3 ms·

It's a huge mess of contractors, sub-contractors and consultancies. Enormous companies or consortia bid for these projects, government ministers have no freakin

by SandB0x 16y ago

It's a huge mess of contractors, sub-contractors and consultancies. Enormous companies or consortia bid for these projects, government ministers have no freaking idea about software or technology so hire consultants to consult about hiring these consultancies and get thoroughly shafted in the process. For example, check out the UK e-Borders system [1]. The spec, according to the article is "Under the e-Borders scheme, immigration and government security systems will be linked with transportation hubs to check and log every passenger travelling in and out of the country." On the face of it, it doesn't sound much more complicated than say the Diaspora project, and I'd fully expect a small group of YC-calibre hackers to put together a functioning prototype in a couple of months. It's obviously not that simple, but what do you expect when you hire a consortium consisting of Raytheon, Serco, Accenture, Detica, QinetiQ, Steria and Capgemeni [2]? Christ. And how do you think the existing security systems that need linking to have been developed? Do you think there's an api? [1] http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2202536/borders-winner-set-sign-3607674 http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2202536/borders-wi... [2] http://trustedborders.com/about-us.shtml http://trustedborders.com/about-us.shtml

arethuza 16y ago
There will be no push back on requirements - nobody is going to say "do you really need that" as they will be reducing the scope of the project and therefore the amount of money made. Implementations of complex systems in the commercial world (e.g. global ERP systems) often work best when the chance is taken to align the processes of the organization at the same time. I can't see that happening in the context of outsourced government projects - nobody has any incentive to reduce the amount of money spent.
- junklight 16y ago
  The current cuts are providing some incentive but I think you are right but there is another part of the picture: the lack of incentive to cut is one thing. The ability to see things that can be cut is the other piece of the jigsaw - and I guess this stems from exactly what you are talking about - its not been a necessary skill or a part of the process before. In order to constrain costs both motive and ability to do so are essential.

by SandB0x 16y ago

arethuza 16y ago

There will be no push back on requirements - nobody is going to say "do you really need that" as they will be reducing the scope of the project and therefore the amount of money made. Implementations of complex systems in the commercial world (e.g. global ERP systems) often work best when the chance is taken to align the processes of the organization at the same time. I can't see that happening in the context of outsourced government projects - nobody has any incentive to reduce the amount of money spent.

junklight 16y ago
The current cuts are providing some incentive but I think you are right but there is another part of the picture: the lack of incentive to cut is one thing. The ability to see things that can be cut is the other piece of the jigsaw - and I guess this stems from exactly what you are talking about - its not been a necessary skill or a part of the process before. In order to constrain costs both motive and ability to do so are essential.