This document summarizes the periodic review process for user access and permissions to the Guidewire Billing Center system. It outlines the objectives to identify the components and serve as a template for future reviews. It provides instructions for the data owner receiving reports to gather feedback and communicate proposed changes through a help desk ticket. The document also specifies service level agreements for implementing access changes and provides details of the last review, including the report name, distribution and date.
Alliance 2017 - CRM Deep Dive: Workflows, Business Rules, Security, and Troub...Sparkrock
Presented by Irina Kon and Ulrike Kruger on January 25th, 2017.
Irina and Ulrike take a deep dive into our CRM solution to help you get some hands-on experience that you can bring back to your workplace and better understand the solution.
ISAS 600 – Database Project Phase III RubricAs the final ste.docxbagotjesusa
ISAS 600 – Database Project Phase III Rubric
As the final step to your proposed database, you submitted your Project Plan. This document should communicate how you intend to complete the project. Include timelines and resources required.
Area
Does not meet expectations
Meets expectations
Exceeds expectations
A. Analysis - how will you determine the needs of the database
Did not identify appropriate plan for analysis phase
Identified appropriate plan for analysis phase
Identified appropriate plan for analysis phase and included additional content
Design - what process will you use to design the database (tables, forms, queries, reports)
Did not sufficiently identify detail on the appropriate process for design phase
Identified appropriate process for design phase
Identified appropriate process for design phase and included additional detail
Prototype/End user feedback - Will you show users a prototype before building the system?
Did not sufficiently identify method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system
Identified method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system
Identified method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system and provided additional detail
Coding - what process will you use to build the database?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate process for coding the database
Identified appropriate process for coding the database
Identified appropriate process for coding the database and provided additional detail.
Testing - How will you test it?
to build the database?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate process for testing the database
Identified appropriate process for testing the database
Identified appropriate process for testing the database and provided additional detail.
User Acceptance - describe the final step of determining if you met the user's needs?
Did not sufficiently identify an appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs.
Identified appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs.
Identified appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs. Answer provided additional detail
Training - what is the plan for training end users?
Did not identify appropriate detail for training plan
Identified appropriate detail for training plan
Identified appropriate detail for a training plan and provided additional detail.
Project close out - what steps will you take to finalize the project?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate steps for closing out the project
Identified appropriate steps for closing out the project
Identified appropriate steps for closing out the project and provided additional detail.
Entity Relationship Diagram1
ERD:
Normalization:
1NF:
For the 1st NF we will have to check the tables’ attributes, like there must not be any multivalued attribute, if there is any multivalued at.
Alliance 2017 - CRM Deep Dive: Workflows, Business Rules, Security, and Troub...Sparkrock
Presented by Irina Kon and Ulrike Kruger on January 25th, 2017.
Irina and Ulrike take a deep dive into our CRM solution to help you get some hands-on experience that you can bring back to your workplace and better understand the solution.
ISAS 600 – Database Project Phase III RubricAs the final ste.docxbagotjesusa
ISAS 600 – Database Project Phase III Rubric
As the final step to your proposed database, you submitted your Project Plan. This document should communicate how you intend to complete the project. Include timelines and resources required.
Area
Does not meet expectations
Meets expectations
Exceeds expectations
A. Analysis - how will you determine the needs of the database
Did not identify appropriate plan for analysis phase
Identified appropriate plan for analysis phase
Identified appropriate plan for analysis phase and included additional content
Design - what process will you use to design the database (tables, forms, queries, reports)
Did not sufficiently identify detail on the appropriate process for design phase
Identified appropriate process for design phase
Identified appropriate process for design phase and included additional detail
Prototype/End user feedback - Will you show users a prototype before building the system?
Did not sufficiently identify method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system
Identified method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system
Identified method for feedback and prototypes during building of the system and provided additional detail
Coding - what process will you use to build the database?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate process for coding the database
Identified appropriate process for coding the database
Identified appropriate process for coding the database and provided additional detail.
Testing - How will you test it?
to build the database?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate process for testing the database
Identified appropriate process for testing the database
Identified appropriate process for testing the database and provided additional detail.
User Acceptance - describe the final step of determining if you met the user's needs?
Did not sufficiently identify an appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs.
Identified appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs.
Identified appropriate process for User Acceptance phase - How to determine if the database meets user’s needs. Answer provided additional detail
Training - what is the plan for training end users?
Did not identify appropriate detail for training plan
Identified appropriate detail for training plan
Identified appropriate detail for a training plan and provided additional detail.
Project close out - what steps will you take to finalize the project?
