Factors To Consider For Acquiring Photo-Editing Software: An Essay On Organizational Social Structures.

Discuss About The Organizational Social Structures For Software Engineering.

Factors Influencing Acquisition of Software

The art of editing photos to design, shape, and size that suits the users' demands is a common feature of the current technology usage. This process is commonly referred to as Photo-Editing while in some cases it is known as graphic designing, and it affects the current lives to a large extent (Adjibolosoo 2014, p. 126).  Almost everybody today uses these skills even without attending classes to learn them as a result of the software are readily available in many platforms such as computers and some phones and tablets. The photo editing is done through the use of design tools Photoshop, your suggestion and Gimp which I feel is better for the company as at now. I would like to bring to your attention that most people will choose Photoshop over Gimp as a tool of editing and designing images, but as an expert who has used the two tools, I would recommend Gimp. Many people feel that Gimp is just the best alternative after Photoshop but my keen analysis proves to me that the reverse is true.

As a designing tool, Gimp possesses some distinct characteristics that make it better than the Photoshop which majority think is indisputable. When it comes to Information Technology issues like applications and tools, there are basic concepts that need consideration when making a decision on which one to use (Feng, Jiang, & Liu 2018, p. 128). Being an expert in Information Technology and a business person, you understand that the company needs that the software, applications, and tools chosen by the company should meet the optimal value; the best the company can get with least possible investment.

One point that needs consideration before deciding on the software is the price against the value of the software, applications, or the tools you want to acquire. Cost of any commodity is one of the most fundamental determinants in the decision-making process regarding the purchase, even though it is not a standalone factor. It may not be easy drawing a clear correlation between price and the value of the software, as in most cases, relatively cheaper software and applications are faulty (EUN-YONG LEE, SOO-BUM LEE & YU JUNG JENNIFER JEON 2017, p. 300). However, the more expensive software may have more features than the relatively cheaper one, but it should be noted that some of the extra features may not be even applicable in the company operations. The type of software features Macey’s Company needs are very specific and should. Therefore, the decision to acquire any editing software should consider the wastage of resources that accompany acquisition of software that has extra inapplicable features.

The Applicability of the Software into the Buyer's Demands

Before deciding to purchase any software, the company should be sure that it is customizable to the real usage in the company and that the basic functional features of the software be reachable to the staff that will finally use them. It should be noted that the company may spend a lot of money, but the acquired features do not work effectively and efficiently in the company's specific system (Adjibolosoo 2014, p. 127). I believe that you want to choose software with applications that the staff can easily understand to avoid wasting a large amount of time in pieces of training. The very complex software may lead to more challenges than the intended benefits and may have negative effects on the adoption and adjustment rate among the employees; learning to use the software itself should be as simple as possible.

1. Check if the implementation is assisted or not.

Another consideration worth noting is the independence of the software, does the implementation of the software depend on the provider such that the company must be assisted by an outsider to use it. If yes, then the purchaser should understand the terms and conditions attached to it before making the purchase; the user should know the possible ways out of the contract should they want to pull out and the applicable penalties if any. The buyer should have the required finances should they want to commit to a long term contract with the supplier of the software to avoid any stalemate in future. The buyer needs to understand the basics of the software and be sure of the viability of the guarantees provided by the supplier.

1. Suppliers readiness and willingness to fix any bugs

Before making any purchase, the buyer needs to know the possible challenges his or her company expects to face when using the software and how the bugs would be fixed when they arise (Guo & Ma 2018, p. 245). How ready the supplier is to set a bug is one of the most important determinants in making a purchase of software given that almost every software contains some bugs at some points and need to be fixed.

1. The possibility of software updates and the notification

Software, like any other aspect in the information and technology requires periodic updates to cope with the ever-evolving demands and customer needs (Feng, Jiang, & Liu 2018, p. 3009). The buyer needs to know the schedule of such routine system upgrades and find out the effects that would have on his or her company’s operations.

The ability of the software to be customised to fit the needs of the buyer is one the key decision making qualities. Every buyer requires software that can be personalized fit into his or her demands with little or no difficulties. It should, however, be noted that the more customizable a software is, the more complex it may be, and this may lead to the software being more expensive (Kraus, Ashley, & Nicole Martins 2017, p. 243). On the other hand, more simple software is harder to customise even if it may be cheap. The buyer should look at the tradeoffs and make an informed decision given that the simpler and less customizable software is the harder it is to adapt to the customers' system.

