System Development as a Rational Communicative Process
G.E.(Gert)VELDHUIJZEN V AN ZANTEN,
S.J.B.A.(Stijn)HOPPENBROUWERS,and
H.A.(Erik)PROPER
IRIS,University of Nijmegen
Nijmegen,The Netherlands,EU
P UBLISHED AS:
G.E.Veldhuijzen van Zanten,S.J.B.A.Hoppen-
brouwers,and H.A.Proper.System Development as
a Rational Communicative Process.In N.Callaos,
D.Farsi,M.Eshagian-Wilner,T.Hanratty,and
N.Rish,editors,Proceedings of the7th World Multi-
conference on Systemics,Cybernetics and Informat-
ics,volume XVI,pages126–130,Orlando,Florida,
USA,July2003.ISBN9806560019
ABSTRACT
System development is a process in which communication plays an important role.Requirements must be elicited from vari-ous stakeholders.But stakeholders also make decisions and must understand the consequences thereof.Different view-points must be reconciled,and agreements reached.
An important assumption we make is that all actions in the de-velopment process are(or should be)based on rational deci-sions.The quest for rationality is a driving force behind the communication that takes place within the development pro-cess,because it raises issues that may otherwise have remained in the subconsciousness of stakeholders.We zoom in on the role of vagueness in communication,and argue that there are good reasons not to try and formalize things too soon in the development process.
The purpose of this paper is to position our ongoing research, encourage discussion about the assumptions we make,and in-spire novel approaches to system development.We work to-wards a comprehensive theory of rational system development, in which due attention is paid to development processes,com-munication,and the representations used therein.
Keywords:System development,Architecture,Communica-tion,Rationality,Language,Vagueness.
1INTRODUCTION
Organizations and their information systems are becoming more and more complex,making it increasingly dif?cult to con-trol the process of system development,and even more so to make it effective.The alignment of information systems to or-ganizations and the work practices therein is regarded as cru-cial[Boa99].In a rapidly changing world,where an organiza-tions need to adapt quickly,alignment calls for highly?exible systems.Architectures are recognized as important tools that help control the information system development process and at the same time help achieve better alignment[BCK98].The potential role of architecture in the development process is un-derlined by the uses of architectural descriptions,as identi?ed in[IEE00]:
?Expression of the system and its(potential)evolution.?Analysis of alternative architectures.
?Business planning for transition from a legacy architecture to a new architecture.
?Communication among organizations involved in the de-velopment,production,?elding,operation,and mainte-nance of a system.
?Communication between acquirers and developers as a part of contract negotiations.
?Providing criteria for certifying conformance of imple-mentations to the architecture.
?Providing development and maintenance documentation, including material for reuse repositories and training ma-terial.
?Providing input to subsequent system design and develop-ment activities.
?Providing input to system generation and analysis tools.?Supporting operations and infrastructure,con?guration management and repair,redesign and maintenance of sys-tems,sub-systems,and components.
?Enabling planning and budget support.?Preparation of acquisition documents(e.g.,requests for proposal and statements of work).
?Enabling reviewing,analysis,and evaluation of the system across its life cycle.
The ArchiMate project[The03]advocates a generic architec-tural approach in which visualization and communication play a central role,alongside analysis.A primary goal of the Archi-Mate project is to improve support for the design,communica-tion,realization,and management of architectures.These are recognized as crucial areas in which support(methods,tech-niques and tools)is still lacking.
In our opinion,architectures should capture the essentials of the processes and(computerized)information systems within an organization as well as their(potential)evolution,in rela-tion to the concerns of stakeholders[IEE00].Essentials con-cern only that which can be thoroughly motivated in terms of the important goals identi?ed.Capturing essentials requires a thorough understanding of processes,systems,and stakeholder concerns.Such understanding also enables the negotiation pro-cess that is needed in dealing with different and contradicting concerns of stakeholders.
In this paper,we focus on the communication aspect of(in-formation)system development,as this aspect is most tightly coupled with the goals of architecting.The concept of com-munication also takes an important place on the list of uses for architectural descriptions as discussed in[IEE00].In our view, understanding is a cornerstone for information system develop-ment.It can only be achieved through communication.Please note,however,that our communicative perspective should be seen as complementary to the descriptive perspective as taken in traditional approaches.
An important assumption we make is that all actions in the de-velopment process are(or should be)based on rational deci-sions,even if this happens only in hindsight.These decisions are to guide the communication processes taking place within the development process.Hence the title of this paper:System Development as a Rational Communicative Process.
The structure of the paper is as follows.We start with a brief discussion of some background:communication and rational-ity.In section2,the communicative perspective is contrasted to the representational(modeling)perspective on system develop-ment.In particular,we will discuss the limitations of the repre-sentational perspective that we intend to overcome by adopting a communicative perspective.In section3,we discuss ratio-nality and its potential role in the system development process. This is followed by the core of this paper:section4.In this section we discuss the process of system development and its constituents from a rational communicative perspective.We continue with a discussion of three key issues in system devel-opment that come to the fore when taking the rational commu-nicative perspective:
?We believe negotiation and understanding are key to the success of a development process.The rational com-municative approach provides a natural starting point for negotiation among,and understanding by,the system’s stakeholders(section5);
?We feel that“vagueness”has a very important role to play in system development,leading to the notion of“just-in-time formality”(section6);
?A rational communicative approach to system develop-ment poses speci?c requirements for tool-support.We pro-vide a sketch of the functionality that should be provided (section7).
2COMMUNICATIVE PERSPECTIVE
Although the principle importance of communication in system development has been widely acknowledged,current practice fails to include concrete measures that actively support com-munication in line with advanced insights into communicative action[Rei96].Contemporary lines of thought are mainly con-cerned with representation,rather than with communicative ac-tion.Many current architectural methodologies are based on the IEEE standard1471-2000for recommended practices for architectural description of software intensive systems[IEE00], or apply a similar line of thinking.
According to the IEEE standard,an architectural description consists of multiple views.Each view addresses one or more of the concerns of the system stakeholders.The term“view”is used to refer to the expression of a system’s architecture with respect to a particular viewpoint.A viewpoint establishes the
conventions by which a view is created depicted and analyzed. In most cases,methodologies based on the IEEE standard ig-
nore the fact that descriptions as such do not actively support
the much sought after alignment between organizations,work-practices and information systems.The descriptions used may
seem to indicate an alignment between the different elements,
but this‘alignment’occurs purely at a representational level.
The descriptions on their own cannot provide suf?cient proof
of the alignment of the real organization,work-practices and
information systems.
We propose to extend the notion of view and viewpoint from
a descriptive perspective to a communicative one,looking be-
yond the representations as such,taking serious the role that
they play in the architectural communicative process.The mere
existence of a representation does not imply that its meaning has
been communicated to the intended audience.Metaphorically
speaking,trying to construct architectural representations with-
out thoroughly communicating their underlying agreements and
motivations is like writing minutes of a meeting that never took
place.
