Advertisement
*
Reproduction permitted for personal use only. For reprints and reprint permission, contact reprints@wistechnology.com.

State IT failures are not inevitable

Madison, Wis. - Are state government information technology consolidation projects bound to be expensive, problematic, and time-consuming?

Matt Miszewski, the CIO for the State of Wisconsin, has indicated the problems Wisconsin is having with IT consolidation are not unusual for large state projects. He has plenty of support on that point, especially from other government CIOs, but are cost overruns, implementation delays, and outright failures really inevitable?

Christopher Baum, a research vice president for Gartner, Inc., a Stamford, Conn.-based information technology and research analysis firm, recently provided an outside perspective on state government IT consolidation. Baum is a big believer that little in life is inevitable, but he also knows there are a lot of factors working against such large-scale projects. He said most state government projects run into trouble for six reasons:

Complicated governance models that feature competing factions and different sets of expectations and motivations. "It's very seldom that you have vision alignment for this kind of project," he noted.

Unrealistic expectations, especially when projects are oversold - and most, but not all, are oversold.
Advertisement
Political friction, which Baum called "the nature of the beast." Even when Republicans and Democrats agree on the need for IT consolidation, there will be friction and finger pointing.

Funding issues. Not necessarily a lack of funding, but poorly applied funding. Baum said governments traditionally fund projects in individual agencies. When they try implement change across agencies, as is the case with IT consolidation, they can run into trouble. Sometimes, compliance issues become overwhelming.

The lack of independent verification and validation, especially when working with systems integrators. "You need an independent overseer," Baum stated. "Sometimes, you need people who don't have an emotional attachment."

Appointing the wrong IT management team. On occasion, Baum said, the responsibility simply is given to the wrong people, either someone who is politically connected or who has the wrong motivation.

Courting the ideal

Ideally, IT consolidation is supposed to bring cost savings, secure infrastructure, and improved information sharing and data integration. Gov. Jim Doyle hired Miszewski as the state's CIO in 2003 to bring greater efficiency to the state's information technology enterprise, and he certainly expected some bumps and detours along the way. But given the expensive snags that some large-scale IT projects have encountered, some believe promised savings - a moving target now pegged at $9 million annually - will never materialize.

The latest shoe to drop is the University of Wisconsin System's likely jettisoning of new payroll software after spending a cool $26 million on the project, which has led to calls for more effective legislative oversight of state IT contracts. Prior to that, the cost overruns and implementation delays that have frustrated large IT projects in several state agencies already had cost millions of taxpayer dollars, prompting the Joint Legislative Audit Committee to authorize an audit into IT purchases.

Baum said a lot of wasteful spending could be eliminated by a willingness to kill projects if they are out of alignment at an early, pre-determined milestone juncture. The "deep-six/kill" mechanism means that money will be lost, but it also means that losses will be cut. "It's hard to lose $170,000 on a project," Baum acknowledged, but that's better than losing even more money because nobody has the will to apply the brakes to failed projects.

"Unfortunately, this is looked at as a failure," Baum added, when it actually could be, or lead to, a success.

In a recent national assessment of state IT consolidation, the National Association of State CIOs surveyed state government CIOs regarding their consolidation and shared services initiatives. Eighty percent identified workforce resistance to change as an obstacle or challenge to their consolidation effort, but Baum said change isn't the issue.

"The conventional wisdom is that people resist change," he said. "That's wrong. People resist loss."

To illustrate, he said few if any would resist receiving $1 million tax-free, which is a change, but they would resist being held up at gunpoint, which involves a loss. Thanks in part to what Baum called "improper visioning," they also may resist the loss of a given technology that has allowed them to perform their jobs well and forge a successful career in the process.

"Typically, as a best practice, change management or acceptance training should be part of any major project," he said.

Management style

Meanwhile, Miszewski plows ahead with IT consolidation, predicting that complete agency migration will occur by July of 2007 "unless something changes." Many in Wisconsin lay the state's problems at the feet of Miszewski, a 1995 graduate of the University of Wisconsin-Madison Law School who started his own IT consulting company, Topical Networks, and also focused on labor law in private practice. One year ago, he was hailed by Government Technology magazine as one of its 25 "Doers, Dreamers, and Drivers." Today, some state employees characterize Miszewski as arrogant, egotistical, and inexperienced.

Few would deny that state CIOs face a unique set of challenges, but some believe Miszewski's approach has made matters worse. "He wants to be able to make everything happen, but he doesn't have the experience to make a good judgment on whether it's realistic or not," said one state employee who did not want to be identified. "He loves an audience. He loves to get up and talk about things that have happened in the past tenses that haven't even begun yet. It's just a combination of someone who did not have the experience to make key decisions in a project, any project this large."

Baum believes a number of management styles can be successful, depending on the project and the stage of a project. He said there are times when it's appropriate to bring in someone who is going make a change at any cost, just as there are stages in the life cycle of a project where consensus building is required. "I think a lot of projects fail because managers have only one management style," he stated.

