A House of Commons committee launches a fundamental review of
best practices in IT, focusing on the Department of Work and
Pensions' modernisation projects.
A House of Commons select committee is half way through one of the
most fundamental reviews of government IT ever carried out.
The MPs are examining the Department of Work and Pensions'
management of its IT projects, and may seek to draw out lessons for
the whole of Whitehall.
The DWP's modernisation programme is one of the largest programmes
of its kind in Europe. "It will have a major impact on the lives of
its 26 million customers," the department noted in its 2003 annual
report.
IT is central to the department's efforts to improve its quality of
service and reduce fraud and error. The committee's investigation
will take a close look at the Child Support Agency's IT overhaul
and best practice in general.
Among the questions it seeks to answer are:
- Should policy be simplified before drawing up an IT
specification and does this happen in practice?
- Do bespoke IT systems ever work successfully?
- Is there a competitive process in awarding IT contracts with
the DWP?
- Does a genuine transfer of risk occur between the DWP and its
suppliers, especially in the case of administering
benefits?
- Does commercial confidentiality unnecessarily obscure
transparency and accountability?
The committee, a subgroup of the work and pensions select
committee, has been given powers to call witnesses and investigate
IT projects outside its normal terms of reference.
MPs take evidence from specialists on how to avert
government IT disasters
British Computer Society
The British Computer Society's submission to the work and
pensions subcommittee pointed to a series of "flawed perceptions"
about software systems. These included:
- Anything is possible - "Both customers and suppliers are liable
to forget the very real limitations of software; unrealistic and
infeasible expectations are the result."
- We can change as we go - "Excessive requests for new features
or alterations of functions during the project... increase the
chance of failure and contribute to over-runs in completion times
and budgets."
- Let's do it as usual - "Software's inherent flexibility...
[means that users] will invariably request changes to be made to
software, rather than modify their processes to find an
off-the-shelf package."
The BCS also highlighted progress towards project improvement,
including:
- Engagement - "It is vital that customers should be engaged in
the development process from its inception to completion, and that
the project team has well-defined mechanisms that allow the
customer both to be involved in the project and add value during
its lifetime."
- Commercial considerations - "Given the scale of potential
losses when projects fail, commercial relationships must be set up
so that timescales, functionality and financial risks are managed
in an equitable manner."
- Change management - "Successful projects realise that
unpredicted changes occur and put in place contingency processes
and funding resources to manage these changes."
Intellect
Intellect, which represents 1,000 IT suppliers in the UK, told
the committee, "We do not believe there is anything to gain by
publicly apportioning blame when projects run into difficulties.
Rather we see it as far more important to understand the lessons
learned and to work in partnership to ensure that best practice is
embedded among both customers and suppliers."
The Office of Government Commerce has outlined perceived
problems with the IT industry, Intellect noted, including
"unrealistic claims about our capability to deliver, standards
relating to corporate capability and individual professionalism,
inappropriate business models and post-contract changes to
scope".
Intellect's submission said, "All these criticisms could be
expected of customers who have invested a great deal of money and
believe they have not yet reaped the promised benefits."
The organisation highlighted its work with the OGC to develop
the Senior IT Forum of supplier and user organisations, which has
launched three initiatives:
- Senior responsible industry executive - the supplier equivalent
of the senior responsible owner in a user organisation
- Government procurement code - a code of practice for government
and its suppliers
- Value for money evaluation - a best practice guide on balancing
cost and quality over the lifetime of a contract.
Office of Government Commerce
Peter Gershon, chief executive of the Office of Government
Commerce, told the committee that no major public sector
organisation in the world had completely got to grips with IT
project failure. But, "we think we are among the leaders in
cracking the problem," he said.
He said the OGC can warn ministers that a proper risk analysis
is necessary before policies that rely on IT are announced. He
highlighted a series of measures to drive up success rates.
Independent peer reviews would limit the number of people who "mark
their own homework", said Gershon, suggesting that the senior
responsible owner could act as a bridge between technology and the
business world.
The government is trying not to roll out "big bang" projects and
departments now avoid announcing that projects will go live on a
certain date, he argued at.
"Ministers are sensitised to the issue that technology must be
handled with great care. I have told secretaries of state that what
they are trying to do is too risky," said the OGC chief executive.
Projects are now categorised as "mission-critical", "highly
desirable" and "desirable". "Mission-critical projects get the
scrutiny they deserve and should attract the best resources that
suppliers and departments have," Gershon said.
The government has dropped the use of private finance initiative
funding for IT projects and now considers the track record of
suppliers when awarding contracts, he added.
Gateway reviews are uncovering weaknesses in the early stages of
projects and helping to ensure that these are tackled, he said.