Miszewski touts benefits of IT integration

If the State saves even $1 because of the consolidation project, i will erect a statue of Mr. Miszewski in my front yard in appreciation! It's not going to happen. In the 3.5 yrs. that Miszewski has been in charge, i have not seen one project that has been completed on-time, or under-budget. I have seen a lot of money wasted with nothing to show for it. Laying off State employees and hiring $200/hr contractors in their place does not save the State money. There is no way the consolidation project will be even close to being completed by July 2007. If you believe that, you must be drinking the water over at DET. Wisconsin could learn something from states such as Iowa and Florida who have fired their CIO's for failed consolidation projects. The money saved could pay for 2-3 new policeman or teachers..

As a taxpayer I am quite conerned about the huge cost of this effort to the taxpayer. Generally grandiose IT business strategies fail. The speaker in this article leaves out reference to the years of cost already spent towards the new IT projects. Won't that inflate any of those "savings" to be realized? His desire to create a "Borderless' government
is political and not wanted by taxpayers. Is it needed or worth the cost? I, and I'm sure many other Wisconsin taxpayers, do not find it appealing to wait in line with scores of other people who are all in one place trying to get a marriage license, a hunting license, a boat registration, their water tested, signing up for UW classes, filing a complaint with the insurance commissioner, an unemployment check,and so forth, as I wait to renew my drivers license. The lines from the new DOT computer system to get just drivers license are already too long. And please Wisconsin do not revolutionize the process so that we all end up talking to people over in India, or worse yet, a computer. There are common government and BUSINESS processes that end up as practical 'barriers' which make sense and add to efficiency when we are pursuing a specific government service. The best thing government can do during times of budget difficulties of today with our tax dollars is to strengthen the services those dollars provide taxpayers by making sure that every dollar designated for the various government programs are actually directed and used for the recipients of those programs. The government should not be redirecting funds to waste them by building more data centers, huge flashy computer systems, or so forth, when tens of thousands of people in Wisconsin are starving, unemployed, homeless, or can't pay for heating, can't buy their medicines, nursing homes, or are facing other real life threatening issues.

The article mentions Mr. Miszewski owned an IT business. What industry does/did it serve? What was the revenue for the business? How did he dispense of the business? Unless his business was at least Fortune 1000, he has no clear credibility in being CIO for a state.

"Doing this [consolidation] is a 'duh," he stated.

Famous last words...

"Save an incredible amount of money"? "$9 million dollars"? Over the last 3 years, no one I know has ever seen credible evidence or cost analysis that supports these saving's numbers. How were these saving's numbers achieved? LAB should first look at and comment about Mr. Miszewski's cost analysis (if there was even such an exercise), and then compare it against what has already been spent (including the $29 million for a new Data Center). Duh ...

Mr. Miszewski also noted that the state will save $175 million over 5 years over all IT initiatives. I think this should be applauded...but not before someone outside the political appointment circle validates the savings AND how the savings were subsequently used.

If the staff had been allowed to work on the consolidation, three or four agencies would be done already. Instead, a consultant was hired. That consultant spent millions, used up two years and has yet to consolidate a single server.

This consolidation effort is symbolic of all failed DOA I/T projects over the decades. If the state is really interested in saving money - dismantling DOA would be a start. The only thing DOA will accomplish with this project is to severely reduce service to the taxpayers. As usual, DOA is wasting money to keep the governors supporters happy. I wonder if they'll ever try to keep the taxpayer happy?

Very interesting forum. Hats off to the WTN for providing this most excellent platform. One thing I've noticed is that I have not really seen a positive comment or endorsement for State IT consolidation, shared services, or Matt. I think that is telling.

Even from me, I both think enterprise planning/direction is important and that Matt has missed the mark in getting us there. That the projects underway will not only cost more, but not many stakeholders will notice any improvement in services. Matt is attempting to both produce great customer service "where the voice of the customer is integrated into everything we do" and save money via consolidation. In the world of IT, these are two very conflicting goals.

A satisfied IT customer is one where IT is able to customize an individual customer's use of technology specifically to that individual. The biggest cost of a software implementation is customizing software. To the point where you can get the greatest number of people to be satisfied with the fewest amount of customization, the more you save money. Matt's biggest problem is thinking you can save money and customize enough to create stakeholder buy-in without studying this first.

Matt has not demonstrated he knows where this balance point is. In fact, I will postulate that the main reason an IT project goes over budget and takes more time is due to having to customize more and more just to get continued stakeholder support to even continue a project. I think if Matt truly recognizes this, he would do these projects differently.

A great example is the current IBIS project. The predecessor was WISMART. WISMART was an attempt to get a single state accounting package. What happened was a lowest common demoninator implementation. If everyone in state government could be convinced that that was all they ever needed for accounting software, you would have achieved great savings. Instead, it was discovered that everyone had their own unique requirements. Many state agencies then purchased their own accounting software to take care of what was missing.

