"...where the Next Big Thing has been a seemingly infinite sequence of concepts such as high-level languages, structured programming, relational databases, SQL,

"...where the Next Big Thing has been a seemingly infinite sequence of concepts such as high-level languages, structured programming, relational databases, SQL, fourth-generation languages, object-oriented programming, agile methodologies, and so on ad nauseam. I think it is fair to say that none of these technologies has made any significant difference in the success/failure ratio of IT projects" Those are amazing tools when used correctly, but they don't work on their own. They need people that knows how to use them. In a big project you need a good design or all the structure falls down. Nothing to do with NIH. More to do with how bad politicians are at choosing who is best suited to carry a project. They are mostly lawyers that prefer someone who gives a great presentation than an expert on the field. Smooth talkers who say yes to design by committee, mostly because they are not the ones who work on it, get the projects. Imagine you were to judge Donald Knuth by their presentation skills(he stutters and use handwritten transparencies). That is what politicians do, because they don't know better. Also politicians have a vested interest in expending as much as they can. Basically the more they spend, the more important they are, the more they earn, the more influence they have. Chinese wheelbarrow is better suited for some things, but is worse for others. It is bigger and less stable, and splits the space in two, making harder to transport some objects.