A point that is easily missed from a descriptive perspective is
that the architecting process is really a creative and collabora-
tive one,in which understanding and agreement is reached on
subjects that emerge from the communication between archi-
tects and other stakeholders.The descriptive perspective tends
to encourage the idea that the architecture is somehow already
“out there”and only needs to be represented;it views architect-
ing mostly as a modeling exercise.Architecture descriptions are the mere result of a process of developing understanding, negotiation,decision making,and creation.We are not alone in stressing the importance of the process itself.If we carefully look at the potential uses of architectural descriptions identi?ed in the IEEE recommended practice[IEE00](as quoted in the introduction of this paper),then this list echoes our claim.Ar-chitecting is,therefore,essentially an ongoing process of nego-tiation,decision making,raising of awareness,etc,that guides and follows the co-evolution of organizations,work-practices and information systems.Architecting methodologies should support the process rather than just seek the shortest path to-wards elicitation of some“?nal representation”.
Taking a communicative perspective implies that we view an ar-
chitecture(description)as a result of a communicative process.
In this process,information should?ow from(all)stakeholders
into the developing architecture.This contrasts the descriptive
perspective in which information in the form of architectural
descriptions?ows towards the stakeholders in the organization.?From the latter perspective,it appears as if stakeholder can do little more than validate the concoctions of the architects—assuming that they understand the representations offered to them,including their consequences.
In line with this incomplete perspective,viewpoints tend to be
designed with the information need of a stakeholder in mind.
We emphasize that it is at least as important to consider what in-formation is to be obtained from the stakeholder.In other words, viewpoints should be designed(and selected)on the basis of the two-way communication need associated with them.In general, viewpoints should document the communicative purpose under-lying them.
One of our goals is to raise the architect’s awareness of the
communicative perspective,and in particular some of its con-
sequences.For instance,when some architectural diagram is
presented to the board of directors,explained and approved,this
tends to create a false sense of agreement:it is naive to assume
that everyone in the board has understood the full consequences
of what was presented.To make things worse,the diagram may
have invoked unintended interpretations.It is extremely hard to
create architectural representations that convey only the essen-
tials,i.e.neither too much nor too little.It is an architect’s duty to minimize unintended communication,and to persevere until
communication has actually taken place.This is only veri?ably
the case when the stakeholder demonstrates understanding.De-
velopment of techniques to validate such understanding is one
of the challenges we see for future research.
3RATIONALITY
Understanding is deeply entwined with the question of why choices are made[YM94].Argumentation is often much more directly connected to a stakeholder’s concern than the architec-tural choices as such.Therefore,we advocate a rational ap-proach that emphasizes the motivation behind representations. In this paper,we view rationality as goal-directed reasoning,in which the overall goal is to achieve maximal results at minimal cost.It implies making decisions based on an assessment of their possible outcome,the likelihood of these outcomes,and their utility with respect to the goals held[RS00,Rus97].This includes assessment of the resources spent in making decisions. Making rational decisions requires estimation of the costs in-volved in accomplishing goals by certain means. Rationality,therefore,is a very convoluted principle.Cost esti-mations can in general be made more accurate by gathering in-formation.The decision to gather information should,however, also be subject to rational contemplation,because the gathering itself also consumes resources.At?rst glance,it seems that this could go on forever;rational agents contemplating a decision by climbing meta-level after meta-level.However,rationality will generally shortcut these meta-levels,because at some point the cost of rationalization becomes too high for the expected utility. Rationality does not mean that every step of the way should be thoroughly underpinned with motivations,consideration of alternatives and deep assessments of possible consequences. What it does mean is that decisions are made with goals and the trade-offs between them in mind.The underpinning of the system development process should only go as far as is prof-itable for the goals at hand.It is important to take into account as much information as is possible but only if it is relevant to the decision,and only if it can be obtained at acceptable costs. Information is relevant to a decision if it has the potential of changing the decision’s outcome.Thus the relevance of new information depends on which information is already taken into account,and on the strength of the motivation with which the decision can be taken on the basis of the information already available.If one of the options in a decision has a much higher utility than the alternatives,then it is unlikely that the outcome of the decision will change on the basis of new information.
In sum,rational system development should lead to sensible trade-offs,for instance between costs and advantages of re-quirements traceability[DP98],or between provable correct-ness through formal speci?cations and the ability to communi-cate with stakeholders.
4THE PROCESS
We will?rst describe the system development process irrespec-tive of the communicative perspective.Thus,we supply the ba-sis to which we can add communication in section5.Our initial description of the process is rather neutral,although it already contains some devices which allow for extensions to rational and communicative principles.
The system development process can be seen as the interweav-ing of three main?ows;the why-?ow,the what-?ow,and the how-?ow—typically aiming at construction or formulation of business goals,requirements,and design,respectively.
The distinction between the?ows is motivated by the need to become aware of the distinction between essential and arbitrary aspects of design artefacts.Aspects in the how-?ow that are not motivated by the what-?ow or the why-?ow are unlikely to be essential.The same holds for what-aspects unmotivated by the why-?ow.
Representationally,each?ow contains statements about the sys-tem under development(or on a meta-level about the develop-ment process).Typically:
The why?ow contains statements about business or organiza-tional goals;
The what?ow contains statements about requirements related to these goals;
The how?ow contains statements about design decisions made to optimize conformance to these requirements. We assume that the complete history of each?ow is accessible. The?ows are logically ordered(from‘high’to‘low’),but they progress in parallel.
The system development process consists of several types of action,extending the?ows by changing the set of statements therein.Within each?ow we have actions of re?nement,back-tracking,and assumption.
Re?nement is the modi?cation of earlier statements in the light of new insights,and the adding of detail.Re?ne-ment does not change the intention of statements;it cor-rects them,or makes them more precise. Backtracking is the taking back of earlier statements,to open up alternative lines of development.
Assumption actions introduce statements without any logical connection to statements already present.
The interweaving of?ows is also achieved through actions.The higher?ows provide the rationale for the lower levels.This gives rise to two additional types of action:
Solution generation involves the descending from one?ow to another.Various alternative solutions may be generated, so each?ow may have several alternative solutions devel-oping in parallel.
Selection involves a choice is made between these alternatives on the basis of criteria originating from the higher level ?ow.
In ?gure 1,the system development process with its ?ows and actions is depicted.
?ows.
The importance of design rationale,argumentation,and con-tribution structures is stressed in the literature on requirements tracing (e.g.[Jar98]).In this paper,we extend this view by not only looking at the automated system and its documentation,but also at the socio-technical system it is part of [Che81],in-cluding the mental states of the various stakeholders within it and the communication between them.
Rationality also plays an important role on the level of the de-velopment process.During the process,resources are spent.These resources must be put to good use,leading to maximal results at minimal costs—our adage of rationality.
5NEGOTIATION AND UNDERSTANDING
In the description of the system development process so far,we have abstracted from the negotiation that is needed to come to an agreement.?From a communicative perspective,it is impor-tant to note that everyone involved in the process has their own view and interpretation of the process—their own idea of what is in each ?ow.The views of different stakeholders are not nec-essarily in agreement.The mere existence of well-documented representations of the system under development does not guar-antee communication.The representations and the system un-der development do,however,serve as a medium for communi-cation between stakeholders.
