Published on the 15/08/2013 | Written by Newsdesk
The $1.2 billion Queensland payroll system debacle has seen IBM booted from future State projects – but also delivered lessons about how not to manage major software projects…
A commission of inquiry into the $1.2 billion Queensland payroll system debacle identified it as possibly one of the worst failures of public administration in Australia’s history. While the State cannot sue IBM under the terms of its deal with the computer company, Queensland Premier Campbell Newman, who said Queensland had been “taken for a ride” by IBM, has pledged that the computing giant will not be allowed to enter any new contracts with the State Government until it improves its governance and contracting practices.
He also indicated that he expected IBM “to deal” with employees named adversely in the report and has also indicated he will seek legal advice as to any action which should be taken against current or former public servants associated with the project.
While Queensland now echoes with a cacophony of stable doors bolting and hoofbeats receding, the commission report does provide insight into how large software projects should not be managed.
The clear signals are that large waterfall-style systems development is inherently risky as Agile development procedures would have identified problems early and allowed them to be nipped in the bud. This approach would also have helped tackle the challenge of scope creep which dogged the Queensland project from the start.
Commissioner Richard Chesterman’s report sets out a series of recommendations intended as a guide for future State Government IT projects. However they will resonate for other enterprises embarking on significant programmes of work.
It makes clear that to succeed:
- A project must have continued business justification;
- A project has defined and agreed roles and responsibilities within an organisation’s structure that engages the business, user and supplier stakeholder interests;
- A project is planned, monitored and controlled on a stage by stage basis;
- A project has defined tolerances for each project objective to establish limits of delegated authority; and
- A project focuses on the definition and delivery of products in particular their quality requirements.
