Private sector 'not fit for purpose'.

[Fogey]

So the whole of the private sector is 'not fit for purpose ' because of some monumental balls up involving one contract?

 

Ask yourself a question, why is it that whenever the public sector gets involved with a major IT project it goes mammaries up?

 

When the private sector require a major IT project it usually arrives as ordered.

 

Why? Because the private sector understands how business works. Before signing a contract they ensure that the specification meets their needs.

They also accept that any deviation from the original spec is going to cost an arm and a leg, so they don't deviate.

 

Penalty clauses are placed in the contract requiring delivery on time and agreed performance levels. If there's a loser it won't be the customer, ensures commitment from the supplier.

 

Someone is made responsible for the project if it goes wrong because of bad planning they pay the price with their job.

 

None of that applies in the public sector, they order a system at the cheapest price and then start requesting additional requirements that weren't specified and can't be supplied without major alteration.

 

Halfway through doing that they think of something else they require.

 

No one loses their job, it's public money which is apparently viewed by the public sector as the equivalent of monopoly money so no problem.

 

The common denominator in most of these cases is the public sector and it is their senior management - I use the word in it's loosest possible definition - who are to blame.

 

I have sympathy with the poor sods employed in the public sector who have to attempt to keep the show on the road whilst these clowns think up their next money wasting scheme.

 

Pretty much agree with this. The issue is politicians want to be able to claim victory quickly to win favour with voters. Senior managers push stuff through too quickly so they can get it on their CV and use it as a way to get bonuses and a better paid job somewhere else.

[max]

When the private sector require a major IT project it usually arrives as ordered.

 

Having worked in IT in the private sector for decades I can tell you this is patently untrue. There are as many high cost failures in the private sector as there are in the public; the only reason we don't get to hear of them is that there is no responsibility for the private sector to report their failings.

[Berberis]

Staunton ... Didn't the blair govt introduce PFI?

 

No that was Major. Blair just took the idea and ran with it.

[mjw47]

Having worked in IT in the private sector for decades I can tell you this is patently untrue. There are as many high cost failures in the private sector as there are in the public; the only reason we don't get to hear of them is that there is no responsibility for the private sector to report their failings.

 

Well that surprises me, I worked for three PLCs over a number of years and never encountered a balls up of anything like the magnitude associated with the public sector.

 

The amount of money lost on these failed projects would severely damage all but the very largest corporations, people would lose their jobs and company reports to shareholders would normally reveal the truth.

 

Not saying you're not correct, just surprised it isn't reported more often.

[perplexed]

Part of the problem is that one doesn't understand how the other works. To declare an interest, I'm in the public sector.

 

The problem is that governments of various shades over the years have tried to tinker with things of which they know nothing about. Aspects of the public sector I would completely agree, need reform. The problems arise when external 'whizz kids' are drafted in from a sector which is utterly unrelated and fail to understand why, bonkers though some processes appear, things happen the way they do.

 

After an in depth study, the collective groan is audible, when external executives (who will shortly be moving on) decide for the 27th time in 10 years, to reinvent the wheel. It's like they put a jar of jam in the fridge on Monday, yet continue to express disappointment when the staff go to the fridge the next day and can't find marmalade.

 

Yep, the sector needs reform, but can we please get experts from within the sector to listen to the blummin' staff and get them what they need, not what the government want them to have in order to appear 'efficient' to the electorate.

Edited March 20, 2015 by perplexed

[Fogey]

Part of the problem is that one doesn't understand how the other works. To declare an interest, I'm in the public sector.

 

The problem is that governments of various shades over the years have tried to tinker with things of which they know nothing about. Aspects of the public sector I would completely agree, need reform. The problems arise when external 'whizz kids' are drafted in from a sector which is utterly unrelated and fail to understand why, bonkers though some processes appear, things happen the way they do.

 

After an in depth study, the collective groan is audible, when external executives (who will shortly be moving on) decide for the 27th time in 10 years, to reinvent the wheel. It's like they put a jar of jam in the fridge on Monday, yet continue to express disappointment when the staff go to the fridge the next day and can't find marmalade.

