ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is our proud privilege and duty to acknowledge the kind of help and guidance received
from several people in preparation of this report. It would not have been possible to prepare
this report in this form without their valuable help, cooperation and guidance. First and
foremost, we wish to record our sincere gratitude to our Internship coordinator sir
Dr. Sandeep Kumar Department of CSE, for his constant support and encouragement in
preparation of this report and for making available library and laboratory facilities needed to
prepare this report.
The training on “Front-end web Development” was very helpful to us in giving the necessary
background information and inspiration in choosing this topic for the training. Their
contributions and
technical support in preparing this report are greatly acknowledged.
Last but not the least, we wish to thank our parents for financing our studies in this college
as well as for constantly encouraging us to learn engineering. Their personal sacrifice in
providing this opportunity to learn engineering is gratefully acknowledgement.
Thanks for all your encouragement!
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE NO.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 1
INTERNSHIP CERTIFICATE 2
CHAPTER - 1. INTRODUCTION 4
1.1 Modules
CHAPTER - 2. ANALYSIS 6
2.1 Requirement analysis
2.2 Interviews
2.3 How the interviews were conducted
2.4 Interview finding
CHAPTER - 3. SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS SPECIFICATIONS 10
3.1 System configuration
3.2 Software requirements
3.3 Hardware requirements
CHAPTER - 4. Technology 11
4.1 PHP
4.2 HTML
CHAPTER - 5. CONCLUSION 13
CHAPTER - 6. REFERENCES 14
APPENDICES 15
2
3
CHAPTER-1
INTRODUCTION
Software process automation is a technology that may be viewed as a two-edged sword. On The
one hand it can be viewed as a productivity and quality enhancer, while on the otherhand,
It can be viewed as a mechanism to control, routinize, and de-skill work. These views both
Have elements of truth, but with appropriate design and adoption considerations, we believe
That it is possible to enhance the positive elements while reducing the negative ones.
This report looks at the issues that have arisen for the early adopters of process automation.
These people are the innovators, the ones who have been through the ―school of hard Knocks,‖
taken the brunt of an immature technology, and suffered from the fact that there are Few
experienced people to guide them. Some of the projects we saw succeeded, some failed, But
few found the going easy. This technology is not for the faint of heart—at least not yet.
However, we hope, through this report, to document experiences and lessons learned. We Hope
that we have extracted practical insights to provide insights to the developers of process
Automation tools and guidance to those who wish to automate their processes.
These general objectives have been met through a series of activities that include in-depth
interviews followed by a questionnaire survey and a workshop. The specific objectives of these
activities are as follows:
• The interviews are aimed at gathering practitioner experiences in a relatively
unstructured Way, to identify what individuals believe are the important issues in the
adoption of software process automation, and to establish a basis for the more structured
questionnaire survey. Some of the interviewees were contacted about a year after the
initial interviews.
• Finally, the workshop was aimed at identifying success strategies for the introduction of
Software automation. The workshop brought together a widely diverse group of individuals
withexperience in research and development, adoption, management and end use of
processautomation, and to raise awareness of critical issues across these communities
4
As described by Christie [Christie 96], the specific objectives of the study are to
• Identify the technical, social, and organizational inhibitors to the adoption of
processautomation:
– Assess the prevalence and scope of software process automation.
– Categorize the technologies and practices that are currently being used.
– Identify effective and ineffective technologies and practices.
– Develop guidelines for process automation implementers.
• Support vendors and researchers in developing products more in tune with end-userneeds:
– Develop guidelines for researchers and vendors to improve producteffectiveness.
– Foster effective communications between researchers, vendors, developers and end users.
Recruitment life cycle diagram
1.1 MODULES:
1. Login page
2. Registration page
3. Background verification form
4. Induction form
5. Employee form
5
CHAPTER-2
ANALYSIS
2.1 Requirement Analysis
The main objectives for undertaking this project are:
To understand the internal Recruitment process in organization.
To identify areas where there can be scope for improvement.
To give suitable recommendation to streamline the hiring process.
To develop practical knowledge with theoretical aspects.
To know about the importance of recruitment and selection.
To find out better process of recruitment.
To know about the role of recruiter.
Need for recruitment:
It makes possible to choose the right person in the right time at the right place. It also
makes it possible to acquire the number and type of people necessary to ensure the
continued operationof the organization.
Planned needs: - such needs arise from changes in the organization policies.