WISMART is generally considered so-so at best, and a complete failure at worst. So, the real question is: was this legitimate? What IT decision makers should study in great detail are both the shared, common requirements, and the legitimate differences across the enterprise. Being able to articulate both, and being able to convince the business leaders across the enterprise that there are few enough differences to make a project cost effective is what Matt should have been doing.

Promising everything to everybody is not sustainable in an IT world. All of the projects being audited in state government suffer from trying to gather up all and satisfy all requirements, rather then looking at all legitate differences and determining if you can still be cost effective. Or, convincing these same people that doing a project will have increasing cost as requirements/customization is added, but that it will still be worth the added cost. (Cost benefit vs. cost savings.)

So, Matt, and all IT leaders, give us (all enterprise stakeholders) convincing, credible documentation before proceeding with major IT projects. And if you can't produce such documentation, don't think you can substitute support from the Governor's office and then magically get cost savings. Do your job right.

Don't count on any kind of accountability, on any IT project, from any IT leader, anytime soon. The IT leaders hired mostly all new middle management at DET, who were then allowed to hire a few additional staff each. So basically it goes like this. Doyle hired his friend, he hired his friend, who hired a friend, who hired a bunch of his friends, and then each of these friends hired a few of their friends as well. These people all got together collectively and decided to go along with whatever their constituents want because well.., they are under probation to keep their jobs! The plan is usually to pay larger consulting firms modest sums of money to tell them what to do, which usually incurs spending additional modest sums of money to the consultants or their friends as well. It's kind of a vicious corrupt cycle of lies hedged up with good intentions. Another good comparison is the blind leading the blind.

An early poster raises an important question. What are Miszewski's qualifications? You would think that a position at this level would require a decade and likely more experience in IT management.

Here is the BIO that was sent to staff when Matt was hired:

---------START of Miszewski BIO-------------
Matt Miszewski (pronounced mis-chev-skee) got his start in the field of technology early - very early. He got his first computer at age four, and has been fascinated ever since. Playing at a friend's house, whose father was an executive of IBM, consisted of taking apart and fixing computers.

This sparked a love of technology that has continued all his life. In
addition to wanting to work with technology, Matt had a driving ambition to practice law. He worked his way through college at Marquette University by working at IBM, and continued his education at the University of Wisconsin -Madison Law School. It was also here that he met his wife, Kathleen, and they loved the city so much that they named their daughter Madison. Law degree in hand, Matt began to practice law. Coming from a family of sheet metal workers and with a background in organized labor, he planned to practice labor law. He was Senior Counsel to AFSCME District Council 48 due to his labor law experience. He then worked for three years as the General Counsel for the Service Employees International Union where he was eventually named Wisconsin State Council Director. After that, he was asked by the Executive Director for District Council 48 to return, and came back as a partner. During this time, Matt was also advising high tech companies on start up, finance and direction. After cashing out his law firm partnership, Matt started his own IT company which has gone through many iterations. Signing contracts with several large companies allowed him to see the challenges in IT organizations and the marketplace. Whether technological or management related, Matt has always had a love for solving complex organizational problems. In 1996, Matt ran for State Assembly in West Allis. Though he wasn't elected, he built long lasting friendships that
continue to this day. His political work became part of his business world too and he has consulted on several local, state and federal campaigns. Matt also had contact with Secretary of Administration Marc Marotta, who thought Matt would be a great fit here in DEG. When asked what he liked about state government, Matt said, "I want to provide efficient and effective services to the citizens of Wisconsin." He added that information technology is doing that and DEG can be a model of success for the rest of the state. During the transition, Matt's first focus will be on leadership - the need for stability and vision. He knows there are issues that need to be addressed, but believes that with the in-house talent, DEG will overcome any challenges. His second goal will be to address the concerns of other agencies. He views this time as "a great opportunity." With the change in administration, the new executive leadership, and the current budget crisis, he views this as an opportunity for agencies to work together and to solidify DEG's position as a creator of efficiency. Matt would like staff to know that he has an open door policy. He wants to meet the staff and to know what is happening in the department. He wants to work on and fix the communication structure. Matt is excited about his job and sees nothing but opportunity for DEG.

-------------END of BIO---------------

If you want to know more about his extensive consulting experience after he got out of the lawyer business, do a google search for "miszewski topical networks" or "miszewski napster". Looks like he thought he was going to make it big in the Internet business. All I can find, though, are magazine and newspaper interviews. He talked big about a solution he had to the Napster music sharing issues. He was going to collect money from the music downloaders and give it to the music artists. He also talked about setting up a web site related to high gasoline prices. Neither of these web sites appear to exist anymore. My searching has turned up no other accomplishments of Topical Networks.