Although many things have changed over the years, the fundamentals of execution, management, and governance remain the same.
October 28, 2013 | by Faisal Hoque
The recent NY Times article – From the Start, Signs of Trouble at Health Portal tells an all too familiar tale of governance and execution failure. It reports:
“For the past 12 days, a system costing more than $400 million and billed as a one-stop click-and-go hub for citizens seeking health insurance has thwarted the efforts of millions to simply log in. Interviews with two dozen contractors, current and former government officials, insurance executives and consumer advocates, as well as an examination of confidential administration documents, point to a series of missteps — financial, technical and managerial — that led to the troubles.”
Although many things have changed over the years, the fundamentals of execution, management, and governance remain the same. The industry (both private and public sector) is littered with failed complex business and technology initiatives such as the Healthcare.gov launch.
In 2002, I wrote in the Wall Street Journal:
“With rare exceptions, then, the so called strategic application of technology is little more than a grand experiment which demonstrates a disconnect between business and technology. ….it seems logical that people who are actually going to use a system would have a major role in designing it. But logic can be elusive; few project teams reach out as broadly as they should in their work.”
Over the last 20 plus years I have seen way too many of these failures up close. I have worked on complex roll-outs in both the private and public sectors, studied them, written page after page about them, and created companies and research think-tanks in the hopes of fixing similar management disconnects.
For complex projects such as Healtcare.Gov, first, you have to break the broad goal down into a set of execution capabilities enabled with cohesive governance procedures and risk mitigation.
Read the full article @HuffPost.