Has the private sector caught the public sector IT disease?
5 Comments
Hi James, and thank you for picking this up. I have taken the liberty of replying to your response on your blog http://bit.ly/a91iX2 and explaining how and why we need different, contextual, approaches to governance when we start rolling IT outside of our firewalls and into the public domain, and why the governance of IT becomes a matter of corporate governance instead of being within the domain of the CIO.
Cheers, Steve
There does not appear to be any similarity between these incidents and public sector project failures. There are major IT incidents that directly affect customers every week. Some are managed well enough that they do not make the press. These two obviously have. As systems become more self service rather than used by call centres, branch staff etc. it will become more noticeable when there are problems. One the basis of these incidents I don't think you can say that there are any issues with IT governance at these organisations. I don't think there are many large organisations that have not ever had a major systems issue. Obviously there is no data on this as everyone tries to keep these things out of the public eye and avoid being cited in articles like this.
@David. I think there are direct comparisons between these incidents and some high-profile public sector IT failures, the commonality is that they were let out the door before they were ready, whether due to political or management pressure or blind optimism.
The governance point is predicated on the difference in standards needed for internal vs external projects. Those systems which we expose to the public cease to be internal IT, they become products and services of our organisations and require higher standards. We don't expect cars, aircraft, laser printers, mobile phones etc. to be launched with major, disabling faults (barring the iPhone4). These are all technically complex products containing huge rafts of code. Yet somehow IT expects to get away with it, accepts lower standards of quality and reliability. Whilst IT is an internal service this may be acceptable, but when we roll it out the door as a product offered to the public it ceases to be so, shortcomings and failures then expose our organisations to reputational and legal risks which require higher standards of governance, and escalate the issues from the parochial domain of IT governance into the higher plane of corporate governance.
HTH, Steve
The heritage of public-facing IT is littered with embarrassment for even the largest and important organisations. For example, many may remember such failures at British Airways and the London Stock Exchange.
When a problem occurs, the real measure of the business is their effectiveness in managing the recovery process. Failure to restore 'business as usual' or to respond adequately to customer service issues are the most damning aspects.
Of course, my own view is that such failures often have roots firmly planted in the adherence to the redundant iT paradigm.
By focusing on IT, the 'system' is ignored so we should not be surprised when the system fails, even if the IT still appears to be working.
Leave a comment
-- Advertisement --

The suggestion that governance is the answer to IT failure implies that complex systems are capable of getting to 0% failure rates in a regime where it is impossible to test anything completely. That's not the case, so management is forced to make risk based decisions on go-live. Doing so is not incompetence, its sensible IT management.
I have a full response to this post on my blog:
http://bankervision.typepad.com/bankervision/2010/07/is-governance-the-answer-to-system-failure.html