Anticipated needs: - It refers to those movements in personnel which an organization
can predict by studying trends in internal or external need.
Unexpected needs: - Such need arises due to illness, death and resignation.
Recruitment follows HR planning and goes hand in hand with selection process by which
organizations evaluate the suitability of candidates. With successful recruiting to create a
sizeable pool of candidates, even the most accurate selection system is of little use.
The next step is careful examination of skills, abilities and experience needed to perform
thejob successfully. Other steps follow:
• Creating an applicant pool using internal or external methods.
• Evaluate candidate via selection
• Convince the candidate
• And finally make an offer
6
Selection process is good but it should also be modified according to the requirements
and should job profile so that main objective of selecting the candidate could be achieved.
Further from this survey I hope the organization will be benefited and with the help of the
suggestions given the organization can improve its functioning and the overall
Recruitment and Selection Process in the organization and its performance will increase.
2.2 The Interviews
This report is based upon interviews with individuals who are knowledgeable about and
experiencedwith process automation. We performed a qualitative analysis of these
interviews to arrive at the findings reported here. The material in this section closely
follows thatpresented in an earlier report [Christie 96].
Three independent organizations were involved in performing the interviews reported
here: The SEI, Nolan Norton and Company (a division of KPMG Peat Marwick), and Cap
GeminiSogeti(located in Grenoble, France).
2.3 The Interviewees
An extensive list of candidates was identified early on, including end-user organizations,
commercialand in-house developers, and researchers. Our original goal was to interview
mostly end users of process automation. However, that was not to be. Because of the
immaturity of the technology, we interacted with relatively few experienced end users of
the technology.
Most of our interviews were with people who were involved in developing and
implementingprocess-centered environments (PCEs).
These individuals came from a wide variety of organizations including
• A vendor of a major process-oriented configuration management (CM) product
• FourDOD sites implementing process-centered environments (PCEs)
• Two U.S. government contractors who were developing process tools and
implementingPCEs
• Two French government contractors who were implementing PCEs
• A French bank that is operating with a PCE
• A university group with strong ties to industry
7
2.3 How the Interviews Were Conducted
A total of 14 interviews were conducted with 12 projects.1in the large majority of these
interviewsessions, two interviewers were present. The number of interviewees in each
interview ranged from one to eight. All interviews were taped to ensure that the
comments were recorded accurately. The interviews took approximately 36 hours with
an average lengthof 2.4 hours per interview. All in all, the interviews yielded 150 pages of
transcripts.
In one organization, two different projects were interviewed. With two other projects,
multiple interviews wereconducted.
A standard script supported each interview. This script provided a consistent framework
and ensured that we would have comparable information from each of the interviews.
While the questions were used to support the interviews and to ensure coverage, they
were not followedmechanically; areas of interest were often probed in depth. Christie
provides further details ofthe interview format [Christie 96].
2.4 Interview Findings
The interviewees represented one or more automation efforts that, loosely speaking, can
be seen as pilot projects. These projects ranged in size from fewer than 10 to more
than 60people.
For purposes of discussion, the numbers cited include the personnel for whom the
automationwas intended, as well as the developers of the automation if they are part of
the same organization. Typical project size was toward the low end.
While we made no attempt to measure formally the process maturity level of the
organizations/projects interviewed, some had previously undergone formal process
assessments using the SEI Capability Maturity Model (CMM). These projectsranged in
maturity from level 1 (ad hoc/chaotic) to level 5 (optimizing). However, most can
becharacterized as relatively immature (at or below level 2). Other projects had not been
assessedformally, but many characterized themselves as having a poorly defined a set.
8
Of the twelve projects interviewed (seven currently active, four inactive, one
experimental), only two were far enough along for the automation to be considered
institutionalized. In one case, the automation was associated with a company that
developed and distributed a configurationmanagement product. This product has
significant process capability that is usedto support further development of the product.
The other organization that effectively adoptedPCE technology did so to support software
problem tracking.
Four points may be made about the interviews and the findings derived from them. First,
because of the immaturity of the technology, we interviewed few people who could be
considered experienced end users of the technology. The great majority of interviewees
were either developersof process-centered environments, developers of the process tools
fromwhich PCEs can be built, or managers of development projects. Second, the findings
not only surfaced problems but identified potential solutions to these problems. We hope
that this information will be useful to organizations intending to build and use PCEs.
Third, interviewees’ experiences were not always consistent, and these inconsistencies
may at times be reflected in the report.