1. The bugs are known currently.

Investigation Technique

As mentioned earlier, almost every software has some existing bugs. The satisfaction would be in knowing the current challenges associated with the software and the schedule the supplier has to fix them. Such information makes the usage of the software effective, and they know the limits beyond which the software may not perform effectively.

From the above, one should be sure that the software if the best available software for the company at the best price. This optimal and rational decision helps the user not to waste resources on the software that does not solve the existing challenge effectively (Nan, Li, Zhang, & Li 2018, p. 123). Consequently, I would like to use the above standards to explain the comparison between Photoshop and Gimp.  It is from the analogy that I would like that you decide on the software you deem best for Macey’s Company.

Another area my report would explore is the comparison between Photoshop and Gimp. Based on the requirements of the Macey’s Company, the two designing tools, Photoshop and Gimp tend to provide the same service and can be substituted to each other. This reason therefore creates the discussion on which one of the tools should be given the priority in the company (Feng, Jiang, & Liu 2018, p. 500) As the company boss, kindly go through the main differences between Photoshop and Gimp and make a decision that suits the company best based on the comparisons below.

Software, like any other aspect in the information and technology requires periodic updates to cope with the ever-evolving demands and customer needs (Feng, Jiang, & Liu 2018, p. 3009) The buyer needs to know the schedule of such routine system upgrades and find out the effects that would have on his or her company’s operations.

This investigation will be based on the past studies, conducting literature reviews and exploiting the various resources to get the clear cut between Photoshop and Gimp (PINTO & CASTOR, 2017). The team involved will at times visit other companies that use Photoshop and some that apply the services of Gimp.

The team will gather data on the experiences people have will using Photoshop and Gimp, and some that who have the chance to use both tools either simultaneously or at times. After data collection, the team will do data analysis, come up with the findings, conclude, and come up with the recommendations on which one between the two is best for our company (Gopal & Koka, 2015). the team will come up with the recommendations and adjustments to the chosen tool, to make it fit Macey’s Company’s demands.

The people involved in this research are the Technical and Design team members and other selected staff members who will be assisting the investigators understand how the chosen design tool would affect the employees with little knowledge in information technology. The team will be divided into groups according to the main issues to be addressed in the report (Grewal, Ahlbom, Beitelspacher, Noble, & Nordfält, 2018). For instance, there is a group that will handle ‘The factors influencing purchase of software’.  Another group shall handle the main differences between Photoshop and Gimp; this group shall be subdivide into groups handling specific differences like the flexibility, price value and subscription and the basic requirements of each tool such as the space needed for full installation. There is a team that shall be handling the how the unskilled staff would adapt to the chosen designing tool.

This team is to find out how the staff in the company, staff who are of less knowledge regarding information technology, would respond to new changes in technology. The response would help the company the company know how to make adjustments in managing the transition (Lesage & Smirnova, 2015). That is one of the pieces of information that the company requires to know the effects of introduction of new technology in the company.

Another area my report would explore is the comparison between Photoshop and Gimp. Based on the requirements of the Macey’s Company, the two designing tools, Photoshop and Gimp tend to provide the same service and can be substituted to each other. This reason therefore creates the discussion on which one of the tools should be given the priority in the company (Feng, Jiang, & Liu 2018, p. 500) As the company boss, kindly go through the main differences between Photoshop and Gimp and make a decision that suits the company best based on the comparisons below.

The resources required by the team include several laptops and tablets to carry out the tests on applicability and compatibility of the tools (Lesage & Smirnova, S 2015). The financial resources to cater for transport and other financial needs like hotel bookings and food.  It should be noted that some events in the investigation would be done in other companies far from our company, and this fact implies that some accommodation requirements shall apply.

The collected data shall be transmitted through mails from the team in the field to the office at Macey’s company. The team at the office shall use the data for analysis, interpretation, conclusion, recommendations, and carryout the required tests on the designing tool selected (Guo, & Ma, 2018). The final report will be delivered to the company boss, Macey Hargreaves. The report is intended to enable her access the fine details of the information she needs to make a decision on which designing tool the company should choose.

The data collection should take a maximum of three weeks.

The data analysis needs to take ten days.

The interpretations, conclusions, recommendations need to be within the same week as the analysis. What we expect to consume much time is the time taken for testing the chosen design tool in the company system (Ojala, 2016). Another time consuming stage will be conducting the training among the unskilled employees who will be required to use the application. The final report is expected to be tabled before Macey Hargreaves.

Reference List

Adjibolosoo, S 2014, ‘The Human Factor and Future Directions: Seizing and Making the Future’, Review of Human Factor Studies, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 1–29, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=119061819&site=ehost-live

EUN-YONG LEE, SOO-BUM LEE & YU JUNG JENNIFER JEON 2017, ‘Factors Influencing the Behavioral Intention to Use Food Delivery Apps’, Social Behavior & Personality: an international journal, vol. 45, no. 9, pp. 1461–1473, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=125672406&site=ehost-live

Feng, H, Jiang, Z & Liu, D 2018, ‘Quality, Pricing, and Release Time: Optimal Market Entry Strategy for Software-As-A-Service Vendors’, MIS Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 333-A14, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=127748834&site=ehost-live

Gopal, A & Koka, BR 2015, ‘The Asymmetric Benefits of Relational Flexibility: Evidence from Software Development Outsourcing’, MIS Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 553–576, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=74717003&site=ehost-live

Grewal, D, Ahlbom, C-P, Beitelspacher, L, Noble, SM & Nordfält, J 2018, ‘In-Store Mobile Phone Use and Customer Shopping Behavior: Evidence from the Field’, Journal of Marketing, vol. 82, no. 4, pp. 102–126, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=130025375&site=ehost-live

Guo, Z & Ma, D 2018, ‘A Model of Competition between Perpetual Software and Software as a Service’, MIS Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 101-A26, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=127748824&site=ehost-live

Karlinsky-Shichor, Y & Zviran, M 2016, ‘Factors Influencing Perceived Benefits and User Satisfaction in Knowledge Management Systems’, Information Systems Management, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 55–73, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=112574340&site=ehost-live

Kraus, Ashley, and Nicole Martins. 2017. “On the Street: A Content Analysis of Body Imagery in Streetstyle Fashion Blogs.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 61 (2): 351–67. doi:10.1080/08838151.2017.1309410

Lesage, F & Smirnova, S 2015, ‘“Keeping up” through Teaching and Learning Media Software: “Introducing” Photoshop’, Canadian Journal of Communication, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 223–241, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=102758506&site=ehost-live

Guo, Z & Ma, D 2018, ‘Implicit Time Integration in the Generalized Interpolation Material Point Method for Finite Deformation Hyperelasticity’, Mechanics of Advanced Materials & Structures, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 465–473, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=77441447&site=ehost-live

Nan, G, Li, X, Zhang, Z & Li, M 2018, ‘Optimal pricing for new product entry under free strategy’, Information Technology & Management, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 1–19, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lxh&AN=128482266&site=ehost-live

Ojala, A 2016, ‘Adjusting software revenue and pricing strategies in the era of cloud computing’, Journal of Systems & Software, vol. 122, pp. 40–51, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=119161142&site=ehost-live

Parry, S, Rowley, J, Jones, R & Kupiec-Teahan, B 2012, ‘Customer-perceived value in business-to-business relationships: A study of software customers’, Journal of Marketing Management, vol. 28, no. 7–8, pp. 887–911, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=78164839&site=ehost-live

PINTO, G & CASTOR, F 2017, ‘Energy Efficiency: A New Concern for Application Software Developers’, Communications of the ACM, vol. 60, no. 12, pp. 68–75, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=126581918&site=ehost-live

Read, GL, van Driel, II & Potter, RF 2018, ‘Same-Sex Couples in Advertisements: An Investigation of the Role of Implicit Attitudes on Cognitive Processing and Evaluation’, Journal of Advertising, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 182–197, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=129424570&site=ehost-live

TAMBURRI, DA, LAGO, P & VAN VLIET, H 2013, ‘Organizational Social Structures for Software Engineering’, ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 46, no. 1, p. 3–3:35, viewed 9 October 2018, https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=buh&AN=91956722&site=ehost-live