Did not sufficiently identify appropriate steps for closing out the project
Identified appropriate steps for closing out the project
Identified appropriate steps for closing out the project and provided additional detail.
Entity Relationship Diagram1
ERD:
Normalization:
1NF:
For the 1st NF we will have to check the tables’ attributes, like there must not be any multivalued attribute, if there is any multivalued at.
Running head The REA Approach1The REA Approach8The REA Approa.docxtodd521
Running head: The REA Approach 1
The REA Approach 8The REA Approach
Franklin Lee Henderson
American Intercontinental University
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]
Abstract
The Resource-Event-Agent (REA) model is a way to deal with conceptualizing the semantics of Fina Calculated models of undertakings can be utilized for both business procedure demonstrating and the genuine structure of automated data systems. The Resource-Event-Agent (REA) model, an area explicit structure for deciding the data engineering of bookkeeping and endeavor data frameworks, has fundamentally been utilized for plan purposes. In this paper we investigate the utilization of REA for business process modeling. At first, we talk about how REA natives are utilized to portray the esteem included change of assets all through the venture. Next, we break down some troublesome determination issues that identify with business procedure displaying when all is said in done and to REA designing answers for these issues. We finish up the paper with the detail of a three-layer engineering that abridges the REA way to deal with business procedure demonstrating: (I) endeavor level determination, (ii) REA-based procedure depictions, and (iii) task-level or work process specifications. The design demonstrates that work process portrayals can be identified with the detail of the venture esteem chain through the mode of REA data structures’ trades, for example, bookkeeping exchanges. The REA model is an ISO standard.
The REA Approach
In this paper we investigate the utilization of REA for business process modeling. At first, we talk about how REA natives are utilized to portray the esteem included change of assets all through the venture. Next, we break down some troublesome determination issues that identify with business procedure displaying when all is said in done and to REA designing answers for these issues. We finish up the paper with the detail of a three-layer engineering that abridges the REA way to deal with business procedure demonstrating: (I) endeavor level determination, (ii) REA-based procedure depictions, and (iii) task-level or work process specifications. The design demonstrates that work process portrayals can be identified with the detail of the venture esteem chain through the mode of REA data structures’ trades, for example, bookkeeping exchanges. The REA model is an ISO standard.
Tantamount deals are for the 52-week time frame finished January 25, 2019, contrasted with the 52-week duration finished January 26, 2018. For more data in regard to our monetary 2019 budgetary execution, see our yearly report on Form 10-K for financial 2019 recorded with the SEC on March 28, 2019. Certain money related measures talked about above are non-GAAP measures under the SEC's principles. See Annex A for more data about how we figure these monetary measures, why those money related measures give significant data, a.
The Virginia National Guard Cooperative Agreement Process is how the State Department of Military Affairs seeks reimbursement from the Federal government for services rendered. This process was functioning in such a poor state that senior leaders in Virginia were considering furloughing employees due to tied up funds. At the end of this process we were able to take the reimbursement time from an average of 49 days to 5 days, improved their delinquency rate and standardized the process across all functions. This also resulted in a cost avoidance of 50% on behalf of the Federal Government while improving transparency for all parties involved.
Analytic Snapshots: Common Use Cases that Everyone Can Utilize (Dreamforce 2...Rhonda Ross
Have you heard about Analytic Snapshots, but been intimidated about setting your first one up? Or, are you simply unsure of how you can use them? Join us as we show you how setting up a snapshot can be as simple as performing three easy steps. Several use cases that virtually every organization can take advantage of will be discussed, such as tracking user logins over time, measuring Chatter adoption, reporting on changes to key fields, and more! Step-by-step instructions for setting up your own snapshots will be available so you can put what you learn into practice immediately.
Running head The REA Approach1The REA Approach8The REA Approa.docxtodd521
Running head: The REA Approach 1
The REA Approach 8The REA Approach
Franklin Lee Henderson
American Intercontinental University
Author Note
[Include any grant/funding information and a complete correspondence address.]
Abstract
The Resource-Event-Agent (REA) model is a way to deal with conceptualizing the semantics of Fina Calculated models of undertakings can be utilized for both business procedure demonstrating and the genuine structure of automated data systems. The Resource-Event-Agent (REA) model, an area explicit structure for deciding the data engineering of bookkeeping and endeavor data frameworks, has fundamentally been utilized for plan purposes. In this paper we investigate the utilization of REA for business process modeling. At first, we talk about how REA natives are utilized to portray the esteem included change of assets all through the venture. Next, we break down some troublesome determination issues that identify with business procedure displaying when all is said in done and to REA designing answers for these issues. We finish up the paper with the detail of a three-layer engineering that abridges the REA way to deal with business procedure demonstrating: (I) endeavor level determination, (ii) REA-based procedure depictions, and (iii) task-level or work process specifications. The design demonstrates that work process portrayals can be identified with the detail of the venture esteem chain through the mode of REA data structures’ trades, for example, bookkeeping exchanges. The REA model is an ISO standard.