Miszewski, meanwhile, believes it's his job to overcome cultural resistance, and he prefers to build bridges. "I certainly have some large-scale challenges, and there are two things you need to do to make those things happen," he said. "One is to try to build as many bridges as you can to make sure that folks understand the vision that you're driving for, to try to get as much buy-in as you can in that process, and work directly with your customer base to make that happen.

"And when all else fails, you need to lead, and there have been occasions where I have needed to lead the enterprise, and I don't shy away from that."

Miszewski now believes the state has a firmer grasp on what he agrees is an ambitious project. "Certainly, when you're starting to build the project, you don't know all the intricacies that you find out as the project moves on," he said. "So, certainly, the complexity was more than we anticipated when we started, but now we think we've got a pretty good handle on it."

More on state IT

Miszewski touts benefits of IT integration

Auditors outline what they want to know about state IT projects

Audit of multi-million dollar state IT spending will proceed

State defensive on new Oracle contract

Oracle out, Microsoft in for state e-mail project

Comments

State IT Worker responded 3 years ago: #1

It's easy to not know where you are on a large IT project, even for the most experienced manager. Typically, there is a large stakeholder base for any IT project, and you will find a continuum of hugely positive and negative support. Educated, well articulated people can spin any event, anyway they want depending on what side they are on. So, being able to identify an early failure point, much less cut your losses at an early stage, is much easier said then done. So, knowing this, how does one reduce risk? State of WI LAB in one of their audits actually published a nice set of suggestions. I've seen many best practice recommendations for reducing risk in large IT projects. It has always puzzled me why people don't follow these. To WTN: you should research all of these ideas and publish an article about them.

borg responded 3 years ago: #2

This quote says it all: "Certainly, when you're starting to build the project, you don't know all the intricacies that you find out as the project moves on,". This points directly to the problem: doing things backwards. The state should not make large technical initiatives without first evaluating how best to leverage current technology investments, understand reuse and extension opportunities before buying new components, and a systematic and realistic review of major integration requirements that should work out of the box so the state can focus on public needs.

New to State Govt responded 3 years ago: #3

The 1st thing government does is look for “low cost”. Strike one. But assuming you have made a good decision on what to do, you next need to do it the right way. If the State of Wisconsin has an implementation methodology, it’s not very good. Strike two. Even with two strikes, heroic effort can prevail - but only with good leadership. How common is that with a government project and the politicians that drive them? Strike three.

State Worker 2 responded 3 years ago: #4

DET under Matt has done very little up-front analysis. A dreamer I can agree with - a doer not so much. A driver? No way. He did not get buy-in from the agencies because he didn't listen to them. WI needs a new CIO. If Doyle doesn't see that, then maybe we need a new governor as well.

ITSM Analyst responded 3 years ago: #5

Another Gartner finding is that 70% of critical IT failures are due to process, 20% from the technology and 10% due to lack of skills. So what I'd be interested in knowing about State IT:

- Do you have standard IT processes?
- What services do you offer your internal customers and how much do those services cost?
- Have you implemented or "consolidated" technology before establishing solid operational processes?
- Is the IT organization focused on technology or services?
- Is state IT a cost-center? Do they charge back for IT services and drive the behavior of their consumers?

State Worker 3 responded 3 years ago: #6

My, my, so much criticism on the WTN forums is so negative about State of WI CIO Matt Miszewski. Whenever WTN publishes an article that has a reference to the State of WI CIO, they get plenty of comments, mostly negative. I know that Matt gets the whole spectrum of all possible advice. Agencies would have preferred smaller, more focused projects that had a better chance for success to gain proof of concept, credibility, buyin, and better preplanning. Matt considered that too slow. LAB had a best practice recommendation to chop up the consultant contracts into smaller phases and smaller contracts. Mostly ignored. Several of the state consolidation consultants were extremely critical of the cost benefit analysis. They were fired. Looks to me like a risk taker to the extreme. If he were successful, he would be applauded. But most comments so far have been negative. Can anyone on this forum make any positive comments? Let's hear from you.

WI Tax Payer responded 3 years ago: #7

Show me the savings! This project needs an outside audit. If it really comes down to saving money prove it. So far all we have is another state building and a lot of talk about estimated savings. At least complete a part of the project and show us how much we are actually savings.

Ben Stein responded 3 years ago: #8

"Can anyone on this forum make any positive comments? Let's hear from you."

Anyone...anyone...Ferris?

The silence is deafening.

R responded 3 years ago: #9

Agencies are all for progress as long as there's no change.

Ted Klumb-Taxpayer responded 3 years ago: #10

I fail to understand why the State does not look to qualified Wisconsin companies/suppliers to work with on these projects. It would build employment, tax revenue, improve the IT community, improve the success rate, and other benefits too numerous to mention.

The State of Wisconsin seems to shun Wisconsin companies on most projects. Sue Jeskewitz has done the state a service by demanding an audit. Maybe this will change things.

State Worker 3 responded 3 years ago: #11

On the State of WI Enterprise Email project, according to press reports, Oracle bid 2.6 million, Microsoft 9 million and Berbee (the local Wisconsin company) bid 12 million. How could anyone have chosen the local Wisconsin company.


