter of cases.
In 2015, the World Medical Association reaffirmed its position:
“Physician-assisted suicide, like euthanasia, is unethical
and must be condemned by the medical profession. … However,
the right to decline medical treatment is a basic right of
the patient and the physician does not act unethically even if
respecting such a wish results in the death of the patient.”
Let us hope that American physicians avoid the slippery slope
upon which Canadian and European doctors now find
themselves.
RONALD W. PIES
LEXINGTON, MASS.
The writer is a psychiatrist and medical ethicist affiliated with
SUNY Upstate Medical University and Tufts University.
https://www.wma.net/policies-post/wma-statement-on-

physician-assisted-suicide/
York Times
To the Editor:
As I read about John Shields’s decision to end his life by
physician-assisted suicide, I was reminded of the very similar
and
equally well planned and beautiful death of a beloved family
member of ours named Lucy.
After a life well lived, Lucy, an elderly female in failing health,
was injected with a lethal dose of drugs. The drugs were
administered by a kind and sensitive doctor, in the familiar
surroundings of Lucy’s own home, while she was held and
comforted by those who loved her. Her passing was gentle and
peaceful, and she deserved no less.
Lucy was our beloved golden retriever. In most of America,
human beings are denied the option to choose the type of
death with compassion and dignity that we routinely afford our
pets.
Your sensitive rendering of the journey John Shields chose will,
I hope, show us another, and better, way.
LINDA ACHESON POOL
PITTSBURGH
To the Editor:

“Birth and death, deliveries in and out — I find it very
transferable,” Dr. Stefanie Green explained in your article. She
chose to specialize in death, rather than birth, because “she
needed a better life-work balance than the erratic delivery of
babies allowed.”
Some may view Dr. Green’s offhand description of hastening a
person’s death as, in her words, “a mark of our humanity.”
Others will experience a sense of alarm at turning death into
another routine clinical procedure, to be scheduled around a
doctor’s vacation.
As we read of how the doctor pressed the plunger on a series of
syringes until the person was no more, we might ask
ourselves if this is a road we want our doctors and our society
to start down. Seriously ill people may feel that they are a
bother to others and subtly pressured to get out of the way.
ALAN B. ASTROW, BROOKLYN
York Times
The writer is chief of hematology/medical oncology at
NewYork-Presbyterian Brooklyn Methodist Hospital and a
professor
of clinical medicine at Weill Cornell Medical College.
To the Editor:

Tormented by an incurable disease, John Shields chose death
with grace and dignity. In Canada assisted suicide is legal;
in the United States only a few states allow it. The experience
of those states shows no evidence of misuse or abuse.
Consider a person with a terminal diagnosis coupled with the
probability of a long, painful and possibly bankrupting death
(with subsequent impoverishment of the survivors). The
prospect of having the choice to end one’s own physical and
mental suffering would be a great comfort even if one never
opts to exercise that choice. John Shields said: “No matter
how I looked at my life from this moment on, I see personal,
physical unbearable suffering. I don’t want to suffer
anymore.”
The Maine Legislature just considered and rejected an aid-in-
dying law. Maine shares a long border with Canada. Perhaps
some of that Canadian compassion and understanding can filter
across the border and cause Maine to join the ranks of
states accepting the concept of death with dignity.
LEN FREEMAN, PORTLAND, ME.
To the Editor:
“The Death and Life of John Shields” was a compelling portrait
of the very real fragility and beauty that is often revealed
at the end of life. As a specialist in hospice and palliative
medicine, I have had the privilege to bear witness to daily
reminders of what courage and love in the face of terminal
illness look like.
I was disheartened, however, with the adulatory light shed on
the act of a physician administering lethal injections. As a
physician dedicated to improving my patient’s quality of life,
such an act is antithetical to hospice care, and yet there was

no clear delineation made in the story. Furthermore, the lack of
insight from true palliative care experts to provide the
counterpoint to euthanasia was truly disappointing.
The growing discussion of dying well is a welcome and needed
one. It also needs to be balanced and well informed.
York Times
BRENDAN FLYNN
WINCHESTER, VA.
The writer is chief medical officer at Blue Ridge Hospice.
To the Editor:
Your tearjerking, multipage exploitation of John Shields’s last
days and your unabashed promotion of euthanasia are not
in the tradition of “All the News That’s Fit to Print” and are not
appreciated. May Mr. Shields, with whose family I
commiserate, rest in peace.
ROBERT J. RICHARDSON
ACTON, MASS.
To the Editor:
As I read your wonderful story about this remarkable man and
his remarkable death, my eyes were watering throughout.
I was mesmerized by his careful planning and the inevitable

outcome. If only this kind of death were available to
everyone, maybe we would live our lives more carefully and
thoughtfully. Thank you for devoting so much time and space
to a well-told story that will affect us all.
KATHERINE MCEWEN, CHICAGO
A version of this article appears in print on June 4, 2017,
Section SR, Page 8 of the New York edition with the headline:
Choosing When and How to Die
PHI 2604 Final Essay Assignment
Purpose: The purpose of this assignment is to review the ethical
theories covered by the class,
demonstrate your comprehension of their key concepts and
ethical consequences, and to use them to
come to a conclusion about the morality of euthanasia.
Skills: This assignment will help you practice the following
skills:
• Structuring an essay.
• Writing analytically.
• Comparing and contrasting different views.
• Applying theory to a concrete issue.
Knowledge: This assignment will help you become familiar with
the following content.
• The debate on the morality of euthanasia.