The REA Approach
In this paper we investigate the utilization of REA for business process modeling. At first, we talk about how REA natives are utilized to portray the esteem included change of assets all through the venture. Next, we break down some troublesome determination issues that identify with business procedure displaying when all is said in done and to REA designing answers for these issues. We finish up the paper with the detail of a three-layer engineering that abridges the REA way to deal with business procedure demonstrating: (I) endeavor level determination, (ii) REA-based procedure depictions, and (iii) task-level or work process specifications. The design demonstrates that work process portrayals can be identified with the detail of the venture esteem chain through the mode of REA data structures’ trades, for example, bookkeeping exchanges. The REA model is an ISO standard.
Tantamount deals are for the 52-week time frame finished January 25, 2019, contrasted with the 52-week duration finished January 26, 2018. For more data in regard to our monetary 2019 budgetary execution, see our yearly report on Form 10-K for financial 2019 recorded with the SEC on March 28, 2019. Certain money related measures talked about above are non-GAAP measures under the SEC's principles. See Annex A for more data about how we figure these monetary measures, why those money related measures give significant data, a.
The Virginia National Guard Cooperative Agreement Process is how the State Department of Military Affairs seeks reimbursement from the Federal government for services rendered. This process was functioning in such a poor state that senior leaders in Virginia were considering furloughing employees due to tied up funds. At the end of this process we were able to take the reimbursement time from an average of 49 days to 5 days, improved their delinquency rate and standardized the process across all functions. This also resulted in a cost avoidance of 50% on behalf of the Federal Government while improving transparency for all parties involved.
Analytic Snapshots: Common Use Cases that Everyone Can Utilize (Dreamforce 2...Rhonda Ross
Have you heard about Analytic Snapshots, but been intimidated about setting your first one up? Or, are you simply unsure of how you can use them? Join us as we show you how setting up a snapshot can be as simple as performing three easy steps. Several use cases that virtually every organization can take advantage of will be discussed, such as tracking user logins over time, measuring Chatter adoption, reporting on changes to key fields, and more! Step-by-step instructions for setting up your own snapshots will be available so you can put what you learn into practice immediately.
2. Guidewire Billing Center System
1 | P a g e
T a b l e o f C o n t e n t s
PURPOSE ...............................................................................................................................................................2
OBJECTIVES............................................................................................................................................................2
NOTE TO DATA OWNER .........................................................................................................................................2
IS SERVICE LEVEL AGREEMENT EXPECTATION ........................................................................................................3
GENERAL INFORMATION .......................................................................................................................................3
REPORT DETAILS....................................................................................................................................................3
JIRA REQUIREMENTS .............................................................................................................................................4
REQUIREMENTS HISTORY..................................................................................................................................................4
October 29, 2013 - Original Access Review Audits Requirements....................................................................................... 4
November 12, 2013 - Access Review Audits Requirements Update I.................................................................................. 5
November 13, 2013 - Access Review Audits Requirements Update II................................................................................. 5
FINAL REPORT................................................................................................................................................................6
Access to Producer Master Report - Report Information (Worksheet) ............................................................................... 6
Access to Producer Master Report - Legend (Worksheet)................................................................................................... 7
3. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
2 | P a g e
P u r p o s e
The purpose of the Department Review Guidewire Billing Center System document is to identify, review, and
maintain processes used in the periodic review of user’s access and their permissions to the system. The document
is divided into 6 sections – Objectives, Note to Data Owner, IS Service Level Agreement Expectation, General
Information, Report Details, and JIRA Requirements. The Objectives section is to identify how this document is used.
The Note to the Data Owner section is specific instruction and guideline to the data owner to help when he receives
the reports and who he should send the report to and how the changes are communicated for logging and tracking
purposes. The IS Service Level Agreement section is to communicate and ensure an IS SLA level 2 Level 2 status for
changes that result from the review process by the data owner as specified in the IS Service Level Agreements itself.
The General Information section is to summarize the system reviewed, the review frequency of that system, the
governing policy and process flows behind the review, the owners involved in the review, and the last system review
date. The Report Detail section is to outline the name and location of the query that generated the report reviewed,
the name and location of the report reviewed by the data owner, the report output format, the report distribution,
as well as the last created report date. The JIRA Requirements section is to identify all report requirements, report
Mock ups, as well as the QA Review Results.