By now,it should be evident that communication is an essential part of the system development process.Yet communication takes time,the spending of which is generally not considered to be the primary goal of system development.Therefore,com-municative actions should also be scheduled in a rational way.The main goal of system development is often taken to be the construction of some automated system.For a rational approach,however,it is important to identify communicative goals as well as constructive goals.Furthermore,these goals should be subordinate to higher level business or organizational
goals.
Communicative goals are,for instance:achieve agreement between stakeholders,
obtain commitment from stakeholders to supply the nec-resources,
validate parts of the system,
elicit information from stakeholders,and
de?ne concepts in which requirements can be expressed.goal of system development is to change the busi-organization in which the system is introduced.To bring
change,however,it is not suf?cient to make available artefact.It requires that people in the environment are aware of the system’s implications,that they the system’s relevance to their concerns,and that committed to its implementation and operation.They to change their way of working.So,an essential in-of system development is that stakeholders’attitudes,and perceptions change in the course of the development This requires intensive communication during that pro-cess.
Let us demonstrate the in?uence of the communicative perspec-tive with an example.When a stakeholder formulates a require-ment,various solutions meeting that requirement may be gen-erated.When these solutions or consequences thereof are pre-sented to the stakeholder,some of the alternatives may strike stakeholders as highly unwanted,even though no requirement excluding them had been formulated.Investigation of this situ-ation may lead to the formulation of new requirements of which the stakeholder was previously unaware.
6
VAGUENESS
6.1
T HE ROLE OF LANGUAGE
In conjunction with the development of a system,a language emerges that supports the communication about the system.Concepts are adopted and de?ned,and acquire an increasingly precise meaning during the development process.
The language that stakeholders initially use to communicate about the system domain is,in general,too ‘?uid’to base the construction of computerized systems on.Concepts,functions,and entities have to be precisely de?ned.For example,mod-eling languages like UML aim at identifying the main con-cepts that make up the system domain,and the relations be-tween those concepts.A common misconception is that dia-grams de?ne the meaning of concepts.Diagrams merely de?ne the (static and dynamic)structure of concepts.The meaning of concepts is for a large part attached to the words naming them.This can easily be demonstrated by removing all words from the diagrams [Hop97].
Meaning is essentially subjective.Formal techniques and di-agrams transfer meaning to an objective world in which only pure structure remains,and where the relation to the (subjec-tive,personal)concerns is lost.This implies that even in formal methods the statements expressed are vague.
6.2T HE MERITS OF VAGUENESS
Descriptive thinking generally opposes vagueness because it is seen as the opposite of clarity,and thus undermines understand-ing.Seen from a communicative perspective,however,vague-ness is an instrument which invites further re?nement if and when the time is right.In other words,rational system develop-ment implies just-in-time formality.It helps in scheduling the communicative actions of the architecting process.This means that vagueness enables us to make motivations as explicit as is considered helpful,so that one indeed concentrates on essen-tials.Achieving precision remains an important drive within the architecting process.Vagueness,however,has its merits, and should not be banned for the wrong reasons.
In line with the above,consider the following.When asked,ar-chitects in business environments name general purpose of?ce tools,such as word-processors and generic drawing tools,as their primary means for architecture support.This fact is usu-ally noted as a weird phenomenon that is symptomatic of the immaturity of the architecting community.It is assumed that in a more mature situation,formal and semi-formal modeling tools would be used.Although from a software development point of view,formal modeling has clear advantages,this assumption misses an important point raised by taking the communicative perspective.Of?ce tools are popular because they supply a free-dom of expression that is missing in more formal tools.The ex-pression of a vague intuition opens a dialog in which new and more re?ned ideas emerge through communication.Vagueness therefore is a very effective means for creating understanding, i.e.it is essential for real communication.The conclusion is that architecting is chie?y done in between the creation of represen-tations.This reduces representations to means of architectural development instead of main results.The main results are un-derstanding and agreement between stakeholders.
In sum,traditionally and misguidedly vagueness is seen as a problem.In our approach,it is embraced as an invitation for re?nement when required,and thus a driving force behind ef?-cient and effective communication within the architecting pro-cess.
It is interesting to contrast the notion of vagueness with that of abstraction.Both are means to deal with complexity.Ab-straction,however,presupposes the existence of something to be abstracted from,while vagueness is a communicative mecha-nism that presupposes that partial communication is suf?ciently clear.
7SUPPORT
As part of the ArchiMate project,architectural support tools are being designed in which the communicative perspective is in-grained.We envisage tools that support architecting as a com-municative process.A central architecture repository is used to re?ect the common ground[Tra94,Cla92]in the negotia-tion and communication process.This repository contains ar-chitecture models,views,and visualizations,together with,im-portantly,statements concerning their underlying rationale and communicative function.
To support the communication process,the tools include a goal-driven mechanism based on principles of rationality.Perceived inconsistencies,misunderstanding,disagreement,and missing information can be signaled to the architect.These signals are
collected in a device not unlike a to-do-list.The to-do-list con-
tains suggestions for communicative action aiming to inform
some stakeholders,initiate negotiations between them,or elicit
missing information from them.The items in the list refer to
representations in the repository.
Communication with stakeholders may not immediately yield
de?nite and precise results.Nevertheless,even if tentative or
imprecise,such stakeholder contributions are signi?cant and
should be incorporated in the architecture repository.There-
fore,the tools incorporate devices which allow vague expres-
sions.Mere pieces of prose and sketches can be stored in the
architecture repository,alongside formal diagrams.
Apart from storing representations themselves,the repository
does some bookkeeping to track the communicative status of
those representations.The communicative status tells us which
stakeholders have agreed upon which aspects of the representa-
https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html,municative status is an important parameter for ar-
chitecture visualization.Care should be taken to present tenta-
tive models in a way that shows their tentativeness,for instance,
by making them look like hand drawn sketches.This will in-
vite stakeholders to ask questions and give feedback.Diagrams that are too neatly drawn may give the false impression that the
presenter highly values the particular representation,and that
comments will not be welcomed.In many cases,however,the
diagram will be shown for the explicit purpose of inviting feed-
back.
8CONCLUSION
We have described system development as a rational commu-
nicative process.In an approach that focuses merely on repre-
sentations and modeling,some important points concerning the
system development process are easily missed. Reconsidering the system development process from a rational and communicative perspective has led to a number of conclu-sions:
?Architecture is about de?ning the essentials of an enter-prise,business process or organization.Sifting the essen-tials from random variations requires understanding of the goals behind the choices.
?Rationality in the system development process implies striving for an overall cost-bene?t analysis.?Communication is essential for reaching understanding and agreement covering all relevant concerns and stake-holders.Rationality in system development requires communication,but also communication should be ap-proached rationally.
?Modeling choices are often made without full comprehen-sion of their consequences.Unintended side effects may start living a life of their own.In particular in architecture, the distinction between essential and arbitrary choices is crucial.
?Commitment of stakeholders is entwined with their under-standing of the decisions made within the process.?Viewpoints should be de?ned with respect to their com-municative purpose.
