Colin Beveridge examines the reasons behind high profile public
sector IT project failures and looks at what must be done to get
better value for taxpayers' money.
Public sector IT has always had a fairly poor reputation in the UK.
To many thrusting IT professionals, the public sector reeks of
cardigans that have seen better days and the prospect of years of
cyber-drudgery, brightened only by the twice-daily appearance of a
tea trolley.
But is that a fair perception - are things really like that in
government departments these days?
Food for thought
My very first freelance role, back in
1984, was to design a new revenue handling system for a district
council. That was a real eye-opener for a bright young lad from the
private sector world of leading-edge software houses, as I spent
almost the entire assignment working on the kitchen table. The
kitchen was next door to the finance director's office so he could
keep me away from his own computer staff, thus avoiding the risk of
any cross-contamination between the "expensive contractor" and his
less well-paid permanent workers.
If there was to be any skills transfer between the local data
processing department and myself, it would have to be by osmosis
through several brick walls.
So, for a month or two, it was just me, the cooker and the kettle,
interrupted only by the occasional foray into the kitchen by brave
souls from the native computer department, desperate for a stealthy
brew and a glimpse of whatever magic I was weaving with my
flowchart template.
I must admit to heaving several sighs of relief when I had finished
that assignment and finally
 | | "To many thrusting IT
professionals, the public sector reeks of cardigans that have seen
better days and the prospect of years of cyber-drudgery" | | | | | |
| | Colin Beveridge | | |
|
|
moved back again, into the very much faster-moving commercial
world.
Top-heavy difference
If that had been my only exposure
to public sector computing, I might have just put it down as an
isolated, if somewhat bizarre, experience.
Since then I've worked with dozens of IT departments, including a
representative selection of central government, local government
and quasi-government bodies. Every one of these organisations has
been radically different from the commercial sector companies with
which I have worked, in one very fundamental respect: the
management culture.
I suppose that is only to be expected because in the private sector
the IT function has usually been more orientated towards achieving
measurable results, whereas the public sector departments seem to
have been particularly geared towards fulfilling pre-determined
roles.
Perhaps I had better clarify that observation, as it is based on an
extremely fine nuance of thought. What, if any, is the actual
difference between achieving results and fulfilling a
pre-determined role?
Well, for a start, in the private sector, the key business drivers
for IT are all about sustaining and developing the profitability of
the venture - so everything is geared towards balancing costs with
benefits. Generally speaking new technology investment in the
commercial world depends on the existence of a viable business
case. Delivering the anticipated benefits is how we measure our
success - hence my supposition that the private IT function is
geared towards achieving results.
All services are subject to change
But when we look at
the public sector situation, we find that the key drivers for IT
are all about enabling policy initiatives and, more often than not,
the policy initiatives are subject to arbitrary change, or
cancellation. This sometimes takes place at very short notice,
because government policy, as opposed to legislation, is subject to
the trials and tribulations of the political world so that what
seems to be a very good ministerial idea one week, may well become
completely undesirable the next.
In a "democracy" that's the way politicians have to operate and one
reason why so many public sector computing initiatives are
inherently susceptible to failure from the outset.
Even my fairly limited exposure (less than 10% of my IT career) has
shown me how often government policy changes have seriously
impacted on important IT programmes, mid-flight. It's not just a
question of moving the goalposts either. Too often the whole game
is abandoned after consuming considerable time and resources.
Which is why I believe that most public sector IT departments are
there to fulfil a pre-determined role as a standing army of
technologists, rather than to achieve results. Quite simply, their
basic function is to use their technical skills and resources, if
possible, to deliver current policy and to be prepared to
accommodate unexpected severe changes of direction at incredibly
short notice, in computing terms at least.
We all know that scope creep, lack of resources and change are the
three greatest enemies of cost-effective IT development projects.
In the commercial sector we move heaven and earth to avoid these
risks - and yet they seem to be endemic to the management culture
within public sector computing.
Of course, we are not just dealing with a single, mega-sized IT
division - the problem is compounded by the existence of myriad
government departments, each with their own agenda and
policies.
The element of surprise
Is it any wonder then, that we
get so many high profile public IT fiascos? In fact, the more I
look at this problem, the more that I feel that we are lucky to get
any working IT at all from the public sector, given its highly
complex organisational structure which is constantly pounded by
unremitting tidal waves of political policy.
Unfortunately it's not going to get any better - unless we can
persuade our political masters to change their ways, radically, by
applying the same rigour and quality of thought to their political
strategy management as their counterparts in industry.
At the moment, it seems like this fundamental problem is not
properly recognised by the Government - they simply lay any fault
firmly at the door of those poor souls tasked with implementing
their polymorphic policies, without understanding their own
contribution.
Outsourcing in fashion
Instead of understanding that
the complexity and cost of public sector computing are direct
functions of the political agenda, the only solution so far to
rising IT costs has been to outsource more and more government IT
to third-party providers, in the hope that the cost of public
sector computing can be contained, or reduced.
But what we really need is a root and branch overhaul of the
structure of public sector IT - to reduce the organisational
complexity and the impact of policy change.
Until we take these basic steps, I can't think of a worse possible
scenario for outsourcing - we might just as well print Project
Change Requests on pads made from £50 notes.
Do you agree?
Is organisational complexity the reason why so many public
sector IT projects fail? >>CW360.com reserves
the right to edit and publish answers on the Web site. Please state
if your answer is not for publication.Colin Beveridge is an interim executive who has held
top-level roles in IT strategy, development services and support.
His travels along the blue-chip highway have taken him to a clutch
of leading corporations, including Shell, BP, ICI, DHL and
Powergen.