Fourth, as might be expected, we found that many of the adoption issues we
identified have much in common with adoption issues associated with other
technology areas.
The findings fall into three major categories
• drivers and inhibitors
• contributors to success
• technology issues
In the following discussions, we make heavy use of quotes (indicated in italics) from
theinterviews.
A major reason for this is that interviewees were surprisingly frank in giving us their
views about process automation and how their organizations were dealing with it.
9
CHAPTER-3
SYSTEM REQUREMENTS SPECIFICATIONS
3.1System configurations
The software requirement specification can produce at the culmination of the analysis task.
The function and performance allocated to software as part of system engineering are refined
by established a complete information description, a detailed functional description, a
representation of system behavior, and indication of performance and design constrain,
appropriate validate criteria, and other information pertinent to requirements.
3.2Software requirements:
Operating System: Windows
Coding Language: HTML, CSS, PHP, JavaScript, and Bootstrap.
Text Editor : Sublime Text3.
Database : My SQL.
Package : XAMPP.
3.3Hardware Requirements:
Processor : Intel core i3
Memory : 8GB RAM
Hard Disk : 1TB
10
CHAPTER-4
TECNOLOGY
PHP (recursive acronym for PHP: Hypertext Preprocessor) is a widely-used open source
general-purpose scripting language that is especially suited for web development and can be
embedded into HTML.PHP is server side scripting language designed for web
development but also used as a general purpose programming language.
PHP code may be embedded into HTML code, or it can be used in combination with various
web template systems, web content management systems and web frameworks. PHP
code is usually processed by a PHP interpreter implemented as a module in the web server or
as a common gateway interface (CGI) executable. The web server combines the results of the
interpreted and executed PHP code, which may be any type of data, including images, with the
generated web page. PHP code may also be executed with a common-line interface (CLI)and
can be used to implement standalone graphical applications.
Instead of lots of commands to output HTML (as seen in C or Perl), PHP pages contain
HTML with embedded code that does "something" (in this case, output "Hi, I'm a PHP
script!"). The PHP code is enclosed in special start and end processing instructions
<?php and ?> that allow you to jump into and out of "PHP mode."
What distinguishes PHP from something like client-side JavaScript is that the code is
executed on the server, generating HTML which is then sent to the client. The client would
receive the results of running that script, but would not know what the underlying code was.
You can even configure your web server to process all your HTML files with PHP, and then
there's really no way that users can tell what you have up your sleeve.
The best things in using PHP are that it is extremely simple for a newcomer, but offers many
advanced features for a professional programmer. Don't be afraid reading the long list of PHP's
features. You can jump in, in a short time, and start writing simple scripts in a few hours.
11
4.1 HTML
HTML is the standard mark-up language for creating Web pages.
HTML stands for Hyper Text Mark-up Language
HTML describes the structure of Web pages using mark-up
HTML elements are the building blocks of HTML pages
HTML elements are represented by tags
HTML tags label pieces of content such as "heading", "paragraph", "table", and so on
12
CHAPTER-5
CONCLUSIONS
Once the on-boarding and training phase wraps up, the new staff member should be
ready to engage in a rewarding long-lasting career. The full cycle recruiting process
can indeed be a gruelling experience for all parties involved. But, will the addition of
a new, reliable employee for the firm, it is also a much needed and appreciated part
of nurturing a successful business.
Even for owners of small enterprises, for peace of mind in hiring the best candidate
for a job, following the steps of the recruitment life cycle is well worth the time and
effort and is a proven method of reducing turnovers within a company, saving both
time and money in the long run.
13
REFERENCES
1. Dave W. Mercer, Allan Kent, Steven Nowicki, David Mercer, ―Beginning PHP5‖, 3rd
edition, Wrox publications.
2. Vikram Vaswani, ―MySQL(TM): The Complete Reference‖, 6th edition, Mc Graw
Hill Education publications.
3. Luke Welling, ―PHP and MySQL Web Development Book‖, 5th edition, Pearson
India publications.
4. Larry Ullman, ―PHP and MySQL for Dynamic Web Sites‖, 4th edition, Pearson India
publications.
1. To learn about the software required to use, we used,
www.wikipidea.org.
2. For more examples for learning, we referred,
www.tutorialpoint.com.
3. For learning the MongoDB , we referred,
www.npmjs.com.
14
APPENDIX –I
15
16