Task
In this paper you will review the three ethical theories covered
in class and apply them to the
euthanasia debate. The three ethical theories are utilitarianism,
the ethics of autonomy, and social
contract theory. All of these theories have something to say
about the nature of morality in general, but
none of them are specifically about euthanasia, and both
proponents and opponents of legal euthanasia
can defend their views by appealing to any and all of these
theories. Your task in this paper is to
explain how each theory can be interpreted as providing reasons
both for and against euthanasia, and
then to make a concluding moral judgment by identifying what
you take to be the overall strongest
reasons in the debate. You will be using the New York Times
article “At His Own Wake, Celebrating
Life and the Gift of Death” to provide context for your
discussion.
Read the New York Times article, which you can find here:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/25/world/canada/euthanasia-
bill-john-shields-death.html
You may also find the letters readers wrote in response
worthwhile:
how-to-die-euthanasia.html
For your paper:
1. First, define “euthanasia” in your own words, then give a
very brief introduction to the debate
over euthanasia by explaining in general terms why someone
may be rationally conflicted

about the morality of legalizing euthanasia. (1 paragraph)
2. Then, explain how a proponent of euthanasia could appeal to
utilitarianism in defense of their
view. Be sure to explain how legalizing euthanasia supposedly
maximizes net happiness. (1-2
paragraphs)
3. Then, explain how an opponent of euthanasia could appeal to
utilitarianism in defense of their
view. Be sure to explain how legalizing euthanasia supposedly
fails to maximize net happiness.
(1-2 paragraphs)
4. Then, explain why considerations of autonomy could favor
legalizing euthanasia. Be sure to
explain why legalizing euthanasia supposedly demonstrates the
appropriate respect for
people’s capacity to effectively pursue their own goals. Is
someone’s autonomy being
respected more than others, and does that matter? (1-2
paragraphs)
5. Then, explain why considerations of autonomy could favor
prohibiting euthanasia. Be sure to
explain why legalizing euthanasia supposedly violates
someone’s autonomy. Is someone’s
autonomy being violated more than others, and does that

matter? (1-2 paragraphs)
6. Then, explain why we might put rules protecting the
availability of euthanasia in the social
contract. Be sure to use a combination of Hobbes, Rawls, and
the prisoner’s dilemma to justify
your reasoning. (1-2 paragraphs)
7. Then, explain why we might put rules prohibiting euthanasia
in the social contract. Again, be
sure to use a combination of Hobbes, Rawls, and the prisoner’s
dilemma to justify your
reasoning. (1-2 paragraphs)
8. Then, make a concluding moral judgment about legalizing
euthanasia. This judgment may
include qualifications about who may receive euthanasia, when,
and why, but it cannot be
ambiguous, it must be clearly either in favor of or opposed to
legalizing euthanasia. However,
the moral judgment you decide to defend here does not need to
be your actual personal view. It
can be any judgment that you believe can be defended using
reason. (1 paragraphs)
9. Identify the one or two best reasons in support of your
conclusion and explain why these are
the most significant factors in the debate. (1-2 paragraphs)

10. Identify what you take to be the strongest objection to your
view and respond to it. (1-2
paragraphs)
11. Evaluate the story of John Shield’s euthanasia in light of
your conclusion. Did anyone act
immorally, and if so how? Did anyone act exemplary, and if so
how? Make sure your judgment
about the Shields case fits your conclusion in step eight. (2-3
paragraphs)
12. Finally, provide a works cited page that provides the
citations you used, written in MLA
format.
Your paper should be in double-spaced 12-point font, Times
New Roman, Vani, or Calibri, and
stapled. Give it an appropriate title and bold on underline the
title. Make sure your name and date is on
it, and also put the time your class meets (this will really help
me stay organized) but don’t put the
name of the professor.
Criteria for Success
• Every step of the task is fully completed, accurately, and in
the proper order.
• Every step is written primarily in your own words. If you
quote Rachels, the Times, my slides,
or any other of the authors we’ve read this semester, be sure to

give proper attribution by
providing the source after the quote and listing the source in
your works cited page.
• The paper does not contain any “filler,” i.e. sentences
unrelated to the prompt.
• The paper is turned in on time.
• The paper has the proper typesetting spelling, grammar,
paragraph structure and editing.
Rubric
Euthanasia is defined and the debated is
introduced.
Utilitarian reasons for and against
euthanasia are adequately described.
Autonomy-based reasons for and against
Contractarian reasons for and against
A conclusion is made and supported by
good reasons.

An objection to raised and responded to.
The New York Times article is discussed
in terms of the student’s conclusion.
Proper spelling, grammar, typesetting,
editing, citations, and paragraphs.
Total
/20
/30
/30
/30
/20
/20

7212019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement Recom.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 7212019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement Recom.docx

Similar to 7212019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement Recom.docx (20)

More from blondellchancy

More from blondellchancy (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

7212019 Analysis of Main Cause Factors and Improvement Recom.docx