4 ms·

Which is exactly what they do in 9.9/10 cases. As an example, Healthcare.gov was built via a contract with CGI.

• ryanianian 6y ago
  Yes but this whole set of "playbooks" seems to be written for government agencies who are doing the work in-house. The playbooks aren't wrong, but it's silly to think they'll actually fix the issue of technology not being a government's core competency.
  • bladegash 6y ago
    Yeah, that’s a fair point. It’s going to take more than a playbook to fix the problems, but there are some movements in the right direction. Government is just very very slow to change. Sometimes that’s a good thing, but not so much when it comes to technology.
  • jolux 6y ago
    No, but setting up more agencies to do the work in-house and follow guidelines to this will fix it.
  • dimmke 6y ago
    This is wrong - This playbook actually came out of fixing Healthcare.gov. The original version of Healthcare.gov that failed and had all those issues WAS contracted out. Your premise that the government should just contract out tech is bad because it already does contract out the vast majority of it. And the results are still bad in a lot of cases. This playbook has become something that a lot of contracting companies that specifically focus on doing good dev work specifically call out in their websites and marketing. Ex: https://digitalservicescoalition.org/#/story https://digitalservicescoalition.org/#/story