Opciones metodológicas de la Pastoral Juvenil

The results were calculated in Excel, and the Excel file used in this calculation (DrawbBen- CompSquared.xlsx) can be found in the archive RQ1calculationsInDepth.zip, which is appended to this thesis. Other calculation methods were also attempted, and the res- ults of these (and the method presented in this section) can be found in the Excel files referenced in Appendix B.

During the calculations we found that the hybrid cloud deployment model was at a significant disadvantage. Possible reasons for this are discussed in Section 3.5.5. We therefore decided to remove the hybrid deployment model from the calculations, thereby also removing any points another deployment model would have gained or lost based on their comparison. The Excel files presented in B include results both with and without the hybrid deployment model.

The file BenDrawTable.xls, found in RQ1calculationsInDepth.zip, includes one sheet for benefits and one for drawbacks, and the impact rating of all of these. The two sheets are used by all other Excel files in the folder to calculate results.

Inside the other files of the .zip-folders the layout is the same, but we will use DrawbBenCompSquared.xlsx as an example since this is the one we are using in this chapter.

The first sheet, ”Explanation”, describes the values used to perform the calculations. The next five sheets, ”Private”, ”Hosted-Private”, ”Public”, ”Hybrid” and ”Conven- tional” include the calculations of benefit and drawback points for each of the five de- ployment models when compared to the others. These are the same type of tables as presented in Appendix A. All these sheets, barring the sheet for the hybrid deployment model, have two tables. The table at the top includes the hybrid model, while the table at the bottom has discarded it. The bottom table was created when the decision to omit the hybrid model was made.

Using the ”Private” sheet as an example, the tables in these Excel sheets consist of five main columns. The first column contains the deployment models we are comparing the private model to. The second column named ”Benefits” contains one sub-column for each of the categories we use. In the cases when the private model has a benefit, and some of the other models have not, the private cloud gains positive benefit points against that deployment model.

In the third column called ”Drawbacks” we also have one sub-column from each of the categories. In the cases where there exists a drawback which impacts the private model negatively, but does not affect some of the other deployment models, the private model gains negative drawback points against these deployment models.

In the forth column called ”SUM” the negative drawback points are subtracted from the positive drawback point for each comparable deployment model in each category. As an example, cell J4 calculates cell B4 minus cell F4. In the fifth column named ”SUM TOTAL” the numbers in the SUM column for each deployment model are summed up into a grand total.

The next four sheets named ”Access Results”, ”Availability Results”, ”Infrastructure Results” and ”Integrity Results” are category comparison tables for each of the four cat- egories. There the numbers found in the ”SUM” columns of the former five Excel sheets are combined, and every permutation of deployment models can be viewed in each cat- egory. Also here, two different tables are included, one where the hybrid cloud is in- cluded, and one without.

Let’s say we want to compare the public deployment model with the private deploy- ment model with regards to access. In Table 25 found in Appendix C.1 we find the public deployment model in cell 4,1 (column 4, row 1), and the private deployment model we want to compare with in cell 1,2. The cross section between the two is cell 4,2. In this cell the sum of the benefit and drawback points of the private deployment model compared to the public deployment model when focusing on access (cell 10,4 of Table 17), 8, is subtracted from the sum of the benefit and drawback points of the public deployment model compared to the private deployment model when focusing on access (cell 10,3 of Table 19), -10. The calculation then becomes -10-8 = -18, indicating that the public de- ployment model is at a disadvantage when compared with the private deployment model in the access category.

Comparatively one can view cell 2,4, indicating the opposite view. In this cell the public access points is subtracted from the private access points, 8-(-10) = 18, indicating that the private deployment model has an advantage over the public deployment model when it comes to access.

The last row of the table indicates the sum of all the comparison points of one deploy- ment model against the others. The deployment model with the highest sum gives us an indication of which is the best deployment model for the table category. The collection of the top scores in each category when using the single value calculation method is given in Table 33.

The last sheet of each file called ”Boiled down results” feature the combined ”SUM” rows of all the category comparison tables of the Excel file into one table. The table allows us to view the highest rated deployment model in each category. These tables are similar to the one presented in Appendix D. As before, two separate tables are used, one including the hybrid model, and one without it. Histograms for each table are also included as a visual representation of the results.