?For negotiation it is important to identify and communi-cate the goals and motivations underlying options.
?A language is created within the system development pro-cess;concepts acquire an increasingly more precise mean-ing as the process develops.
?Representations are not the only product of architecting, agreement and understand are at least as important.?Vagueness is not merely something to be condoned,it is
a vital element in any communicative process that works
towards real understanding.Vagueness is needed to enable rational communication as well as creative design.
9ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This paper results from the ArchiMate project,a research ini-tiative that provides concepts and techniques to support archi-tect in the visualization,communication and analysis of inte-grated architectures.The ArchiMate consortium consists of ABN AMRO,ABP,the Dutch Tax and Customs Administra-tion,Ordina,Telematica Instituut,Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica,University of Nijmegen,and the Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science.
REFERENCES
[BCK98]L.Bass,P.Clements,and R.Kazman.Software Architecture in Practice.Addison Wesley,Reading,
Massachusetts,USA,1998.ISBN0-201-19930-0 [Boa99]B.H.Boar.Practical steps for aligning information technology with business strategies.Wiley,New York,
New York,1999.ISBN0471076376
[Che81]P.Checkland.Systems thinking,systems practice.Wi-ley,New York,New York,1981.ISBN0471279110 [Cla92]H.H.Clark.Arenas of Language Use.University of Chicago Press,Chicago,Illinois,USA,1992.ISBN
022*******
[DP98]R.D¨o mges and K.Pohl.Adapting Traceability Envi-ronments to Project-speci?c https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html,munications
of the ACM,41(12):54–62,December1998.
[Hop97]J.J.A.C.Hoppenbrouwers.Conceptual Modeling and the Lexicon.PhD thesis,Tilburg University,Tilburg,
The Netherlands,EU,1997.ISBN90-5668-027-7 [IEE00]Recommended Practice for Architectural Description of Software Intensive Systems.Technical Report
IEEE P1471-2000,IEEE Standards Department,The
Architecture Working Group of the Software Engi-
neering Committee,September2000.ISBN0-738-
12518-0
https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html,
[Jar98]M.Jarke.Requirements https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html,munication of the ACM,41(12):32–36,December1998.
[Rei96]V.E.van Reijswoud.The Structure of Business Com-munication:Theory,Model and Application.PhD the-
sis,Delft University of Technology,Delft,The Nether-
lands,EU,1996.[RS00]H.Raiffa and R.Schlaifer.Applied Statistical Deci-sion Theory.MIT Press,Cambridge,Massachusetts,
USA,2000.ISBN047138349X
[Rus97]S.J.Russel.Rationality and Intelligence.Arti?cial Intelligence,94:57–77,1997.
[The03]The ArchiMate consortium.Website of the ArchiMate project.Telematica Instituut,Enschede,the Nether-
lands,EU,2003.
http://archimate.telin.nl
[Tra94] D.R.Traum.A Computational Theory of Grounding in Natural Language Conversation.PhD thesis,Univer-
sity of Rochester,Rochester,New York,USA,1994. [YM94]E.S.K.Yu and J.Mylopoulos.Understanding’why’in software process modelling,analysis,and design.In
Proceedings of the16th international conference on
Software engineering,pages159–168,Sorrento,Italy,
EU,1994.IEEE Computer Society Press,Los Alami-
tos,California,USA.ISBN081865855X
package src.day01; public class ACC { //父类，以下是共有属性和方法 //卡号 protected static long id; // 名字 protected static String name; // 身份证 protected static String personId; //电子邮件 protected static String email; // 密码 protected static long password; //余额 protected static double balance; public ACC(){ } public ACC(long id,String name,String personId,String email,long password,double balance ){ this.id = id; https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html, = name; this.personId = personId; this.email = email; this.password = password; this.balance = balance; } // 存款方法 public static void deposit(double money){ balance += money; System.out.println("存款成功，你存入的金额为：" + money); } public long getId() { return id; } public void setId(long id) { this.id = id; } public String getName() { return name; } public void setName(String name) { https://www.doczj.com/doc/2b16318562.html, = name; } public String getPersonId() {
全能管家多银行资金管理系统（IBS） 宣传手册 1
2
