Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

[DotNet Dude]

Yep but every 6-9 mths when the system is full of critical bugs is a joke

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 09:49, mike smith  wrote:

> Even alleged followers of Agile don't always do frequent releases
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 09:43 DotNet Dude  wrote:
>
>> Agreed. Also some clients, especially government, such as Fines Victoria
>> in this example, still want to follow a waterfall approach and insist on
>> it. I know the Fines Vic people would not allow frequent releases and so
>> the releases would build up into monsters that would be deployed every 6-9
>> months. This approach never goes well and in this case certainly did not.
>>
>> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 09:20,  wrote:
>>
>>> I think one of the biggest issues is that so many project managers still
>>> think you can plan IT projects like you plan building a bridge. The
>>> difference with a bridge is that you can specify what’s needed, and it’s
>>> unlikely to change before you finish building the bridge.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Unfortunately though, that’s also how the people funding it look at it.
>>> They want to know what it will cost before they start.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Somehow, we have to get project planning to match reality. At present,
>>> when there are variations from the plan, that’s seen as a problem, and seen
>>> as unexpected. But the reality is that it’s totally expected. The problem
>>> was the idea that bridge-style planning is appropriate.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr Greg Low
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
>>> fax
>>>
>>> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
>>> 
>>>  |http://greglow.me
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>>> Behalf Of *Ken Schaefer
>>> *Sent:* Sunday, 27 October 2019 9:38 PM
>>> *To:* ozDotNet 
>>> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Depends on how your measure success.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By the typical bottom-line, most projects aren’t “successes”. However,
>>> lots of organisations have:
>>>
>>>1. Arbitrary limits on how much contingency can be included – which
>>>then doesn’t reflect the true level of uncertainty in the project
>>>2. Requirements change
>>>3. Vendors, systems integrators etc. go bust, change direction or
>>>what-have-you
>>>4. Your project competes with everyone else’s for scarce capital, so
>>>everyone has an incentive to downplay cost, and upsell benefits
>>>5. Technological cost estimates can be done relatively accurately,
>>>but large-scale projects include significant organisational change which 
>>> is
>>>much harder to estimate/cost up-front.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> By my guess, about 15-20% of large IT projects ($50-100m+) are
>>> successful. Maybe 20-30% are real failures. Everything else is in a bit of
>>> a grey area where they are failures based on initial cost/time/features
>>> criteria, but might have been successful if business cases were allowed to
>>> be more realistic.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Ken
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>>> Behalf Of *g...@greglow.com
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 2:25 PM
>>> *To:* 'ozDotNet' 
>>> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Not sure about that. I endlessly hear that the success ratio for large
>>> IT projects is around 30%, not up around 70 or 80%.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It’s quite appalling really.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Greg
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dr Greg Low
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
>>> fax
>>>
>>> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
>>> 
>>>  |http://greglow.me
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>>> Behalf Of *mike smith
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 12:45 PM
>>> *To:* ozDotNet 
>>> *Subject:* Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

[mike smith]

Even alleged followers of Agile don't always do frequent releases



On Mon, Oct 28, 2019, 09:43 DotNet Dude  wrote:

> Agreed. Also some clients, especially government, such as Fines Victoria
> in this example, still want to follow a waterfall approach and insist on
> it. I know the Fines Vic people would not allow frequent releases and so
> the releases would build up into monsters that would be deployed every 6-9
> months. This approach never goes well and in this case certainly did not.
>
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 09:20,  wrote:
>
>> I think one of the biggest issues is that so many project managers still
>> think you can plan IT projects like you plan building a bridge. The
>> difference with a bridge is that you can specify what’s needed, and it’s
>> unlikely to change before you finish building the bridge.
>>
>>
>>
>> Unfortunately though, that’s also how the people funding it look at it.
>> They want to know what it will cost before they start.
>>
>>
>>
>> Somehow, we have to get project planning to match reality. At present,
>> when there are variations from the plan, that’s seen as a problem, and seen
>> as unexpected. But the reality is that it’s totally expected. The problem
>> was the idea that bridge-style planning is appropriate.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr Greg Low
>>
>>
>>
>> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
>> fax
>>
>> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
>> 
>>  |http://greglow.me
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>> Behalf Of *Ken Schaefer
>> *Sent:* Sunday, 27 October 2019 9:38 PM
>> *To:* ozDotNet 
>> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>>
>>
>>
>> Depends on how your measure success.
>>
>>
>>
>> By the typical bottom-line, most projects aren’t “successes”. However,
>> lots of organisations have:
>>
>>1. Arbitrary limits on how much contingency can be included – which
>>then doesn’t reflect the true level of uncertainty in the project
>>2. Requirements change
>>3. Vendors, systems integrators etc. go bust, change direction or
>>what-have-you
>>4. Your project competes with everyone else’s for scarce capital, so
>>everyone has an incentive to downplay cost, and upsell benefits
>>5. Technological cost estimates can be done relatively accurately,
>>but large-scale projects include significant organisational change which 
>> is
>>much harder to estimate/cost up-front.
>>
>>
>>
>> By my guess, about 15-20% of large IT projects ($50-100m+) are
>> successful. Maybe 20-30% are real failures. Everything else is in a bit of
>> a grey area where they are failures based on initial cost/time/features
>> criteria, but might have been successful if business cases were allowed to
>> be more realistic.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Ken
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>> Behalf Of *g...@greglow.com
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 2:25 PM
>> *To:* 'ozDotNet' 
>> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>>
>>
>>
>> Not sure about that. I endlessly hear that the success ratio for large IT
>> projects is around 30%, not up around 70 or 80%.
>>
>>
>>
>> It’s quite appalling really.
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Greg
>>
>>
>>
>> Dr Greg Low
>>
>>
>>
>> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
>> fax
>>
>> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
>> 
>>  |http://greglow.me
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
>> Behalf Of *mike smith
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 12:45 PM
>> *To:* ozDotNet 
>> *Subject:* Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>>
>>
>>
>> Success stories don't seem to make it into MSM.  pity, because you'd
>> think there's more successful outcomes than failures
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 12:24 Greg Keogh  wrote:
>>
>> Interesting front page article in The Age newspaper today
>> 

Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

[DotNet Dude]

Agreed. Also some clients, especially government, such as Fines Victoria in
this example, still want to follow a waterfall approach and insist on it. I
know the Fines Vic people would not allow frequent releases and so the
releases would build up into monsters that would be deployed every 6-9
months. This approach never goes well and in this case certainly did not.

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 09:20,  wrote:

> I think one of the biggest issues is that so many project managers still
> think you can plan IT projects like you plan building a bridge. The
> difference with a bridge is that you can specify what’s needed, and it’s
> unlikely to change before you finish building the bridge.
>
>
>
> Unfortunately though, that’s also how the people funding it look at it.
> They want to know what it will cost before they start.
>
>
>
> Somehow, we have to get project planning to match reality. At present,
> when there are variations from the plan, that’s seen as a problem, and seen
> as unexpected. But the reality is that it’s totally expected. The problem
> was the idea that bridge-style planning is appropriate.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> Dr Greg Low
>
>
>
> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
> fax
>
> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
> 
>  |http://greglow.me
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
> Behalf Of *Ken Schaefer
> *Sent:* Sunday, 27 October 2019 9:38 PM
> *To:* ozDotNet 
> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>
>
>
> Depends on how your measure success.
>
>
>
> By the typical bottom-line, most projects aren’t “successes”. However,
> lots of organisations have:
>
>1. Arbitrary limits on how much contingency can be included – which
>then doesn’t reflect the true level of uncertainty in the project
>2. Requirements change
>3. Vendors, systems integrators etc. go bust, change direction or
>what-have-you
>4. Your project competes with everyone else’s for scarce capital, so
>everyone has an incentive to downplay cost, and upsell benefits
>5. Technological cost estimates can be done relatively accurately, but
>large-scale projects include significant organisational change which is
>much harder to estimate/cost up-front.
>
>
>
> By my guess, about 15-20% of large IT projects ($50-100m+) are successful.
> Maybe 20-30% are real failures. Everything else is in a bit of a grey area
> where they are failures based on initial cost/time/features criteria, but
> might have been successful if business cases were allowed to be more
> realistic.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ken
>
>
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
> Behalf Of *g...@greglow.com
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 2:25 PM
> *To:* 'ozDotNet' 
> *Subject:* RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>
>
>
> Not sure about that. I endlessly hear that the success ratio for large IT
> projects is around 30%, not up around 70 or 80%.
>
>
>
> It’s quite appalling really.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Greg
>
>
>
> Dr Greg Low
>
>
>
> 1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913
> fax
>
> SQL Down Under | Web: www.sqldownunder.com
> 
>  |http://greglow.me
> 
>
>
>
> *From:* ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  *On
> Behalf Of *mike smith
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 23 October 2019 12:45 PM
> *To:* ozDotNet 
> *Subject:* Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens
>
>
>
> Success stories don't seem to make it into MSM.  pity, because you'd think
> there's more successful outcomes than failures
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 12:24 Greg Keogh  wrote:
>
> Interesting front page article in The Age newspaper today
> 
> about a Victorian government IT disaster. IT disasters are routine (I'm
> sure we've all caused a few!) but it's interesting that they 

RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

[greg]

I think one of the biggest issues is that so many project managers still think 
you can plan IT projects like you plan building a bridge. The difference with a 
bridge is that you can specify what’s needed, and it’s unlikely to change 
before you finish building the bridge.

 

Unfortunately though, that’s also how the people funding it look at it. They 
want to know what it will cost before they start. 

 

Somehow, we have to get project planning to match reality. At present, when 
there are variations from the plan, that’s seen as a problem, and seen as 
unexpected. But the reality is that it’s totally expected. The problem was the 
idea that bridge-style planning is appropriate.

