4 ms·

Ha, I'm currently a federal government program manager, so I am thinking about it from the government's side right now. I've also been a consultant cog in a me

by nataz 6y ago

Ha, I'm currently a federal government program manager, so I am thinking about it from the government's side right now. I've also been a consultant cog in a mega-corp and run my own small consulting business, so I've seen it from both sides. Tech folks underestimate non tech challenges (basically anything outside of their domain), and clients don't actually know what they want. It's an age old problem in lots of industries.

rorykoehler 6y ago
I’ve been working in enterprise/government sector for a few years now and my observation is that they need to focus on better systems design. Everything is too convoluted. Trying to make the software fit the poorly thought out and implemented legacy ERP design from yesteryear is where most of the money is wasted.
- eecc 6y ago
  Oh, my last disappointment of the week was being lectured via 2 screenfuls of Confluence with a “it’s more complex that what you make it” exposure of 2-3 layers of encrusted legacies. The PO was flexing and glowing how their managed to build into the new product this synthesis of bad designs. Which means entire departments get a list of rotating passwords by email every couple weeks. The network of ossified legacies just grew one more sprout.
- Aeolun 6y ago
  > Trying to make the software fit the poorly thought out and implemented legacy ERP design from yesteryear “We need a new system, but it has to function exactly like the old one.” Including any bugs and craziness.
  - GVIrish 6y ago
    I've wasted far too much time in my career doing exactly this for federal government customers. My favorite is when someone insists a feature is critical and must be replicated, but when I dig into it I find it *never* actually worked and as such, no one was using it.
  - fallingfrog 6y ago
    I’ve seen several new systems that actually were the old system, with a screen scraper and a web interface slapped on top.
imperfectcats 6y ago
Made worse when you have lots of money and even more stakeholders. Perhaps worst of all, when failure has no true cost, avoiding failure matters far less. The CDC won't go broke because they blew through $44 Mil. Most every other organisation would. That's one of the challenges of government, the lack of creative destruction.
allie1 6y ago
Would you say the price is justified?
seebetter 6y ago
Lol, I worked in hardware development for 8 years and politics for a few and now government research. 100% of problem is the core underlying philosophical concept of the theory of administration and bureaucracy. It’s not a broken system, it’s a broken concept.
TheColorYellow 6y ago
I work in a similar sector but have a strong belief that the software delivery can and should become a capability that occurs within the government. They should be diligent in what capabilities they choose to support. And ruthless in continually developing and pivoting these capabilities. This is true of any large organization or enterprise that operates in a software enabled domain, so yes, most industries. The idea that software development is too difficult and should only be contracted out to fleety consultants is one that needs to be properly put to rest. And to be clear, I'm not saying that consultants have no place. But for the type of technology and delivery as required by the project in the OP - there's no excuse.
oivey 6y ago
Domain expertise is important, but I really struggle to see the 10s of millions of domain expertise at play here.

by nataz 6y ago

rorykoehler 6y ago

I’ve been working in enterprise/government sector for a few years now and my observation is that they need to focus on better systems design. Everything is too convoluted. Trying to make the software fit the poorly thought out and implemented legacy ERP design from yesteryear is where most of the money is wasted.

eecc 6y ago
Oh, my last disappointment of the week was being lectured via 2 screenfuls of Confluence with a “it’s more complex that what you make it” exposure of 2-3 layers of encrusted legacies. The PO was flexing and glowing how their managed to build into the new product this synthesis of bad designs. Which means entire departments get a list of rotating passwords by email every couple weeks. The network of ossified legacies just grew one more sprout.
Aeolun 6y ago
> Trying to make the software fit the poorly thought out and implemented legacy ERP design from yesteryear “We need a new system, but it has to function exactly like the old one.” Including any bugs and craziness.
- GVIrish 6y ago
  I've wasted far too much time in my career doing exactly this for federal government customers. My favorite is when someone insists a feature is critical and must be replicated, but when I dig into it I find it *never* actually worked and as such, no one was using it.
- fallingfrog 6y ago
  I’ve seen several new systems that actually were the old system, with a screen scraper and a web interface slapped on top.

imperfectcats 6y ago

Made worse when you have lots of money and even more stakeholders. Perhaps worst of all, when failure has no true cost, avoiding failure matters far less. The CDC won't go broke because they blew through $44 Mil. Most every other organisation would. That's one of the challenges of government, the lack of creative destruction.

allie1 6y ago

Would you say the price is justified?

seebetter 6y ago

Lol, I worked in hardware development for 8 years and politics for a few and now government research. 100% of problem is the core underlying philosophical concept of the theory of administration and bureaucracy. It’s not a broken system, it’s a broken concept.

TheColorYellow 6y ago

I work in a similar sector but have a strong belief that the software delivery can and should become a capability that occurs within the government. They should be diligent in what capabilities they choose to support. And ruthless in continually developing and pivoting these capabilities. This is true of any large organization or enterprise that operates in a software enabled domain, so yes, most industries. The idea that software development is too difficult and should only be contracted out to fleety consultants is one that needs to be properly put to rest. And to be clear, I'm not saying that consultants have no place. But for the type of technology and delivery as required by the project in the OP - there's no excuse.

oivey 6y ago

Domain expertise is important, but I really struggle to see the 10s of millions of domain expertise at play here.