Rewards For Failure, Part 7094

[alchresearch]

Yes Minister had it right  

 

 

[Bargepole23]

15 hours ago, AKAMD said:

This scenario also highlights the folly of relying on computerised systems.  It seems that every walk of life is now controlled by some kind of computerised system.  Yet, what if they fail?  

What's the alternative? To run paper based systems in parallel is just not feasible, both in terms of costs, resource and functionality.

[AKAMD]

Don't agree with you on functionality; paper based systems worked fine and there was a 'paper trail' to find the errors.  They are feasible but they would eat into profits, which are more important than mere mortals. 

[RollingJ]

19 minutes ago, AKAMD said:

Don't agree with you on functionality; paper based systems worked fine and there was a 'paper trail' to find the errors.  They are feasible but they would eat into profits, which are more important than mere mortals. 

They do work, but it is easier to lose a file in paper form, and wading through piles of paper is considerably more time consuming/labour intensive than hitting a few keys on a keyboard - I know,  I can remember just one part of my job many years ago that took around two days a month before the details were on a disk, and then took about 10 minutes to turn into a report my directors could understand.

 

They got fresher data, and I could spend longer doing the important part of my job.

[Anna B]

5 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

What's the alternative? To run paper based systems in parallel is just not feasible, both in terms of costs, resource and functionality.

Surely, when large discrepancies started to arise on a regular basis amongst previously honest and decent postmasters alarm bells should have started ringing. And I can't imagine the said postmasters just lay down and took it without complaint and didn't try to defend themselves with evidence and/ or explanations.

One manager apparently lost £6,000 just by transferring the final manual account on to the computer system, yet even with evidence and proof of what the error was, it took him 5 years to clear his name.

 

Others weren't as lucky. It has totally destroyed their lives. I hope they all get the compensation, including for worry and trauma, that they so clearly deserve.

[RollingJ]

Good points, @Anna B - but we are talking the Post Office here, and a bit like BT (or Post Office Telephones, as I refer to them on another forum they crop up regularly), they still think they live in the 19th century, and management, such that it is, regard themselves as god, and anyone else -customers or staff - as a annoyance.

[andyofborg]

14 hours ago, AKAMD said:

Don't agree with you on functionality; paper based systems worked fine and there was a 'paper trail' to find the errors.  They are feasible but they would eat into profits, which are more important than mere mortals. 

would you be happy to pay 70-100% more for pretty much everything? because that's what your really talking about. 

 

the issue with most of the systems which fail along with many other things in life is people basically want them tomorrow and for nothing. if you put in the time and money to design, develop, test and maintain these systems properly then they work and work well. 

[RollingJ]

2 minutes ago, andyofborg said:

would you be happy to pay 70-100% more for pretty much everything? because that's what your really talking about. 

 

the issue with most of the systems which fail along with many other things in life is people basically want them tomorrow and for nothing. if you put in the time and money to design, develop, test and maintain these systems properly then they work and work well. 

Or, as I have seen twice - because they directly affected me - the systems are implemented to live environments before being fully tested.

I know the subject being discussed is a national issue, and therefore considerably more complex, but in my working life, I was directly and closely involved with the design (from a user perspective), development and implementation of four complex systems, where production control, finance and numerous sub-systems had to work together and not throw up errors once live, as they were part of critical networks.

 

They were all fully tested in an isolated environment, but using 'live' data, before being released for actual use, and even minor changes were subject to rigorous change control procedures. The first one, designed literally from the ground up, took around 6 months to be released, the others slightly less as they were based on that first system, but simplified, from an end-user perspective, whilst still adding functionality.

[the_bloke]

As someone who works in software with some big clients, I think it's appalling.

 

It's quite clear that the software wasn't tested properly, but worse, it's clear that Fujitsu and the Post Office both thought that the issue was with the users to the degree they would rather see the users in prison than discover and fix the problem and admit there was a problem. That reeks of a total sense of arrogance towards the users at a level that is quite astonishing.

[RollingJ]

3 minutes ago, the_bloke said:

As someone who works in software with some big clients, I think it's appalling.

 

It's quite clear that the software wasn't tested properly, but worse, it's clear that Fujitsu and the Post Office both thought that the issue was with the users to the degree they would rather see the users in prison than discover and fix the problem and admit there was a problem. That reeks of a total sense of arrogance towards the users at a level that is quite astonishing.

Exactly, but neither of those parties are going to admit they made a BIG mistake, are they?