 

Regards,

 

Greg

 

Dr Greg Low

 

1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913 fax

SQL Down Under | Web:  

 www.sqldownunder.com | 

 http://greglow.me

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  On Behalf 
Of Ken Schaefer
Sent: Sunday, 27 October 2019 9:38 PM
To: ozDotNet 
Subject: RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

 

Depends on how your measure success.

 

By the typical bottom-line, most projects aren’t “successes”. However, lots of 
organisations have:

a.  Arbitrary limits on how much contingency can be included – which then 
doesn’t reflect the true level of uncertainty in the project
b.  Requirements change
c.  Vendors, systems integrators etc. go bust, change direction or 
what-have-you
d.  Your project competes with everyone else’s for scarce capital, so 
everyone has an incentive to downplay cost, and upsell benefits
e.  Technological cost estimates can be done relatively accurately, but 
large-scale projects include significant organisational change which is much 
harder to estimate/cost up-front.

 

By my guess, about 15-20% of large IT projects ($50-100m+) are successful. 
Maybe 20-30% are real failures. Everything else is in a bit of a grey area 
where they are failures based on initial cost/time/features criteria, but might 
have been successful if business cases were allowed to be more realistic.

 

Regards,

Ken

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com   
mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com> > On 
Behalf Of g...@greglow.com  
Sent: Wednesday, 23 October 2019 2:25 PM
To: 'ozDotNet' mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com> >
Subject: RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

 

Not sure about that. I endlessly hear that the success ratio for large IT 
projects is around 30%, not up around 70 or 80%.

 

It’s quite appalling really.

 

Regards,

 

Greg

 

Dr Greg Low

 

1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913 fax

SQL Down Under | Web:  

 www.sqldownunder.com | 

 http://greglow.me

 

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com   
mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com> > On 
Behalf Of mike smith
Sent: Wednesday, 23 October 2019 12:45 PM
To: ozDotNet mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com> >
Subject: Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

 

Success stories don't seem to make it into MSM.  pity, because you'd think 
there's more successful outcomes than failures

 

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 12:24 Greg Keogh mailto:gfke...@gmail.com> > wrote:

Interesting front page article in The Age newspaper today 

  about a Victorian government IT disaster. IT disasters are routine (I'm sure 
we've all caused a few!) but it's interesting that they actually name the 
software as VIEW from a company called Civica. The article is a bit vague about 
what's actually wrong, it just says "[it] doesn't work", "the system was 
absolute chaos" and systems are not "talking to" their computers. Does anyone 
have inside gossip about what really happened?

 

There was another vast IT 

RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

[Ken Schaefer]

Depends on how your measure success.

By the typical bottom-line, most projects aren’t “successes”. However, lots of 
organisations have:

  1.  Arbitrary limits on how much contingency can be included – which then 
doesn’t reflect the true level of uncertainty in the project
  2.  Requirements change
  3.  Vendors, systems integrators etc. go bust, change direction or 
what-have-you
  4.  Your project competes with everyone else’s for scarce capital, so 
everyone has an incentive to downplay cost, and upsell benefits
  5.  Technological cost estimates can be done relatively accurately, but 
large-scale projects include significant organisational change which is much 
harder to estimate/cost up-front.

By my guess, about 15-20% of large IT projects ($50-100m+) are successful. 
Maybe 20-30% are real failures. Everything else is in a bit of a grey area 
where they are failures based on initial cost/time/features criteria, but might 
have been successful if business cases were allowed to be more realistic.

Regards,
Ken

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com  On Behalf 
Of g...@greglow.com
Sent: Wednesday, 23 October 2019 2:25 PM
To: 'ozDotNet' 
Subject: RE: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

Not sure about that. I endlessly hear that the success ratio for large IT 
projects is around 30%, not up around 70 or 80%.

It’s quite appalling really.

Regards,

Greg

Dr Greg Low

1300SQLSQL (1300 775 775) office | +61 419201410 mobile│ +61 3 8676 4913 fax
SQL Down Under | Web: 
www.sqldownunder.com
 
|http://greglow.me

From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com 
mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com>> On Behalf 
Of mike smith
Sent: Wednesday, 23 October 2019 12:45 PM
To: ozDotNet mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>>
Subject: Re: [OT] Fines Victoria crisis deepens

Success stories don't seem to make it into MSM.  pity, because you'd think 
there's more successful outcomes than failures

On Wed, Oct 23, 2019, 12:24 Greg Keogh 
mailto:gfke...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Interesting front page article in The Age newspaper 
today
 about a Victorian government IT disaster. IT disasters are routine (I'm sure 
we've all caused a few!) but it's interesting that they actually name the 
software as VIEW from a company called Civica. The article is a bit vague about 
what's actually wrong, it just says "[it] doesn't work", "the system was 
absolute chaos" and systems are not "talking to" their computers. Does anyone 
have inside gossip about what really happened?

There was another vast IT disaster a few years ago related to the education 
system I think, where dodgy contracts were being awarded to mates, and I think 
the loss ran into the hundreds of millions. That story vanished from the news 
and I never found out what happened.

Greg K