 

Yep, the sector needs reform, but can we please get experts from within the sector to listen to the blummin' staff and get them what they need, not what the government want them to have in order to appear 'efficient' to the electorate.

 

Again, agreed.

[mjw47]

Part of the problem is that one doesn't understand how the other works. To declare an interest, I'm in the public sector.

 

The problem is that governments of various shades over the years have tried to tinker with things of which they know nothing about. Aspects of the public sector I would completely agree, need reform. The problems arise when external 'whizz kids' are drafted in from a sector which is utterly unrelated and fail to understand why, bonkers though some processes appear, things happen the way they do.

 

After an in depth study, the collective groan is audible, when external executives (who will shortly be moving on) decide for the 27th time in 10 years, to reinvent the wheel. It's like they put a jar of jam in the fridge on Monday, yet continue to express disappointment when the staff go to the fridge the next day and can't find marmalade.

 

Yep, the sector needs reform, but can we please get experts from within the sector to listen to the blummin' staff and get them what they need, not what the government want them to have in order to appear 'efficient' to the electorate.

 

That sounds both reasonable and logical to me. Whilst I have never worked in the public sector I have a daughter who worked for a number of years in finance in the council.

 

She is someone who goes to work to work, as a lot of people do.

 

It appears that whilst that applies to many public employees there are a significant number that are taking the pee and are perfectly willing to let those who are prepared to work carry the burden.

 

That is down to bad management, a reluctance to assign responsibility, and the apparent inability to fire the incompetent.

 

They finally wore her down with the ongoing nonsense and she is now very happy working for the university where the ethos is totally different.

 

I agree about government interference, they use virtually all public sectors, health, education etc as political footballs with little if no regard to the damage they are doing.

 

You are dead right regarding asking the people who are actually doing the job.

 

A sure sign of an organization in trouble is when they bring in highly paid 'consultants' these people know bugger all about the business in question so invariably they set about picking the brains of employees at the middle to bottom end of the business.

 

They then sit down and compile a report using a lot of MBA twaddle and charge a fortune for their 'insight'.

 

The organization could have saved themselves a shed load of money and achieved a faster response by listening to their employees themselves.

[Harrystottle]

I imagine the specifications produced by government for the system were pitiful, which means that you have no means to hold your supplier to account. I would also imagine the project management on the gvt side was equally pitiful.

 

All of which leads to cost and time overuns.

 

True enough.

 

But for a true ocean going disaster, look at the failed NHS mega system.

 

The idea was to get all patient records on line, for GP surgeries to be able to update centrally held hospital records.

 

Only one problem. GP's are independent contractors and the NHS (at that time at least) had no power to compel them to buy any computer system that would feed into the main system.

 

That's before yu get round to what sort of data should be held, in what format, how do we keep the free text to a minimum, etc.

 

Despite the fact that GP's couldn't be compelled to supply data to the host system, the (then Labour) government went ahead anyway.

 

Inevitably the project ended in abject failure because the people who said the project should go ahead had absolutely no idea what they were doing.

[I1L2T3]

Having worked in IT in the private sector for decades I can tell you this is patently untrue. There are as many high cost failures in the private sector as there are in the public; the only reason we don't get to hear of them is that there is no responsibility for the private sector to report their failings.

 

Indeed, but some failures are massive and very public. Banking IT a good example.

[taxman]

 

The problem is that governments of various shades over the years have tried to tinker with things of which they know nothing about. Aspects of the public sector I would completely agree, need reform. The problems arise when external 'whizz kids' are drafted in from a sector which is utterly unrelated and fail to understand why, bonkers though some processes appear, things happen the way they do.

 

 

Yep, the sector needs reform, but can we please get experts from within the sector to listen to the blummin' staff and get them what they need, not what the government want them to have in order to appear 'efficient' to the electorate.

 

We are currently suffering both Pacesetter and Building Your Future.

 

Pacesetter was born out of LEAN, a discredited system that denuded people's skills and disfranchised everyone. Anyone who has encountered it knows about inactive bananas.

 

There is now a whole profession of people within Govt departments who do nowt but ponce about making sure teams whiteboards have the correct coloured stickers on them.

 

Rather than doing real jobs