全能管家多银行资金管理系统( IBS系统) 系统背景 ”资金管理”——顾名思义是指企业和”钱”相关的所有活动的 一种统称。从企业资金管理发展的角度分析, 企业资金管理最初始的 目标就是加快收付款的速度、效率, 加快货币资金的流转。随着企业 的发展, 企业对资金的需求量大大增加, 这时资金管理所表现出来的主 要需求转换为对外部融资的需求, 这时合理的银企关系、财务资金成 本地控制、资产负债比率控制等演化为企业资金管理最重要的需求。 伴随着企业快速成长以及和资本市场的打通, 企业积累了大量的 财富, 同时货币市场的变幻莫测等, 将企业资金管理或者说财务管理人 员从筹集资金向如何将这些财富进行合法、合理的运用以及货币的保 值增值服务需求上转变。 为应对企业资金管理需求的变化和提升, 基于以客户需求为产品 创新源泉和动力的服务理念, 为更好地满足企业资金管理需求, 北京银 行汇聚财资管理智慧, 联合专业IT合作伙伴, 倾力奉献全能管家多银 行资金管理系统( IBS系统) , 致力于为北京银行企业客户伙伴提供一 站式资金、金融管理服务。 系统概述 全能管家多银行资金管理系统( IBS系统) 经过多银行数据服务程 序实现企业和各银行机构信息直通式处理, 实现企业多银行账户资金 的集中管控与统一划拨, 以全面、专业、便捷、灵活的系统服务, 满 3
足企业掌控多行账户信息、明晰资金流时效性、有效量化资金流、 加强风险管控等多项资金管理需求。 IBS系统主要功能包括: 统一数据服务平台、现金流管理、资金 计划管理、资金结算管理、内部银行管理、金融交易管理、投资理 财平台、综合查询系统等多个模块组成。 系统特点: ●为企业提供一站式金融服务: 北京银行IBS系统是一套整合了现代商业银行结算、信息、信 贷、理财服务以及企业资金管理各种需求的面向企业应用的专业资金 管理系统平台。 ●以企业流动性管理为核心: 北京银行IBS系统经过对企业多银行账户的统一管理实现企业对 账户资金实时监控管理的需求, 还进一步经过资金计划预算对企业未 来现金流和资金盈缺情况提供流量分析和平衡试算等功能, 方便企业 资金决策和头寸平衡。 ●先进的技术架构和部署模式: 北京银行IBS系统采用最先进的B/S系统架构, 真正做到单点部署, 多点使用, 同时客户端做到零维护, 方便企业的使用和维护。 应用价值 ●企业资金信息实时掌控 随着企业不断发展壮大, 资金需求、流量都不断加大, 如何能够透 4
燕山大学三级项目设计说明书 题目：银行储蓄管理系统 学院（系）：信息学院 年级专业：教育技术学15—1 学号： 学生姓名：付叶禹 郑凯峰 李文悦 王宇晨 李晓晗 指导教师：梁顺攀 教师职称：副教授 燕山大学三级项目设计（论文）任务书 院（系）：信息学院教学单位：
说明：此表一式四份，学生、指导教师、基层教学单位、系部各一份。 年月日燕山大三级项目设计评审意见表
摘要 论文阐述的是在SQL server 2008开发环境下对银行储蓄管理系统的设计。希望通过该系统的应用，能促使银行储蓄管理工作的规范化、标准化和自动化，提高管理水平和管理效率，为管理工作提供更完善的信息服务和一个成功的信息管理系统。数据库是一个非常重要的条件和关键技术，管理系统所涉及的数据库设计分为：数据库需求分析、概念设计、逻辑设计过程。 本论文叙述了数据库设计的全过程。 主要分为： 1. 系统需求分析与功能设计阶段，包括功能需求、性能需求、数据需求、系统功能框图、系统总体数据流图及分模块数据流图、数据字典。 2. 总体设计阶段，包括系统总体功能模块图、功能模块描述、输入输出及统计查询等功能模块。 3. 概念设计阶段，包括系统各个模块的ER图及系统的总ER图。 4．逻辑结构设计阶段，包括系统各个模块的ER图所转化的关系模式。 关键词：数据库设计；管理系统； SQL server 2008；
目录 摘要...................................................... 1 绪论................................... 错误!未定义书签。1.1项目背景............................. 错误!未定义书签。1.1编写目的............................. 错误!未定义书签。1.1软件定义............................. 错误!未定义书签。 1.1开发环境............................. 错误!未定义书签。 2 系统需求分析 (2) 2.1信息与功能需求 (2) 2.2业务处理需求 (2) 2.3数据流图 (3) (3) (4) 2.4安全性与完整性要求 (8) 2.5数据字典 (8) 2.5.1储户基本信息表 (8)
（业务管理）IBM新一代银行核心业务系统
新壹代银行核心业务系统 何京汉(IBM金融事业部银行资深方案经理) 背景 本文介绍新壹代核心银行所处的金融环境；结合目前国内银行所处的金融环境和银行客户的需求的新趋势，按照模型化银行（Modelingbank）的思想，介绍国内银行于设计新壹代银行核心系统是要考虑的主要问题。突出新壹代核心银行要解决的模型化银行的问题，国内系统和新壹代系统于观念上的差距，银行转型和信息规划设计的关系。国内从业人员普遍关心的金融产品概念（模型要点），核心银行的企业级客户文件（EnterpriseCIF）的原理。 国内外核心银行系统发展所处的环境 国外银行更换核心系统的努力 国外核心应用系统大多是70年代建成的，经过多年的运行后现状是：维护成本高，系统架构封闭，不易于加入新的功能且容易引起宕机。80年代至90年代国外银行，曾经试图更换这些系统，但大多归于失败，如花旗银行10亿美金的工程最终没有取得成功。 虽然，更换新的核心银行系统，难度极大，但银行仍于思考，为什么仍要将大量新的应用放于不灵活的且过时的系统上面？所以更换新的核心系统的努力仍于继续，只是吸取了80年代90年代的教训：银行必须采取新的策略去更新核心应用系统，以保证成功！ 这些策略和市场趋势概括起来有： 用核心银行提供商的解决方案替换自我开发的核心银行系统。100强的银行70%的银行将去寻找"核心银行提供商的解决方案（Vendorbuiltsolutions）"，即购买软件包。 主机方案的规模性得到验证。主机的核心银行方案，将继续流行。是因为它的规模性得到证实。尽管主机的技术没有新技术灵活，它的维护成本需要进壹步下降。 浏览器方式的解决方案（browser-basedsolutions）。市场上将会有更多的以浏览器方式出
〖银行储蓄管理系统〗需求分析 2016年5月
目录 1 引言 (3) 1.1 编写目的 (3) 1.2 项目背景 (3) 1.3 定义 (3) 1.4 参考资料 (3) 2 任务概述 (3) 2.1 目标 (3) 2.2 运行环境 (3) 2.3 条件与限制 (3) 3 数据描述 (3) 3.1 静态数据 (3) 3.2 动态数据 (3) 3.3数据库描述 (3) 3.4数据词典 (5) 3.5数据采集 (6) 4 功能需求 (7) 4.1 功能划分 (7) 4.2 功能描述 (7) 5 性能要求 (8) 5.1 数据精确度 (8) 5.2 时间特性 (8) 5.3适应性 (8) 6 运行需求 (8) 6.1 用户界面 (8) 6.2 硬件接口 (8) 6.3 软件接口 (8) 6.4 故障处理 (8) 7 其他需求 (9)
1引言 1.1 编写目的 根据需求调研分析报告，定义系统功能和系统数据流图，通过编写需求分析规格说明书，让开发人员能够根据需求规格说明书来开发项目。 1.2 项目背景 软件名称：银行储蓄系统 委托单位：银行 开发单位：科技大学 主管：荀亚玲 1.3 定义 银行储蓄应用软件：基本元素为构成银行储蓄行为所必需的各种部分。 媒体素材：是指传播教学信息的基本才来单元，可分为五大类：文本类素材、图形（图像）类素材、音频类素材、动画类素材、视频类素材。 需求：用户解决问题或达到目标所需的条件或功能；系统或系统部件要满足合同、标准、规范或其它正式规定文档所需具有的条件或权能。 需求分析：包括提炼，分析和仔细审查已收集到的需求，以确保所有风险承担者都明其含义并找出其中的错误，遗憾或其他部族的地方。 1.4 参考资料 《软件工程导论——第5版》张海藩编著清华大学出版社 2任务概述 2.1 目标 完善目前银行储蓄系统，之智能跟上时代发展，同时通过实践来提高自己动手能力。 2.2 运行环境 操作系统：Windows XP/Windows Vista，支持环境：IIS 5.0 数据库：Microsoft SQL. Server 2000，编程环境：Microsoft visual basic 6.0中文版。 2.3 条件与限制硬件配置要求 硬什外部设备需奔腾133以上的pc机，内存需16兆以上 软件要求操作人员具有初步的相关知识 由于本系统为即时软件，刘数据蚓叫步要求较高，建议配置网络时使川叫靠性较高佝相关网络硬件设
XX集团资金管理中心设立方案 （试行） 索引 一、设立主体 二、设立目标 三、管理模式及主要职能 四、机构及人员设置 五、参与集团资金统管的公司及纳入监管的银行账户 六、资金流转方案 七、网银权限设置 八、内部账户及账号设置 九、内部存贷款利率设置 十、会计核算科目设置 十一、业务操作内容、流程及会计核算办法 十二、现有银行贷款事项及内部往来的后续处理 十三、注意事项 十四、附件
根据XX集团管理现状及未来发展要求，设立集团资金管理中心。设立方案如下： 一、设立主体 资金管理中心设立在XX集团有限公司。 资金管理中心作为XX集团公司的一个职能部门（利润中心），其所有业务受到XX集团董事长、总经理及财务总监的安排与指导。其所有经济业务设立独立账套核算，同时其涉及到XX集团公司、各下属企业的业务也纳入XX集团有限公司账套、下属企业账套进行核算。并且各账套之间有对应关系。 办公地点设立在XX集团办公室。 二、设立目标 1、实施高度集中控制的资金管理体系，加强集团资金管理与控制 2、资金实现事前计划、实时控制与分析，加快资金周转，提高资金使用效益 3、降低集团财务风险 三、管理模式及主要职能 将银行机制引入企业内部，建立集财务管理、金融管理和企业管理三位一体的现代企业管理模式。身兼银行和财会两种职能，承担企业外部资金结算、资金内部调剂、对外融资等业务。资金管理中心实时掌握集团资金的流量、流向、存量，随时监控子公司的资金使用，同时可以灵活调配“沉淀”存量资金，提高资金利用效率。 1、账户分散、资金集中的管理模式 集团的资金管理采取账户分散、资金集中管理的模式。即各下属企业在外部商业银行的现有账户不变，保持现有的资金业务处理及会计核算流程不变；资金管理中心将各下属企业的外部银行账户加以记录，资金管理中心开立内部账户对应各下属企业的外部银行账户；同时将下属企业的闲散资金每日归集到资金管理中心，作为下属企业的“内部存款”，资金管理中心会计、出纳按照资金计划进行支付单据的审批、拨付；各下属企业依据集团的审批处理资金业