Of course the bigger question is: was the project worth doing at all? Doesn't look like you can save money anymore. Also looks like the local Wisconsin company was most accurate in their cost analysis. So, if you would have trusted the local Wisconsin company, you wouldn't have done the project at all. (The internal agency staff actually had cost analysis simiilar to Berbee's and recommended not doing the project.)

State worker responded 3 years ago: #12

To: BEN STEIN State government is quite self serving. DOA labor budget alone is one half billion dollars, do you hear the sucking sound? Don't get your hopes up anytime that the taxpayers are getting what they pay for. State workers are treated like crap and the contractors get all the kickbacks, like training, the best jobs, free parking, the list does go on.

Another State Worker responded 3 years ago: #13

The OCS bid may have been 2.6 million, but that did not include anti-virus and anti-spam. To add that cost almost 2 million more. So, OCS had an unfair advantage in that their bid did not have to include items that the other vendors did. The cost for those additional features should have been included their bid.

Tax Payer responded 3 years ago: #14

The corporate world is consolidating like mad to save expenses. While there have been tons of mistakes in this endeavor, at least an attempt is being made. If as much energy was expended in helping to find ways to honestly facilitate the consolidation instead of protecting the status quo, I expect the results would be much more positive. In today's environment of "me me me", I doubt that's going to happen, though.

Tax Payer Too & IT Pro responded 3 years ago: #15

There have been extreme failures, war stories in Corporate world regarding consolidation. As far as State consolidation, many Corporate success stories are about consolidating WEB servers. WEB servers are only a miniscule number of State servers being considered. There have been enough consolidation experiences published that the State should be able to base consolidation decisions and strategies on things that work, and to avoid things that don't work (whether then flipping a coin and trying them regardless).

Gartner has always warned that risk from consolidation failures is so high that it warrants a higher level of cost analysis. As a tax payer & IT Pro, I think that consolidation projects should be able to publish and document a high enough level of cost analysis as to pass public inspection. To State of WI CIO: let's see your cost analysis. How did you reach your $9 million dollar savings number? To WTN: publish the State of WI SIS cost analysis and offer it up to forum discussion.

Ken responded 3 years ago: #16

DET, as many other agencies, pay money to Gartner for their .7 probabilty they're are right....it just could influence Gartner's comments. Instead of high paid analysts telling you what could go wrong I think the success should be determined by good analysis of the results.

Innocent State Worker Bystander responded 3 years ago: #17

I would characterize state agency reaction to the consolidation more like sheep being herded. The governor's office support has seen to that. The end result is more like passive resistence, and can be detrimental to IT projects.

I would characterize this sheep like behavior not as resistence to change, or resistence to loss (as in this article), but as resistence to stupidity. The consolidation schedule was created by taking the end target date, and evenly distributing the total number of servers over the remaining months. No analysis about the applications, related servers, testing requirements, scheduling requirements, etc, etc, etc ..... contributed to the migration schedule. Several hundred servers were to have been migrated by today ... none have been migrated yet. Not even email servers. DOA is now retrenching, and promising a more realistic schedule. That did not prevent budgets based on the migration schedules, moving and laying off of state IT workers, etc., etc., etc....

When the State Email systems based on Oracle failed, DOA retrenched and decided to go with Microsoft. The Email project was out ahead of the general server consolidation, but this delay gave them a chance to integrate State Email servers into the general server consolidation infrastructure. But, instead, DOA rebid the hardware and choose different hardware then what was already purchased for general server consolidation.

These are just a small number of examples of questions being thought, but never raised by any of the agencies. And now, we are seeing the results ....

Tim Nuckles responded 2 years ago: #18

Yes, lots of negative comments here. But overall, this is not a happy state of affairs.

In my humble opinion, technology procurement and project management best practices are widely communicated, widely known, but seldom deployed to their full value. And I think that's because they're mostly abstractions or aspirational advice.

What the DOA and the various state agencies need is not more information about best practices. They're saturated with that. What they really need is a set of tools that allows them to implement the best practices they already know about and subscribe to.

I'm talking about written guidelines, specimen documents (RFI, RFP, SLA, PSA, SOW) that are party-neutral or even buyer-biased, meaningful checklists, etc. When these tools are all designed to work together, the results can be encouraging. Not a panacea, but tools definitely help with implementation of best practices (in my opinion).

Tim Nuckles
www.nuckleslaw.com

-Add Your Comment

Name:
E-mail:

Comment Policy: WTN News accepts comments that are on-topic and do not contain advertisements, profanity or personal attacks. Comments represent the views of the individuals who post them and do not necessarily represent the views of WTN Media or our partners, advertisers, or sources. Comments are moderated and not immediately posted. Your email address will not be posted.

WTN Media cannot accept liability for the content of comments posted here or verify their accuracy. If you believe this comment section is being abused, contact edit@wistechnology.com.

Advertisement
Advertisement

-More Stories

WTN Media Presents