GovernmentExecutive.com

COMMENTS

• I guess the easy answer is use EVM and have a good PMP in charge of all IT projects. If a project busts the budget, schedule, scope, or has a poor quality product in the end it really comes down to the accoutability of the mananger in charge. If the projects fails, do we give the manager funds for the next one, or do we give them three strikes first? I suspect wise managers ensure they have good PMPs to watch the proects and stay off the failure list. I see nothing different happening to those that wing it so they will keep putting a warm body in charge and hope for the best... list, what list? charles coffman Posted November 9, 2009 11:24 AM
• Increased oversight is a MUST to slow down or stop this massive waste of taxpayer dollars. Over the past 8 years, the decision making on IT projects has been based on vapor and sales presentations. The result has been one multi-million dollar outsourcing failure after another. How does the govt keep running? According to the "industry experts", agencies are running too many "obsolete" mainframe systems. They fail to mention that these systems run and get the job done way beyond their planned life. The flash and over-expensive "new technlogy" replacement projects continue to fail and waste billions in taxpayer dollars. How much of that money does the govt get back when the contracts fail? In most cases, ZERO is ever retrieved. Enhanced oversight must be placed on the early planning and decision-making phases of projects. Once the contracts are signed, it is too late. Far too often, inept managers are deciding to fix what isn't broken and delaying the solving of difficult problems. The rule of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" actually has some basic applications here. Prioritization must be given heat or all is lost. Don Posted November 8, 2009 10:03 AM