Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Recurso digital |
| Lenguaje: | inglés |
| Publicado: |
Zenodo
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19677298 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
Tabla de Contenidos:
- <p>A web-based system that assists companies in managing their inventory and tracking their assets is the web-based property management catalogue system. Using a centralized platform that can be accessed from any device with an internet connection, the system enables users to manage their inventory. Businesses may easily make informed decisions regarding their inventory and sales strategy because to the system’s real-time updates on inventory levels, sales, and other crucial information. The department’s institution is facing difficulties as they lack an efficient system to manage their inventory and requisition data. The Property Management Office’s current process for issuing forms and managing inventory using Excel is also manual. Maintaining stocks is crucial due to unpredictable changes in product supply and demand and serves as a safeguard against future price fluctuations. The analysis’ main objective is to examine the efficiency of the inventory management system, including a review of the existing system. The study also looks at how inventory levels and reports are affected by changes in stock prices. The study used Agile methodology to develop an ISO 9126-compliant web-based property management catalogue system for a client. The System was evaluated using ISO 9126, and participants in the study were selected using simple random probability sampling. The client can request unused inventory and claim approved unused inventory on material requisition slips. Using a five-point Likert scale, the system’s functionality, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability were evaluated by 50 respondents comprising 80% end-users and 20% expert users. The results indicated very acceptable scores for functionality, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability, respectively. The overall rating of 1.48 suggests that the system meets clients’ expectations and is feasible and acceptable, requiring a mean rating of 2.51 or lower.</p>