第一部分SystemView及其操作简介 美国ELANIX公司于1995年开始推出SystemView软件工具，最早的1.8版为16bit教学版，自1.9版开始升为32bit专业版，目前已推出了3.0版。SystemView是在Windows95/98环境下运行的用于系统仿真分析的软件工具，它为用户提供了一个完整的动态系统设计、仿真与分析的可视化软件环境，能进行模拟、数字、数模混合系统、线性和非线性系统的分析设计，可对线性系统进行拉氏变换和Z变换分析。 1.1 SystemView的基本特点 SystemView基本属于一个系统级工具平台，可进行包括数字信号处理（DSP）系统、模拟与数字通信系统、信号处理系统和控制系统的仿真分析，并配置了大量图符块（Token）库，用户很容易构造出所需要的仿真系统，只要调出有关图符块并设置好参数，完成图符块间的连线后运行仿真操作，最终以时域波形、眼图、功率谱、星座图和各类曲线形式给出系统的仿真分析结果。SystemView的库资源十分丰富，主要包括：含若干图符库的主库（Main Library）、通信库（Communications Library）、信号处理库（DSP Library）、逻辑库（Logic Library）、射频/模拟库（RF Analog Library）和用户代码库（User Code Library）。 1.2 SystemView系统视窗 1.2.1 主菜单功能 进入SystemView后，屏幕上首先出现该工具的系统视窗，如图1-2-1所示。 系统视窗最上边一行为主菜单栏，包括：文件（File）、编辑（Edit）、参数优选（Preferences）、视窗观察（View）、便笺（NotePads）、连接（Connetions）、编译器（Compiler）、系统（System）、图符块（Tokens）、工具（Tools）和帮助（Help）共11项功能菜单。与最初的SystemView1.8相比，SystemView3.0的操作界面和对话框布局有所改变。 执行菜单命令操作较简单，例如，用户需要清除系统时，可单击“File”菜单，出现一个下拉菜单，单击其中的“Newsystem”工具条即可。为说明问题简单起见，将上述操作命令记作：File>>Newsystem，以下类同。各菜单下的工具条及其功能如下表所示： 表1-2-1 SystemView3.0各菜单下的工具条及其功能 菜单工具条命令各工具条的功能简述 File菜单 File>>Newsystem 清除当前系统 File>>Open Recent System 打开最新的SystemView文件 File>>Open Existing System 打开已存在的SystemView文件 File>>Open System in Safe Mode 以安全模式打开系统 File>>Save System 用已存在的文件名存储当前系统内容 File>> Save System As 将当前系统内容另存为一个文件 File>> Save Selected Metasystem 存储选择的亚系统文件 File>>System File Information 系统文件信息 File>>Print System: Text Tokens 打印屏幕内容，图符块用文字代替 File>>Print System: Symbolic Tokens 如实打印屏幕内容，包括图符块 File>>Print System Summary 打印系统摘要，即图符块表 图1-2-1 系统视窗 1
核心业务系统 描述：银行核心业务系统主要功能模块包括：公用信息、凭证管理、现金出纳、柜员支持（机构管理和柜员管理）、总账会计、内部账管理、客户信息、活期存款、定期存款、外币兑换、同城票据交换、客户信贷额度管理、定期贷款、分期付款贷款、往来业务、资金清算、金融同业、结算、人行现代支付、外汇买卖业务、国债买卖、保管箱、租赁、股金管理、固定资产管理等。 一、核心系统背景 VisionBanking Suite Core是集团在总结二十余年银行应用系统集成经验的基础上，认真分析中国银行业未来面临的竞争形势，吸纳国外银行系统中先进的设计理念，推出的与国际完全接轨、功能完善、易学易用、扩充灵活、安全可靠的新一代银行核心业务系统。该系统覆盖了银行整个基础业务范围，有助于银行提供给客户更方便、快捷和贴身的“一站式”服务。 在VisionBanking Suite Core银行核心业务系统的开发中，集团将先进的系统设计思想、技术和国内、国际银行界先进的银行业务模式、管理方法结合在一起。系统采用先进的C-S-S三层体系结构，拥有强大、稳定的系统核心。 在全面覆盖传统银行业务的基础上，突出“金融产品”概念，银行可方便定制新的业务品种、产品组装或更改业务模式；系统整合了银行的业务服务渠道，方便银行增值服务范围的扩展，在无须更改系统内核的情况下方便实现与外部系统的互联互通。系统在深化“大集中” 、“大会计”、“一本帐”、“以客户为中心”、“综合柜员制”等成熟的设计思想的基础上，建立了从“客户”、“产品”到“服务” 、“渠道”的集约化经营管理模式，提供了真正的面向客户的服务模式，作到了为客户定制差别化的服务。从而实现了银行集中经营、规范业务、个性服务、丰富渠道、减少风险、辅助决策、降低成本的目标；系统设计严格遵守业务流程和会计核算分离原则，方便于系统快速部署和适应业务流程再造要求。 集团对核心业务系统的不断发展和完善就是以技术的进步来支持和推动银行业务的拓展，为银行的可持续性发展奠定了坚实的基础。 VisionBanking Core的系统实现原则满足了银行业务系统所要求的：先进性、实时性、可靠性、完整性、安全性、网络化、开放性、易扩展性、易维护性、易移植性。 二、系统功能说明
通信系统仿真实验课程设计 题目银行储蓄管理平台开发设计 学院 2010222111 专业班级通信104 学生姓名霍守斌 指导教师大彬 哥 2013年 6月 15日 摘要 近几年来，随着科技的发展和社会的进步，尤其是计算机大范围的普及，计算机应用逐渐由大规模科学计算的海量数据处理转向大规模的事务处理和对工作流的管理，这就产生了以台式计算机为核心，以数据库管理系统为开发环境的管理信息系统在大规模的事务处理和对工作流的管理等方面的应用，特别是在银行储蓄管理之中的应用日益引起人们的关注。本文基于Visual C++数据库编程技术，以可视化的集成开发环境Visual studio 2008为开发工具， Access 2007为后台数据库实现了一个小型的银行储蓄管理系统，该系统主要功能包括用户注册、销户、存款、取款、查询历史记录、用户修改信息等功能。从而满足了广大人民群众的需要同时也实现了银行储蓄管理的系统化、规范化、自动化和智能化，提高了银行管理的效率。 关键字：Visual C++；Access 2007；银行储蓄管理系统
Abstract In recent years, as technology development and social progress, in particular, the popularity of a wide range of computers, computer application gradually from large-scale scientific computing shift large-scale mass data processing and workflow transaction management, which resulted in of the desktop computer as the core database management system for the development of environmental management information system in large-scale transaction processing and management, workflow applications, especially in the management of bank savings into the application has attracted much attention. Based on the Visual C + + database programming techniques to visualize the integrated development environment, Visual studio 2008 as development tool, Access 2007 database for the background to achieve a small bank savings management system, which mainly features include user registration, cancel the account, deposit , withdrawals, query history, user modify the information and other functions. To meet the needs of the masses but also to achieve the systematic management of bank savings, standardization, automation and intelligence to improve the efficiency of bank management. Key word: visual c + +; Visual studio 2008; Access 2007; Bank savings management 目录 摘要 I Abstract II
