1. ANNOTATION OF
JUSTIFICATION OF THE
APPROACHES
FOR DEVELOPMENT OF
R ESTAUR A N T E - MENU PR OTO T YP E
Created by Traitet Th.
Project: E-menu on iPad for Thai restaurant
Created Date 11 Aug 2012
Topic: Annotation Revised Date 22 Aug 2012
Revision No. 1.0
Content: Annotation of justification of the approaches
Document Name A02-001

2. 2 JUSTIFICATION OF THE A PPROA CHES
Content of this document
1. Relationships among research objectives,
approaches and outcomes
2. Justification of approaches
• Approach for doing research
• Approach for software development
• Approach for gathering requirements
• Approach for collecting data

3. 1 ) R EL AT IO N SH IP AM O N G R ESEAR C H
O BJ EC T IVES, APPR O AC H ES AN D
O U T C OM ES
3

4. 1) RELATIONSHIP AMONG RESEARCH
4 OBJECTIVES, APPROACHES AND
OUTCOMES
Relationships of Research Objectives, Approaches and Outcomes
Case Study Methodology No Objectives Approaches Outcomes
Literature Review To identify key issues
Key issues relating
relating development Critical evaluation
(To identify key issue) 1 development of e-menu
of producing the range of literature
application
e-menu prototype
RAD Methodology
List of requirements, e-
(Software Development) To investigate the system Direct observation and
menu prototype and
2 requirements and develop Rapid Application (RAD)
system analysis and
the e-menu prototype Development
design documents
Direct Observation
Group Interviews
(To investigate
(To collect data and
requirements & To evaluate users'
evaluate system) Group interviews and
develop prototype) 3 perceptions of the final Users' perceptions
content analysis
e-menu prototype
Data Collection
To make
Recommendations
recommendations Reflection of software
Content Analysis 4 regarding development
regarding e-menu development processes
(Data Analysis) of e-menu prototype
development
The main approach employed for this research was a “Case Study” approach.

5. 2 ) J U ST IF IC AT ION O F APPR O AC H ES
5

6. 6 2) JUSTIFICATION OF APPROACHES
Approaches Objectives
Case Study To employ this research
Rapid Application Development To develop a software prototype
Direct Observation To gather business requirements
Qualitative approaches
To collect data by direct observation
(Group interview)

7. 2 . 1 ) J U S T I F I C AT I O N O F A P P R O A C H E
7
TO EMPLOY RESEARCH
The “Case Study” Methodology
No Compared item Case Study Quantitative Approach
providing holistic and in-depth explanations of the
1 Yes No
behavioural problems
2 Suitable for conducting evaluation research Yes No
Appropriate for a descriptive research question, such
3 Yes No
as what or how.
4 Time-consuming Yes No
(Kemanusiaan 2007; Baxter and Jack 2008)
The Case Study approach was selected as a research methodology because it is appropriate for the research
question and enables to understand in-depth business requirements of casual dinning restaurant.
However, it is needed to make an effective action plan to prevent the time-consuming issue.
Request Question: How can a prototype of an electronic menu (e-menu) application be developed for the casual dining restaurant
industry to meet business requirements?

8. 2 . 2 ) J U S T I F I C AT I O N O F A P P R O A C H E
8 F O R S O F T WA R E D E V E L O P M E N T
The "RAD (Rapid Application Development)" Approach
RAD with
No Compared Item Waterfall Agile Description
Prototyping
Waterfall approach clearly separates development
1 Traditional approach Yes No No processes, and doesn't return to a previous stage.
(Khan et al. 2011)
Iterative process can improve a quality of application
Uses iterative process
2 No Yes Yes and increase customer satisfaction (Hoffer, George
and Valacich 2008).
Agile and RAD use a iterative process, which is
Software is likely fit with business
3 No Yes Yes flexible when a requirement is changed (Kendal
needs. 2011).
RAD is an experimental method, which may result in
4 Experimental approach No No Yes insufficiently understand the overall business
requirements (Khan et al. 2011).
Iterative process able to increase the overall cost and
Able to increase the overall cost
5 No Yes Yes time. For example, after requirements are changed, a
and implementation time project will need more time to develop (Cobb 2011).
A large project needs a lot of developers and much
time to implement. It is difficult to observe at a
6 Appropriate for a large project Yes Yes No customer site and make a prototype at a short time
(Meso and Jain 2011)
The RAD approach was selected as a software development methodology because it is suitable
for narrow project scope with small implementation team (Gantt head 2010).

9. 2 . 3 ) J U S T I F I C AT I O N O F A P P O R A C H
9
T O G AT H E R R E Q U I R E M E N T S
The “Direct Observation” Approach
Indirect Observation e.g.
No Compared item Direct observation
recording video
Provide insight into the users, their tasks and business
1 Yes No
requirements.
2 Understand clearly of problem areas Yes No
3 Time-consuming Yes No
Effective to gather both implicit and explicit
4 Yes No
requirements
5 Interrupt staff when they are working Yes No
(Kriwaczek 2006)
This research chose Direct Observation to gather requirements
because it enables the learner to understand clearly in business processes and requirements.
However, the learner decided to work as a waiter to reduce interrupting to staff,
and had used the action plan to manage the project and time. (See in appendix of the MS word file)

10. 2 ) J U S T I F I C AT I O N O F A P P R O A C H E
10
T O C O L L E C T D ATA
The “Group Interview” Approach
No Compared item Interview Questionnaire
1 Bias from an interviewer Yes No
2 Make clear in unambiguous question Yes No
3 Prevent missing important information Yes No
4 Immediate contact with raw data Yes No
5 Quick to setup and complete Yes No
6 Analysis can be time-consuming Yes No
7 Reliability of data Yes No
8 Interviewees have to spend longer time Yes No
(Wisker 2008; Slack 2012)
The group interview was selected as an approach to collect data of users’ perception on the e-menu prototype
because it is an effective method to understand users’ perceptions and users can provide useful
recommendations and in-depth additional requirements to produce an e-menu application in the future,
whereas using questionnaires is more difficult to get useful feedbacks and additional requirements from
stakeholders.
However, the learner changed the plan to finish the final prototype & interviews earlier to spend more time for documentation

11. 11 CONCLUSION
The main issue of this research was that both the case study and direct
observation were time-consuming. However, this research employed those
approaches to understand in-depth business processes and requirements.
Therefore, an action plan or Gantt chart was very necessary for managing
schedule and tasks in order to carry out research within definite time.
Furthermore, RAD methodology with prototyping was also a good approach to
reduce implementation time. It was also enable the developer to work closely with
stakeholders for gathering requirements and receiving feedbacks. Therefore, the
final prototype could be developed close to business requirements.
Finally, group interviews could provide useful recommendations and feedbacks on
the e-menu prototype to produce e-menu application in the future.