Posted on 01/22/2005 9:20:34 PM PST by neverdem
GUEST OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
Carlisle, Mass. — THE Federal Bureau of Investigation has officially entered what computer professionals call "software hell." After spending $170 million to create a program that would give agents ready access to information on suspected terrorists, the bureau admitted last week that it's not even close to having a working system. In fact, it may have to start from scratch.
Shocking? Not at all. A look at the private sector reveals that software debacles are routine. And the more ambitious the project, the higher the odds of disappointment. It may not be much consolation to taxpayers, but the F.B.I. has a lot of company. Software hell is a very crowded place.
Consider Ford Motor Company's ambitious effort to write new software for buying supplies. Begun in 2000, the goal of the project, code-named Everest, was to replace Ford's patchwork of internal purchasing systems with a uniform system that would run over the Internet. The new software was supposed to reduce paperwork, speed orders and slash costs. But the effort sank under its own complexity. When it was rolled out for testing in North America, suppliers rebelled; according to Automotive News, many found the new software to be slower and more cumbersome than the programs it was intended to replace. Last August, Ford abandoned Everest amid reports that the project was as much as $200 million over budget.
A McDonald's program called Innovate was even more ambitious - and expensive. Started in 1999 with a budget of $1 billion, the network sought to automate pretty much the entire fast-food empire. Software systems would collect information from every restaurant - the number of burgers sold, the speed of customer service, even the temperature of the oil in the French fry vats - and deliver it in a neat bundle to the company's executives, who would be able to adjust operations moment by moment.
Or so it was promised. Despite the grand goals, the project went nowhere. In late 2002, McDonald's killed it, writing off the $170 million that had already been spent.
Research by the Standish Group, a software research and consulting firm, illustrates the troubled fates of most big software initiatives. In 1994, researchers found, only 16 percent were completed on time, on budget and fulfilling the original specifications. Nearly a third were canceled outright, and the remainder fell short of their objectives. More than half of the cost overruns amounted to at least 50 percent of the original budget. Of the projects that went off schedule, almost half took more than twice as long as originally planned. A follow-up survey in 2003, however, showed that corporate software projects were doing better; researchers found that the percentage of successful projects had risen to 34 percent.
What happened between 1994 and 2003? The Internet boom went bust. Stung by wasted investments in complicated software systems, business executives began taking a more skeptical view of such projects. They scaled back their expectations, pursuing more modest software enhancements with narrower goals - and far higher chances of success.
Equally important, they stopped trying to be creative. Rather than try to customize their software, they began looking for cheaper, off-the-shelf programs that would get the job done with a minimum of fuss. When necessary, they changed their own procedures to fit the available software. Old, generic technology may not be glamorous, but it has an important advantage: it works.
It may well turn out that the F.B.I.'s biggest problem was its desire to be innovative - to build a new wheel rather than use an old one within easy reach. When it comes to developing software today, innovation should be a last resort, not a first instinct.
Nicholas G. Carr is the author of "Does IT Matter? Information Technology and the Corrosion of Competitive Advantage."
I'm still waiting to hear of even *one* SAP R/3 that ever went well. I'd even settle for one that didn't suck too bad.
:-)
I do a sort of recovery management and when I have to deal with SAP I now for the start that it will be an extended recovery effort.
Seems even the most mundane error can have devestating effects that takes multiple teams hours of recovery.
Too many people think they can solve a process problem with an IT system. This dooms a systems project from the first meeting.
Systems solve system problems, not process problems. Fixing process problems means fixing the *people* first, then figuring out a system that will serve and speed the fixed process.
I'm about to shoot down a CRM system that some marketing folk want to push at my company. They don't need a CRM system, they only *think* they do, because they are marketing people and that's what their trade magazines tell them they should want. But they don't even know what they want to do with it. They just think they should have one.
The complexity is nearly always underestimated by the person trying to sell the system. I am currently working on moving a system that I have maintanined for 28 years to a new system. The schedule that was layed out was totally impossible in my estimation and it has proved thus. There is never any analysis of a problem anymore, just slam it in. Of course this is a recipe for disaster.
bingo.
I like that... There is of course the old: "You can have it fast, cheap, and right. Pick any two."
A large online legal research co. has a 'wonderful' new project. The purpose is to provide value-added online content for attorney customers. To do this, half the project team was selected from attorneys at the company who lack the technical skills. The other half consists of technical people without education or experience in the law. All are supposed to be doing the exact same tasks in the project even though each lacks half the expertise needed to do the job right. Unrealistic deadlines are set, false promises to executives are made, and the garbage produced gets shipped to India to be 'fixed' by programmers. No one will deliver the message because messengers tend to get shot for rocking the boat. Dilbert run amuck.
What's with CRM, computer reads minds, can't remember much, and SAP R/3, system analyst proposals, third recovery?
My IT knowledge is limited. I suspect many other folks are baffled.
ping
Thanks for the link.
Man, have I lived that one. Like f-ing Groundhog Day. And I gotta deliver, sheesh.
CRM = Customer Relationship Management AKA your sales dept. got suckered into buying something useless and expensive.
Could this be a failure to accurately predict the time it will take to complete the projects? I believe so. The project I am participating in currently was projected to take two weeks to lay out the new database and convert the old data. Not even reasonable when you consider that if you get this part wrong, the project is doomed. We are now 6 weeks past the deadline and still working on it. Of course, they brought the user in and showed her the data before it was ready and now she is near panic. The manager of the project was asked to spend the week-end doing spread sheet of why we are late, rather than to actually get this phase finished. I am chuckling as I watch this as the same thing was tried in the late 80's and failed due to unworkable schedules.
It's the most likely explanation. I have seen sales promises collide violently with technological reality so many times I've lost count.
I make my living by fixing failed and/or unfinished projects. I always tell people at interviews that I don't do maintenance so if it's not broken, don't call me.
It's much easier to get people to listen to you after they have failed miserably in front of all the big wheels. Just watch out for the ones that want you to fail too so they will look better.
Yep. I've work with three of them recently. They were all failures of varying degrees. I keep asking if anyone has bothered to test if the complexity involved has paid any dividends. No one wants to hear that. And then we scale back the program three months after the start date because the ROI just isn't there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.