Computer Weekly readers have their say
Data spine outage report doesn't tell the full
story
I am writing with regard to the NHS story "Data spine out of
action for 28 hours in a week" (Computer Weekly, 10 January).
Your report was based on statistics about the services provided
by our suppliers - including the spine - that we publish on our
website week in, week out, even if there are service issues, as has
been the case recently. We are proud of this level of
transparency.
The way we presented the statistics last week meant that,
understandably, your story gave the wrong impression about the
nature of the service difficulties experienced by our users. It may
have seemed as if there was either one very long outage or a string
of shorter outages when, in fact, there was only intermittent
"below par" service on some aspects of the spine service and some
applications that use it.
We worked co-operatively with BT and other suppliers to deal
with the problem and restore normal service to our users. A full
explanation of the issue can be found
at www.connectingforhealth.nhs.uk/
news/update_service_issues
James Herbert, Connecting for Health
Computer Weekly replies
Our article was based on concern among readers about the poor
service, confirmed by statistics on Connecting for Health's
website. A table on the website included statistics on any outages
of the spine in minutes and the number of outages. For the week
ending
1 January 2006, the table showed one outage of 1,680 minutes,
which is 28 hours. In our article we quoted Connecting for Health,
including its comment that there had been intermittent
interruptions with one part of the spine service.
Don't bite off more than you can chew with
ERP
I am writing in response to your story "Firms failing to fully
exploit ERP systems" (Computer Weekly, 17 January). We believe ERP
projects require a new approach as customer demands and buying
patterns have evolved over the past few years.
The most common reason that companies have struggled with ERP
implementations is that they have tried to swallow too much in one
go by deploying a full spectrum of software.
But today, companies can deploy software in components, get fast
payback, and then undertake the next project. This is a much better
approach for both the business and the IT department.
Furthermore, users should really consider whether customisation
is necessary given the sophistication of the business processes in
enterprise software. Not only does customisation often lead to
project delays and costly implementations, but down the line it
results in problematic upgrades and higher maintenance costs.
We would urge companies to consider the approach they are taking
with enterprise software projects and look at a component-based
strategy.
The demands of today's global economy require businesses to be
more agile and have the ability to adapt to customer demands. By
taking this new approach, businesses can maintain 100% focus on
customers.
Alastair Sorbie, IFS UK
Hold your nerve on major ERP surgery
With regards to your article "Firms failing to fully exploit ERP
systems" (Computer Weekly, 17 January), I would like to raise a few
points.
The implementation of ERP systems should be looked upon as major
surgery. They have to be handled with extreme care, diligence and
effective change management to reduce business risk and achieve
success.
However, where companies often go wrong is that they stop
further investment after the initial implementation, thus
preventing the real drive to value for such systems.
Our work with ERP systems proves that the companies that make
best use of their initial ERP infrastructure are the ones that
invest further to achieve targeted benefits such as reducing
stocks, controlling price and achieving process efficiency
gains.
Of course, the reason that some suspend investment is down to
the initial costs of implementation. However, there are proven
methods that can be used to reduce initial costs while maintaining
a low risk profile.
The advice is simple: do not try to build in all the functional
changes that emerge before the system is delivered. Hold your nerve
because you will invariably find that many of these so called
essential changes are not so important after all.
We would also advise that companies spend considerable effort
looking at the change management aspects rather than focusing on
the applications and technology. Major surgery requires effective
management and strong methodologies, and employees must be treated
with care and sensitivity.
Mike Davies, chief executive, Enabler
More mundane threats than Buncefield
In response to the story about the Buncefield disaster (Computer
Weekly, 10 January), although the Buncefield blast has undoubtedly
been a wake-up call for business continuity planning, it should not
take a disaster to focus minds on the importance of having a robust
data back-up and recovery system in place.
Far less dramatic occurrences can have equally catastrophic
effects on business performance. While there may be sympathy over
events such as Buncefield, it is unlikely that firms will be shown
similar compassion should partners, suppliers, customers or staff
be affected by inadequate provision for more "mundane" occurrences
such as software and hardware failures.
Also, business continuity, by its very name, refers to ongoing
business performance. Often, by re-appraising existing back-up and
recovery plans, companies can improve front-line areas of their
business by making better use of the data that they receive,
create, process and store.
Brian Moroney, Hitachi Data Systems
Where's the campaign to sack the
bureaucrats?
Well done for your continued reporting on the blunders of our
civil service. From your description and comments, "Revenue
red-faced as IT system wrongly fines 10,000 companies" (Computer
Weekly, 17 January), these mistakes have cost the British taxpayer
millions of pounds.
This is a failure in systems specification and design that stems
from management incompetence. The bureaucrats who did this should
be fired and they should lose their civil service pension. Why
don't you campaign for that?
Ken Evans