《数据库系统原理》 课程设计 2011年12月31日
目录 一、概述------------------------------------------------- 3 1.1 课程设计的目的---------------------------------------------- 3 1.2 课程设计的内容---------------------------------------------- 3 1.3 课程设计的要求---------------------------------------------- 3 二、需求分析--------------------------------------------- 3 2.1 系统需求---------------------------------------------------- 3 2.2 数据字典---------------------------------------------------- 3 三、系统总体设计----------------------------------------- 3 3.1系统总体设计思路--------------------------------------------- 3 3.2 概念模型设计----------------------------------------- 3 3.2.1 局部E-R图------------------------------------------------ 3 3.2.2 全局E-R图------------------------------------------------ 3 3.3 逻辑结构设计------------------------------------------------ 3 3.4 数据库建立实施--------------------------------------- 3 3.4.1 建立数据库------------------------------------------------ 3 3.4.2 建立关系表------------------------------------------------ 3 四、系统实现--------------------------------------------- 3 五、系统评价--------------------------------------------- 3 六、课程设计心得、总结----------------------------------- 3参考文献：----------------------------------------------- 3致谢--------------------------------------------------- 3附录--------------------------------------------------- 3
SystemView及其操作简介 美国ELANIX公司于1995年开始推出SystemView软件工具，最早的1.8版为16bit教学版，自1.9版开始升为32bit专业版，目前我们见到的是4.5版。SystemView是在Windows95／98环境下运行的用于系统仿真分析的软件工具，它为用户提供了一个完整的动态系统设计、仿真与分析的可视化系统软件环境，能进行模拟、数字、数模混合系统、线性和非线性系统的分析设计，可对线性系统进行拉氏变换和Z变换分析。 一、SystemView的基本特点 SystemView基本属于一个系统级工具平台，可进行包括数字信号处理（DSP）系统、模拟与数字通信系统、信号处理系统和控制系统的仿真，并配置了大量图符块（Token）库，用户很容易构造出所需要的仿真系统，只要调出有关图符块并设置好参数，完成图符块间的连线后，运行仿真操作，最终以时域波形、眼图、功率谱、星座图和各类曲线形式给出系统的仿真分析结果。SystemView的库资源十分丰富，主要包括：含有若干图符库的主库（MainLibrary）、通信库（Communications Library）、信号处理库（DSP Library）、逻辑库（LogicLibrary）、射频／模拟库（RF Analog Library）、Matlab连接库（M-Link Library）和用户代码库（Costum Library）。 二、SystemView系统视窗 1、主菜单功能 图1 系统视窗 遵循以下步骤进入SystemView系统视窗： （1）双击SystemView图标，开始启动系统。
（2）首先会出现SystemView License Manager窗口，可用来选择附加库。本实验中选择Selectall再左键单击OK结束选择。 （3）然后会出现Recent SystemView Files窗口，可用来方便的选择所需打开的文件。在本实验中，左键单击Close结束选择。 完成以上操作，即可进入SystemView系统视窗。如图1所示。 系统视窗最上边一行为主菜单栏，包括：文件（File）、编辑（Edit）、参数优选（Preferences）、视窗观察（View）、便签（NotePads）、连接（Connections）、编译器（Compiler）、系统（System）、图符块（Tokens）、工具（Tool）和帮助（Help）等11项功能菜单。 执行菜单命令操作较简单，例如，用户需要清除系统时，可单击“File”菜单，出现一个下拉菜单，单击其中的“Newsystem”工具条即可。为说明问题简单起见，将上述操作命令记作：File>>Newsystem，以下类同。各菜单下的工具条及其功能如下表所示：
精心整理软 银行储蓄管理系统 可行性分析 目录
一、引言 1.1 编写目的 经过对该银行储蓄系统项目进行详细调查研究，初拟系统实现报告，对软件开发中将要面临的问题及其解决方案进行可行性分析。明确开发风险及其所带来的经济效益。本报告经审核后，交由软件经理审查。 1.2 背景 项目名称：银行计算机储蓄系统 用户：××银行 说明：现在的银行储蓄系统工作效率低，不能满足广大人民群众的要，人们希望能更方便更省时地办理储蓄业务。 在这样的背景下，切需要建立一个新的、高效的、方便的计算机储蓄系统。 1.3 参考资料 ·《软件工程导论（第五版）》张海藩编着清华大学出版社出版 ·《软件工程》任胜兵邢琳编着北京邮电大学出版社 二、可行性研究的前提 2.1 基本要求 2.1.1 功能要求 此系统所要完成的主要功能有两方面： 储户填写存款单或取款单交给业务员键入系统，如果是存款，系统记录存款人姓名、住址、存款类型、存款日期、利率等信息，完成后由系统打印存款单给储户。 如果是取款，业务员把取款金额输入系统并要求储户输入密码以确认身份，核对密码正确无误后系统计算利息并印出利息清单给储户 2.1.2 性能要求 为了满足储户的要求，系统必须要有高的运作速度，储户填写的表单输入到系统，系统必须能快速及时作出响应，迅速处理各项数据、信息，显示出所有必需信息并打印出各项清单，所以要求很高的信息量速度和大的主存容量； 由于要存贮大量的数据和信息，也要有足够大的磁盘容量；另外，银行计算机储蓄系统必须有可靠的安全措施，以保证储户的存储安全。
2.1.3 接口要求 业务员键入储户的资料要全部一直显示在屏幕上；储户键入密码到系统以核对；计算机与打印机有高速传输的连接接口，最后以纸张的形式打印出清单给储户。 2.1.4 输入要求 业务员从存取款表单输入数据，要迅速精确，适当调整输入时间，不能让客户等太久，但也不能让业务员太过忙碌以免影响正确率，造成用户损失。 2.1.5 输出要求 要求快速准确地打印出存款或取款清单给客户。 2.2 开发目标 近期目标： 第一年内在一个银行建立一个银行内部计算机储蓄系统，初步实现银行储蓄系统计算机化，并保证该银行能够按期望顺利完成工作。 长期目标： 希望在三至四年内，在国内银行中建立该计算机储蓄系统，促进银行间的互联合作，实现银行储蓄系统的计算机管理体制，提高银行储蓄系统的整体水平；并实现银行储蓄系统的高效性、方便性、实用性、互联性，给储蓄用户带来方便和益处，从而提高银行的信用度，提高银行公司的经济效益和社会效益。 2.3 限制条件 2.3.1 开发时间 ( 只限于近期目标 ) 预定为半年。 2.3.2 运行环境 Windowsxp 及以上操作系统、数据库：MicrosoftSQLServer2000。MicrosoftVisualBasic6.0中文版. 2.3.3 使用寿命 该系统至少使用四年以上。 2.3.4 进行可行性研究的方法 采用调查方法：通过对银行业务员和客户的调查以获得第一手资料，确定客户和实际应用中的需求；然后经过座谈
多银行资金管理系统标准化管理处编码[BBX968T-XBB8968-NNJ668-MM9N]
