Objectives Develop experience in working with a team. Review real world problems, and o identify elements of decision-making, o analyze the problem and its various elements, o describe the theories used to address the problem(s) presented, and o utilize readings and class discussions to date to provide feedback for future improvements (i.e., the manner in which problem(s) have been approached differently to achive better results). Description The class will be divided into groups (maximum 4 people). Each group will be responsible for discussing, reviewing, and presenting a case study. Each group will choose a case study available in the textbook. Groups will sign up on a first come, first serve basis and each group must review a different case. Materials Required Brown, C. V., De Hayes, D. W., Hoffer, J. A., Martin, W. E., & Perkins, W. C. (2012). Managing information technology (7th ed.) Pearson Education. Each team will prepare a formal report. This report will expand on the presentation. Just like the presentation, the case study report will include the following sections: 1. Introduction - Short summary of the case study. This section will include a background of the case study, which will give the audience a picture of what this case study is all about. 2. Challenges - Provide for a brief description of the challenges that the company is facing and how they are planning to address them. This section will provide the audience with a picture of how the company is planning to address some of the challenges. Also, please provide a summary of your group discussions in terms of addressing these same challenges. 3. Change and Change Management - Provide a summary of your group discussions on change, and whether change is positive or negative for the organization and why. 4. Recommendations - Based on your group discussions, please discuss what would you have done differently and why. 5. Conclusion - Please discuss the lessons learned and the key messages that you would like the audience to take away. Mining Data To Increase State Tax Revenues in California In January 2006 Frank Lanza, Director of the Filing identify possible non-filers and under-reporters and to Compliance Bureau (hereafter, the Bureau) of the estimate the taxes they owed. The INC system was California Franchise Tax Board (www.ftb.ca.gov: the strongly supported by Gerald H. Goldberg, the Board's Board) and Mary Yessen, Section Manager for the Bureau's Executive Officer, who protected the Bureau from Integrated Non-filer Compliance Business Section, were political influence during his 25 years of leadership. discussing next steps in the analysis of data collected from Mr. Goldberg retired at the end of August, and his succes- many sources, in order to identify Californians who were sor was expected to be announced soon and sworn in to not paying their fair share of state income taxes. In office by the end of the month. It remained to be seen December the Bureau had won an award from the Center whether the new Executive Officer would share for Digital Government for its Integrated Non-Filer Goldberg's enthusiasm for the INC system. Compliance (INC) system project. "After all our hard work, that award is well deserved." said Yessen. "Absolutely!" Lanza replied. "However, let's not rest on our laurels. There California's Tax Gap are decisions to be made regarding the latest pilot project." Personal income taxes provided about half of the State of IBM Global Services built the INC system, which California's General Fund revenues in 2005 (see Exhibit 1). was launched in 2001 and utilized a data warehouse Unfortunately, California faced a large budget deficit, which containing information on direct and indirect "income showed little sign of dissipating soon; for fiscal year indicators" for Californians. Data collected from various 2005-06. Governor Schwarzenegger's office anticipated federal, state, county, and local sources were analyzed to spending up to $6 billion more than it took in Objectives Develop experience in working with a team. Review real world problems, and o identify elements of decision-making, o analyze the problem and its various elements, o describe the theories used to address the problem(s) presented, and o utilize readings and class discussions to date to provide feedback for future improvements (i.e., the manner in which problem(s) have been approached differently to achive better results). Description The class will be divided into groups (maximum 4 people). Each group will be responsible for discussing, reviewing, and presenting a case study. Each group will choose a case study available in the textbook. Groups will sign up on a first come, first serve basis and each group must review a different case. Materials Required Brown, C. V., De Hayes, D. W., Hoffer, J. A., Martin, W. E., & Perkins, W. C. (2012). Managing information technology (7th ed.) Pearson Education. Each team will prepare a formal report. This report will expand on the presentation. Just like the presentation, the case study report will include the following sections: 1. Introduction - Short summary of the case study. This section will include a background of the case study, which will give the audience a picture of what this case study is all about. 2. Challenges - Provide for a brief description of the challenges that the company is facing and how they are planning to address them. This section will provide the audience with a picture of how the company is planning to address some of the challenges. Also, please provide a summary of your group discussions in terms of addressing these same challenges. 3. Change and Change Management - Provide a summary of your group discussions on change, and whether change is positive or negative for the organization and why. 4. Recommendations - Based on your group discussions, please discuss what would you have done differently and why. 5. Conclusion - Please discuss the lessons learned and the key messages that you would like the audience to take away. Mining Data To Increase State Tax Revenues in California In January 2006 Frank Lanza, Director of the Filing identify possible non-filers and under-reporters and to Compliance Bureau (hereafter, the Bureau) of the estimate the taxes they owed. The INC system was California Franchise Tax Board (www.ftb.ca.gov: the strongly supported by Gerald H. Goldberg, the Board's Board) and Mary Yessen, Section Manager for the Bureau's Executive Officer, who protected the Bureau from Integrated Non-filer Compliance Business Section, were political influence during his 25 years of leadership. discussing next steps in the analysis of data collected from Mr. Goldberg retired at the end of August, and his succes- many sources, in order to identify Californians who were sor was expected to be announced soon and sworn in to not paying their fair share of state income taxes. In office by the end of the month. It remained to be seen December the Bureau had won an award from the Center whether the new Executive Officer would share for Digital Government for its Integrated Non-Filer Goldberg's enthusiasm for the INC system. Compliance (INC) system project. "After all our hard work, that award is well deserved." said Yessen. "Absolutely!" Lanza replied. "However, let's not rest on our laurels. There California's Tax Gap are decisions to be made regarding the latest pilot project." Personal income taxes provided about half of the State of IBM Global Services built the INC system, which California's General Fund revenues in 2005 (see Exhibit 1). was launched in 2001 and utilized a data warehouse Unfortunately, California faced a large budget deficit, which containing information on direct and indirect "income showed little sign of dissipating soon; for fiscal year indicators" for Californians. Data collected from various 2005-06. Governor Schwarzenegger's office anticipated federal, state, county, and local sources were analyzed to spending up to $6 billion more than it took in