Big projects,
soft targets
When it comes to large scale projects, are we focussing
on what we should?
Marc Cetkowski PIPC
Guardian Public, June 2010
Scrutiny and attack between the parties is not a new
phenomenon but I recall myself smiling recently when
reading the different manifesto pledges on reducing
inefficiency in government and the references to how
government manages (or mismanages) large scale projects.
We are going to be hearing more and more about funding
of large scale projects, that's for sure.
Large scale projects seem to be of particular interest
to all three parties – not surprisingly given
the amount of funding these projects can attract. The
Conservatives, in their manifesto, have attacked Labour
recently by claiming: "This government has a dreadful
track record of managing procurement, with billions
of pounds wasted on mismanaged projects". I wonder
how good the Tories' track record is … perhaps
it's too long ago to remember!
So the Conservatives suggest in their manifesto, 'there
will be a presumption against IT projects costing more
than £100m' and 'we will tackle the problem of
unwieldy IT projects that suffer from poor management
by strengthening the role of the government chief information
officer'.
Are these pledges really tackling the root causes of
project failure?
I think we would agree that improvements in efficiencies
and better outcomes for the public are important. Certainly
we should not forget the medium and longer term benefits
and efficiencies gained by well implemented projects.
For example, social care workers in the field have
been waiting far too long for solutions that support
better ways of working, affording them more time to
work directly with clients.
Streamline information
In adult and children's services, projects which aim
to streamline information sharing across government
departments and provide real time access to important
client information are surely of critical importance.
In my view projects such as these are still crucial
across health, education and children's and adults social
care sectors. But why is there so much reluctance to
undertake the large scale projects that are so needed?
Why do these projects end in failure?
A regrettable fact is that most projects fail to hit
their mark in terms of delivering the intended outcomes
and benefits. This happens in the private as much as
public sector, but failures, followed by criticism and
condemnation of money wasted from the public purse bears
heavy on the will of senior ministers to instigate ambitious
programmes with a real potential to transform.
Failure in large scale public sector projects most
often occurs because the 'whole' organisation and delivery
system does not embrace and get behind the need for
the change.
The second major reason for failure is that project
teams do not comprise the spectrum of experienced experts
that have a focus on delivery and fully understand the
organisations landscape.
Internal silos
Gordon Brown, in Labour's recent manifesto launch,
said that technology must be used to join up policy
and delivery. The vision might be commendable but when
it comes to implementation, the civil service needs
to place more attention on really driving momentum and
buy-in of the project throughout the organisation and,
in doing so, break down any internal silos.
This also needs to be matched by getting the right
blended capability (internal staff and external resources
with the expert skills and experience) to manage all
facets of delivery.
So is it really 'mismanagement' of large projects,
as the Conservatives would claim? Regardless of who
is leading the government after this Thursday, the real
focus needs to be on cutting through the siloed ways
of operating and ensuring that projects have expert
teams.
Inefficiency in the system is rife - some large-scale,
well-conceived reform projects are what is needed.
Marc Cetkowski is the head of government and public
sector at consultancy PIPC.
|
