Government Report Says IT projects almost always fail to deliver?

Are we really that suprised that large government IT projects almost always fail to deliver?

As Edward Leigh MP (chairman of the Public Accounts Committee) says in yet another report about project failure

"If one lesson stands out from the work of the PAC over the years, it is that government departments are masters at spending public money but often far less proficient at ensuring that this translates into better public services. Basic errors are repeated time and again."

Aren't these issues the same ones that raise their heads time after time?

The PAC report highlights the following areas that need to be improved:

• better planning
• more realistic timetables
• more realistic business cases
• stronger project management
• Better assessment of risk
• reduced complexity
• reduced bureaucracy
  

The Government Has Its Own List Of Ready Made Project Excuses

So there we go.

After all the government has issued it's own white paper through the Office of Government Commerce. Which can be used

as a great ready-made list of excuses. It's a white paper called "Common Causes of Project Failure". These eight causes may be summarized as follows:

1. Lack of links to an organisation's strategy
2. Lack of management ownership and leadership
3. Lack of involvement of stakeholders
4. Lack of skills
5. Lack of proper project plans
6. Supplier chosen on price, not ability
7. Lack of senior supplier contact
8. Lack of effective project team integration

Government already knew about lack of proper project plans.

The obvious thing to do is to set-up checklists so that people who run projects don't miss any steps out. Plus projects should be cancellable at any stage during their development and deployment.

That obvious thought seems to be pretty much why the government turned to the PRINCE/PRINCE 2 project methodology.

And this still hasn't delivered all projects to specification, schedule or cost.

What can government do?

It seems as though thegovernment trys to take account of all potential requirements. So that they can save money by not having to change the system in the future when the law and government requirements change.

If that really is what's happening it's a case of guessing what is certainly unknowable and putting in place more complexity than is really required for best operation.

Anyway off they set with these great huge projects. Ministers speaking with pride about the biggest European project for this and the largest project for that for a generation.

The answer to these project failures seems obvious.

Polish what you have, fix what is broken and don't try and bulldoze everything that's been created since computerisation began just so you can start with a fresh sheet.

Otherwise given each projects scale government is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Technorati : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder
Del.icio.us : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder
Ice Rocket : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder
Flickr : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder
Buzznet : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder
43 Things : Common Causes of Project Failure, Office of Government Commerce, better project plan, realistic timetable, risk assessment, stakeholder