Sponsor's Message

Even the experts often have problems meeting targeted delivery dates and staying within budget as unexpected problems crop up or other issues cause over-runs.

However, producing good software on time and for the estimated price is not impossible.

So why is it that so very many government-commissioned software projects seem to go so horribly wrong?

I'm sure we all recall the disastrous INCIS system from the 1990s where a huge amount of taxpayer money was wasted on a system that never ultimately met the goals set for it.

Although it was perhaps the most high-profile government-sponsored IT disaster, there have been numerous other similarly disappointing attempts by our bureaucrats to implement complex computer systems.

Now we hear that the system which was supposed to help collate and crunch the assessments and marks associated with the new NCEA qualification system is also a real lemon.

Readers Say (updated irregularly) INCIS and other... - Grant Government IT Projects... - Peter From Yesterday... Incendiary devices... - Chris Fireworks... - Charlie Have Your Say

It strikes me that you don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that, given the level of performance associated with taxpayer-funded IT projects, there must be some underlying failing in the systems through which they are conceived, allocated and controlled.

In my experience, one of the biggest factors in many IT disasters is "meddling" by the client.

Just ask any project manager what happens to his best-laid plans when the client steps in part-way through the project and demands changes to the spec. Are our bureaucrats guilty of this I wonder?

In a well run "private industry" IT shop, the project manager would have the power to tell such a meddling client to either take a hike sign off on a new spec, delivery date and price.

I wonder if however, in the world of the civil service, whether some people are simply too scared to be so bold and, as a result, end up trying to squeeze a myriad of unexpected changes into an already full project schedule?

Whatever the cause -- the effect is obvious: taxpayers don't seem to be getting very good value for their money and, at least in the case of the NCEA software, innocent people may well be significantly disadvantaged.

How long can taxpayers afford to keep funding this type of incompetence?

Surely it's time that government took a step back and tried to identify any underlying factors common to all these fiascos.

Book Closed on ING
Hopefully, the final chapter in the long and tacky saga of The Internet Name Group may have at last been published.

Visitors to the website InternetNameGroup.com.au will find what appears to be a statement from the administrators of the failed company advising (former) customers of ING's wrongdoings.

I hope those other scoundrels who continue to try and dupe unsuspecting nameholders through similar tactics also read this and take note of what fate could likewise befall them.

If you want to have your say on the contents of today's column then please do so. Only comments marked "For Publication" will (if I have time) be published in the readers' comments section.

Just add a couple of lines of JavaScript to your pages and you can get a free summary of Aardvark's daily commentary -- automatically updated each and every week-day.

Aardvark also makes a summary of this daily column available via XML using the RSS format. More details can be found here.

Contact me if you decide to use either of these feeds and have any problems.

Linking Policy
Want to link to this site? Check out Aardvark's Linking Policy.

Did you tell someone else about Aardvark today? If not then do it now!