In a regular plan of an IT project, an organization wouldn’t be able to anticipate several issues of implementation and some planning practices. The more aligned the project is with the departmental objectives, the easier it is to justify and the greater the organizational support for the project. Moreover, the plan I have come up with realizes the fact that If the operation is critical, the organization should minimize risk. The payroll component of the project was critical. The existing payroll system was rapidly nearing the end of its useful lifespan, and state employees become very upset if they are not paid on time. The personnel component was less critical, since the department could continue to operate, albeit less effectively, without the new system. The telecommunications backbone was very important for future IT infrastructure advancements, but this component was less critical to day-to-day operations of the state. Break large projects into smaller modules if possible, prioritize them in terms of importance of function, and manage them accordingly. Another important point is the fit (or lack thereof) of internal management capabilities with the project technology and scope. The decision to outsource some of the initial development and implementation made sense. It was the management of the outsourcing relationships that broke down. Moreover, for assessing risk, the project should be “unbundled” and each component (payroll, personnel, and network) considered separately. For payroll, the project structure is probably well defined, although the complexity of the organization’s environment might lead us to argue otherwise numerous separate bargaining units with numerous overtime possibilities, tax structures, withholding items, and so forth, resulting in over 100 distinct combinations of payroll characteristics. Personnel is probably less well defined, since many of the features in the new system do not exist in the old, and it appears that the Personnel Department is asking for changes. The structure for the network is probably not well defined. When all three components are considered together, the structure is not well defined. The same type of analysis should be conducted for technology, and for each of the three modules, the technology is unproven and unknown. Furthermore, one should not adapt software to obsolete or inefficient practices. In the case of the company, much time and effort was wasted trying to rewrite the software to match existing procedures, rather than examining procedures and changing those that were inefficient or ineffective. Although the concept of reengineering processes goes against the prevailing culture in many public sector organizations, the perceived need to reduce government bureaucracy is forcing cultural changes.
One of the most effective ways to manage risk is to have a project leader with the necessary skills to match the project needs. Without an appropriate project manager, projects tend to fall apart; at the first sign of trouble, participants run for cover. As the project became more and more mired in controversy, finding a leader became more difficult. The risk of failure was high; the rewards for success were low. Nevertheless, having a single leader with clear responsibility and authority to mediate disputes between agencies and departments was critical. Although obvious, this point is worthy of repeating. Getting multiple departments to agree on project specifications is a major task; again reflecting on the private versus public issue, different departments often try to protect their turf, and compromise tends to be limited. Department managers have learned from bitter experience that if they give something up, they may never get it back. Subsequently, the environment tends to be one of confrontation rather than compromise. The departments and agencies tend to work toward optimizing goals, rather than trying to work toward optimizing global (state) goals. Issues such as who controls interdepartmental databases cause conflict because departments can be in a position where they are legally responsible for the confidentiality and integrity of the data. Implementation of a project in such an environment is obviously much more difficult.
Credit:ivythesis.typepad.com
0 comments:
Post a Comment