O b j e c t i v e s
To serve as a documentation source to quickly assess what was done in the PILOT of the Access Right
Review Project;
Identify the components of the department review;
To serve as a template (turnkey) as department reviews are conducted on system after system;
Help determine a timeline for implementing the change with consideration given to current and future
projects, and peak business activity schedules;
Contribute to the general improvement of the process.
N o t e t o D a t a O w n e r
This section is set up to help assist the Data Owner through this new process of performing a department review.
We want you to know what is set up, how you fit into the process, and what is expected of you.. Although you are
named as the Data Owner for the system, you are not responsible for performing the entire review.
There is a 3 week turnaround on this process for the department owner. Obviously you aren’t familiar with all the
roles and the people in them, but that you would pass this along to the SME’s in Customer Service, Underwriting,
Finance and Sales & Marketing to gather feedback on their suggested changes. If you need any help with this,
contact the Audit Team of this process, members, Linda Karl, Manager, Compliance and/or Perry Heckemeyer,
Controller.
Once you have received responses from these departments with roles/users changes, these changes will be
communicated through the Help Desk ticket system – so once you have gathered information, let an Audit Team
member know and they will assist you with getting these attached to a HelpDesk ticket so they can make your
proposed changes.
On the spreadsheet there is both a Legend with all the roles and defined permissions for each role as well as the
spreadsheet which has individuals, roles, departments and authority limits. As you can see, there is some default
values that were used for roles granting $10m in authority in some instances. These will likely need to be changed
as well as roles/individuals. Again, if you would like a walkthrough or further contact Linda or Perry.
4. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
3 | P a g e
I S S e r v i c e L e v e l A g r e e m e n t E x p e c t a t i o n
The purpose of this section is to provide the business expectations for role and authorization corrections change
requests. According to the IS Service Level Agreements, “incorrect system access” has an IS SLA Level 2 and resolution
is 2-4 business days. Additionally, “an employee access change or addition” is an IS SLA Level 3 and resolution is 5-7
business days. The business expectations for such change requests is a resolution within 2 – 7 business days, having
an IT Service Level Agreement (SLA) of Level 2, when there are no impact upon other business processes. However,
because of the nature of roles and authorizations changes, data owners, who would request such requests, may
have to analyze the impact on business processes on a case by case basis prior to requesting these changes.
G e n e r a l I n f o r m a t i o n
System Name: Guidewire Billing Center
Review Frequency: Annually
Governing Policy: FS_1047 Corporate Access Management Policy
Process Flows: Access Rights Process Flowcharts
Initiative Owner: Finance
Process Owner: IS Operations
Data Owner: Doug Phillips
Last Review Date: 11/13/2013
R e p o r t D e t a i l s
Query Name:
Access to Producer Master Report Query
Access to Producer Master Report - Legend Query
Query Location: Query Location
Report Name: Access to Producer Master Report
Report Location: Report Location
Output: Excel
Delivery Method: Email
Distribution List: Data Owner and Audit Team (as defined in the Governing Policy above)
Last Created Report: 11/14/2013
5. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
4 | P a g e
J I R A R e q u i r e m e n t s
JIRA Requirement: AR-12 Request User Access to Producer Master Report
Attachment (s):
October 29, 2013 Original Access Review Audits Requirements
November 1, 2013 Original Access Review Audits Requirements QA Review
November 12, 2013 Access Review Audits Requirements Update I
November 13, 2013 Access Review Audits Requirements Update II
R E Q U I R E M E N T S H I S T O R Y
O c t o b e r 2 9 , 2 0 1 3 - O r i g i n a l A c c e s s R e v i e w A u d i t s
R e q u i r e m e n t s
6. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
5 | P a g e
N o v e m b e r 1 2 , 2 0 1 3 - A c c e s s R e v i e w A u d i t s R e q u i r e m e n t s
U p d a t e I
N o v e m b e r 1 3 , 2 0 1 3 - A c c e s s R e v i e w A u d i t s R e q u i r e m e n t s
U p d a t e I I
7. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
6 | P a g e
F I N A L R E P O R T
A c c e s s t o P r o d u c e r M a s t e r R e p o r t - R e p o r t I n f o r m a t i o n
( W o r k s h e e t )
8. Guidewire Billing Center System
Department Review
7 | P a g e
A c c e s s t o P r o d u c e r M a s t e r R e p o r t - L e g e n d ( W o r k s h e e t )