government IT.
Discussion
up anything effectively, its IT.
One problem appears to be that by the time Government IT has caught up with the current situation old Gordo changes the rules again.
Another issue is that all Governments like to complicate rules - they rarely remove or simplify them. All this means more and more complex IT to support it...bad systems breed bad computer based implementations of systems.
Government's habit of buying from the cheapest bidder can also be a problem.
Government also makes its buying process so complex that only huge firms with massive resources can spend the money required to bid against their Invitations to Tender - government does this to try and get the best deal but it effectively rules out any of the smaller, specialist firms.
Government then has payment terms that mean only firms who can wait two years to be paid can take on their work.
My firm will never do business with either the UK or US Governments again. Ever. For any reason.
Another issue is that all Governments like to complicate rules - they rarely remove or simplify them. All this means more and more complex IT to support it...bad systems breed bad computer based implementations of systems.
Government's habit of buying from the cheapest bidder can also be a problem.
Government also makes its buying process so complex that only huge firms with massive resources can spend the money required to bid against their Invitations to Tender - government does this to try and get the best deal but it effectively rules out any of the smaller, specialist firms.
Government then has payment terms that mean only firms who can wait two years to be paid can take on their work.
My firm will never do business with either the UK or US Governments again. Ever. For any reason.
LexSport said:
If I remember correctly, the government had to pay various different companies to even tender for a recent project as in most cases EDS have it all sown up.
They pay for tender because to meet the tender requirements takes a lot of resource in many cases & that would stop smaller firms tendering.
The govt doesn't really like Capita or EDS, it's just that these guys can pitch fo rthe work very, very well, often going in low and hoping to make their money on scope changes. The NHS NPfIT project had some interesting if complex payment arrangements for those bidding for certain peices of work.
Govt IT is pretty crap but we tend to only hear about the bad things. IT firms can only put in what they are specced to do. Govt depts are chock full of muppets who don't wven know what they want and moan when it fits their crap spec but isn't fit for purpose. It's a 2 way street and blame should be on bith parties, just don't underestimate the incompetence of many govt business analysts. There are some good ones but that doesn't change my vow never to work on Public Sector IT projects again!
The civil service is over-run with burocracy and bad management. They cannot make decisions to save their lives, and people who know nothing about a particular area are often put in charge of them (Hello Darling, how's the transport baby today?)
Therefore, the people who are responsible for the contracts for IT haven't a clue what a computer is or how it works. They wouldn't know a fox from a fax machine, and yet are responsible for signing away (in many cases) millions of pounds of money on them. Therefore, they are stitched up, royally, in many cases.
Throw in a great reluctance to admit to mistakes, and an ever greater reluctance to chase up problems, and everything comes home to roost. Problems fester, and are never sorted out. No civil servant is ever sacked for doing a bad job, so there is never any come-back from errors. And as for learning from their mistakes - you've got to be kidding!
Some time ago, I posted a thread about a certain government department's IT system losing a large amount of my work (see here www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=141&h=&t=156204). About 10 days after this happened, I told the senior civil servant whom I was reporting to that there would be recompense systems which could be used to claim back costs in the case of situations like this. Her words were (and I quote) "I know there are. But I can't be bothered with the paperwork, so I don't think I'll find the time."
With attitudes like this, what more can we expect?
Oli.
Therefore, the people who are responsible for the contracts for IT haven't a clue what a computer is or how it works. They wouldn't know a fox from a fax machine, and yet are responsible for signing away (in many cases) millions of pounds of money on them. Therefore, they are stitched up, royally, in many cases.
Throw in a great reluctance to admit to mistakes, and an ever greater reluctance to chase up problems, and everything comes home to roost. Problems fester, and are never sorted out. No civil servant is ever sacked for doing a bad job, so there is never any come-back from errors. And as for learning from their mistakes - you've got to be kidding!
Some time ago, I posted a thread about a certain government department's IT system losing a large amount of my work (see here www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=141&h=&t=156204). About 10 days after this happened, I told the senior civil servant whom I was reporting to that there would be recompense systems which could be used to claim back costs in the case of situations like this. Her words were (and I quote) "I know there are. But I can't be bothered with the paperwork, so I don't think I'll find the time."
With attitudes like this, what more can we expect?
Oli.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff