IMPROVING THE DELIVERY OF GOVERNMENT IT
PROJECTS
POST-IMPLEMENTATION
ISSUES
Departments should seek to review the success
of projects as soon as possible so that lessons can be fed back
into consideration of later projects
37. It is essential that organisations learn lesson
from the projects undertaken. A post-implementation review is
designed to establish the extent to which they have secured the
business benefits anticipated. The review may encompass whether
the project has met its business objectives, user expectations
and technical requirements. It can sometimes be seen as an unnecessary
cost, but in view of the importance of not repeating past mistakes,
we consider that the resources are well spent in this way.
Key lessons
38. Departments should seek to review the success
of projects as soon as possible so that lessons can be fed back
into consideration of later projects. In particular:
- reviews should seek to understand the reasons
for cost overruns and slippage in the delivery timetable, as well
as the way in which changes to requirements were considered and
authorised;
- they should monitor the achievement of the anticipated
benefits, which were part of the basis on which the project was
originally approved. Where these have not been achieved, the reasons
should be fully investigated; and
- reviews should be undertaken in a constructive
and open manner with the aim of improving future project performance.
The Hospital Information Support Systems Initiative (Annex A No 15)
Our predecessors were concerned, given the need to learn lessons in good time to inform the development of integrated systems by other NHS hospitals, that the NHS Executive waited four years before developing a mechanism for evaluating the success of the projects. Our predecessors acknowledged that the Executive had undertaken less formal evaluations earlier, but stressed the need to consider evaluation mechanisms at an early stage as integral to all initiatives of this kind.
The 1992 and 1998 Information Management & Technology Strategies of the NHS Executive (Annex A No 5)
Three years later, the Comptroller and Auditor General reported that the NHS Executive had not yet evaluated the implementation of the NHS Number and NHS-Wide Networking projects, which were part of the same strategies as covered above. The Executive expects evaluation work on the 1998 Strategy to be done within the NHS, but had not made clear at the time of the report what evaluation plans it had overall. The NHS Executive told the Comptroller and Auditor General that it intended to issue more detailed guidance on evaluation in 1999.
The Home Office: Handgun Surrender and Compensation System (Annex A No 6)
In our report on Handgun Surrender and Compensation, we commented on problems with the implementation of the computer system, which had contributed to delays in processing claims. We noted that it is important that the lessons of this systems implementation are learned, and we were therefore concerned that the Home Office's Efficiency and Consultancy Unit had postponed their post-implementation review. In the light of the difficulties, we considered that the review should include the respective responsibilities of the Home Office and the contractor, and procedures for resolving systems failures. We recommended that the review now be given appropriate priority so that all the lessons can be drawn quickly and applied to the management of future projects.
|
Sufficient time and resources should be spent
on ensuring that staff know how to use the IT system
39. The implementation of an IT system is not an
end in itself. It is important that sufficient attention is paid
to ensuring that staff are able to use it, and that the likely
impact of its introduction on their productivity has been fully
considered at the planning stage. Without this it is unlikely
that the anticipated business benefits will be realised. Training
of staff can take up considerable resources, often a significant
proportion of the overall cost of the project. Training must address
the needs of users, and of those operating and maintaining the
system.
Key lessons
40. Sufficient time and resources should be spent
on ensuring that staff know how to use the IT system. And proper
consideration should be given to the possible effect the new system
may have on productivity in the period following implementation.
In particular:
- a realistic assessment of the impact of the introduction
of the new IT system on the productivity and effectiveness of
staff should be made and taken into account when planning;
- implementation of new IT systems must be accompanied
by the provision of training appropriate to the required organisational
change to deliver the business benefit; and
- departments must recognise that training may
take time and staff may respond to different types of instruction.
Inland Revenue: Corporation Tax Pay and File (Annex A No 17)
Our predecessors reported in 1996 that the Inland Revenue had introduced a new computer system to support new procedures for assessing and collecting Corporation Tax known as Pay and File. This has been implemented to time and budget, but the Department advised the Committee that the training for the new system had not gone as well as they had hoped. They misjudged the speed and facility with which some inspectors would take to computer training, and had relied too much on distance learning, and not enough on tutor-led training. In retrospect, they acknowledged that it had taken some time to develop the right blend of training. Lessons learnt on this occasion were applied to the introduction of Income Tax Self-Assessment.
Intervention Board Executive Agency: Integrated Accounts project (Annex A No 12)
In our report in 1998 on the qualification of the Intervention Board's accounts, we expressed astonishment that the Board could contemplate introducing a major new accounting system without providing proper desk instructions and without ensuring that its staff were properly trained. We considered that the Board's lack of attention to these issues was a recipe for failure. In our view it was essential that clear and reliable written procedures and an adequate training programme for staff were introduced as a matter of urgency.
The passport delays of Summer 1999 (Annex A No 1)
The Comptroller and Auditor General reported that, due to time pressures, the Passport Agency's test programme for its new passport processing system did not extend to thorough testing of the system's impact on productivity. During the factory acceptance tests in July 1998, the Agency became aware that the examination stage of passport processing was taking much longer under the new system. They did not have time prior to going live to conduct further tests on productivity. Subsequently, output at the Agency's Liverpool office did not pick up as quickly as expected. In part, this was due to a loss of productivity at the examination stage due to examiners' lack of familiarity with the system, and the additional key-strokes and on-screen operations to be completed. Output at Liverpool and Newport continued to fall short of expectations for some time, and it took nearer six months than six weeks to attain previous levels of output in the two offices, with a significant impact on the Agency's ability to meet demand for passports during that period.
|
It is essential that departments learn from past
mistakes and consider how they can co-ordinate better their considerable
resources to ensure better value for money from IT development
41. The White Paper on Modernising Government highlighted
the view that in the past Government has taken a very decentralised
approach to IT procurement that has not maximised the benefits
of technology for government as a whole. The White Paper stated
that the Government is developing a corporate IT strategy to encourage
greater convergence and co-ordination across the public sector.
There may be considerable benefits to the value for money achieved
from the development of IT systems by departments working more
closely together.
Key lessons
42. It is essential that departments learn from past
mistakes and consider how they can co-ordinate better their considerable
resources to ensure better value for money in the future from
IT projects. In particular:
- there may be a need for increased central co-ordination
and monitoring of the way in which Departments implement IT projects,
and the promulgation of more explicit standards against which
departmental performance can be measured and benchmarked;
- Government as a whole may wish to co-ordinate
better the way in which it takes forward major IT projects, making
better use of its purchasing power, and prioritising the projects
it would like to see implemented, to avoid contributing to an
overheating of the market where relatively limited skills are
available;
- there may be scope for encouragement of the development
of greater professionalism in project management across Government;
and
- where projects cross departmental and other organisational
boundaries, and, possibly, costs lie in one body and benefits
in another, an appropriate senior level 'board' should be formed
for the project to champion it and drive it through.
|