多银行资金管理系统 多银行资金管理系统（Multi-bank System，简称MBS），是中信银行在专业分工、合作共赢的全新商业理念的指导下，联手专业软件厂商，根据国内集团企业的实际资金管理情况而打造出的多银行资金管理系统，不但融合了银行金融服务和软件厂商技术服务优势，创造了一种专业、可持续的服务模式，更以一种开放的心态进行系统研发，使得MBS的全新合作模式不排他。 功能完善的多银行资金管理系统 中信银行MBS在研发过程中吸收了银行和软件厂商两方面的先进经验，不但能够实现与银行产品服务的快速对接，同时能够更多地体现企业在资金预算、结算和内部财务控制等方面的管理需求，既可以为集团企业提供传统的现金管理服务，还能作为全面的企业内部资金管理系统，为企业提供多银行账户管理、资金结算划拨、计划预算管控和资金流量分析四大业务平台。 通过多银行账户管理平台企业可以自主设定和维护需要管理的所有银行账户，并按照自身的组织架构来定义账户结构，并可以在总部层面实时查询和掌握所有成员机构在各银行的资金余额和交易状况，所有信息按层级分别显示，余额自动汇总，整体资金情况一目了然。 通过资金结算划拨平台企业能够对各银行账户进行收付结算处理，支持企业根据自身财务制度灵活设置各种资金交易的审批流程。资金交易可以通过手动或自动方式发起，系统及时反馈交易信息。如果与ERP相连，还可以联动记账，生成财务凭证。同时所有资金交易均支持单笔录入或批量导入，支付时可以受企业预算控制，并提供多种控制方式。此外，企业还可通过特殊对账码实现自动对账，并生成余额调节表，减少人工操作。 通过计划预算管控平台企业可以建立全面的资金计划管理体系，包括制定统一的资金计划政策和模版，资金计划审批、执行、调整和控制等。企业也可以根据实际收支情况，自动提交计划执行情况，实现资金计划考核和资金风险防范。
System View 仿真软件简介及实例
目录 第一部分S YSTEM V IEW简介 (2) 1.1 SystemView的基本特点 (2) 1.2 SystemView各专业库简介 (2) 1.3 System View的基本操作 (5) 第二部分通信原理实验 (7) 2．1 标准调幅 (7) 2．2 双边带调制(DSB) (10) 2．3 单边带调制(SSB) (12) 2．4 窄带角度调制(NBFM、NBPM) (14) 2．5 幅移键控ASK (17)
第一部分SystemView简介 SystemView是由美国ELANIX公司推出的基于PC的系统设计和仿真分析的软件工具，它为用户提供了一个完整的开发设计数字信号处理（DSP）系统，通信系统，控制系统以及构造通用数字系统模型的可视化软件环境。 1.1 SystemView的基本特点 1.动态系统设计与仿真 (1)多速率系统和并行系统: SYSTEMVIEW允许合并多种数据速率输入系统,简化 FIR FILTER的执行。 (2)设计的组织结构图: 通过使用METASYSTEM(子系统)对象的无限制分层结 构,SYSTEMVIEW能很容易地建立复杂的系统。 (3)SYSTEMVIEW的功能块: SYSTEMVIEW的图标库包括几百种信号源,接收端, 操作符和功能块，提供从DSP,通讯信号处理,控制直到构造通用数学模型的应用 使用。信号源和接收端图标允许在SYSTEMVIEW内部生成和分析信号以及供 外部处理的各种文件格式的输入/输出数据。 (4)广泛的滤波和线性系统设计: SYSTEMVIEW的操作符库包含一个功能强大的 很容易使用图形模板设计模拟和数字以及离散和连续时间系统的环境，还包含 大量的FIR/IIR滤波类型和FFT类型。 2.信号分析和块处理 SYSTEMVIEW分析窗口是一个能够提供系统波形详细检查的交互式可视环境。分析窗口还提供一个完成系统仿真生成数据的先进的块处理操作的接收端计算器。 接收端计算器块处理功能:应用DSP窗口,余切,自动关联,平均值,复杂的FFT,常量窗口,卷积,余弦,交叉关联,习惯显示,十进制,微分,除窗口,眼模式,FUNCTION SCALE,柱状图,积分,对数基底,数量,相,MAX,MIN,乘波形,乘窗口,非,覆盖图,覆盖统计,解相,谱,分布图,正弦,平滑,谱密度,平方,平方根,减窗口,和波形,和窗口,正切,层叠,窗口常数。 1.2 SystemView各专业库简介 SystemView的环境包括一套可选的用于增加核心库功能以满足特殊应用的库，包括通信库、DSP库、射频/模拟库和逻辑库，以及可通过用户代码库来加载的其他一些扩展库。
软件工程课程设计 项目计划书 项目名称：银行管理系统 学院：计算机科学与技术学院 专业：计算机科学与技术专业 班级： 姓名： 指导教师：
2011 年11 月03 日
目录 1 系统主题................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 引言............................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 背景/选题动机/目的................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 系统与“创新杯”的主题关系(2)......................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 市场调查过程和结论(3) ............................................................................................................ 错误!未定义书签。 2 需求分析................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 概要............................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 使用场景..................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 可行性分析报告......................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 应用领域/实用性分析............................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 未来发展方向............................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 3 团队组成和分工..................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 4 系统功能概述......................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 功能需求分析............................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 系统性能要求 ................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 功能点列表................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 性能点列表................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 数据描述..................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 5 系统设计概要......................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 实现系统所采用的技术方案和技术亮点 ................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 系统构架..................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 功能模块描述............................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 E-R图 ........................................................................................................................................ 错误!未定义书签。 用例图......................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 概念数据模型图......................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 业务模型..................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 界面 ........................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 6 系统环境................................................................................................................................. 错误!未定义书签。 开发平台..................................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。 Client运行环境......................................................................................................................... 错误!未定义书签。