P&P August 2015

IT PROJECT continued from page 7

Don’t assume that by leveraging an existing contract vehicle that you will get something faster. While that may be the case, it is not always, and you could be sacrificing getting the right solution. In the end, it could cost you far more to use that approach than it would to consider all solutions and create competition in the marketplace. Take Control and Move Forward Much is being done to mitigate failed IT projects and to improve project outcomes to achieve business goals. The market is seeing innovative changes in how states are approaching large-scale enterprise initiatives with positive results. Technology alone will not solve your business problems. You need to take control of your projects, advocate for your business, and consider all aspects of a business project. Plan and manage projects holistically, neutrally, and inclusively to ensure a successful outcome. Before identifying a tech- nology solution, putting out an RFP, or procuring a product, take a step back. Make sure you are clear about the problem at hand and the business goals you hope to achieve. Be reflective and sincere about what you can and cannot do on your own. There are consultants who can help you plan these efforts and achieve your defined goals. An outside perspec- tive is valuable to help you properly identify the business problem, estab- lish the metrics to meet your business goals, select the right solution path, and validate and verify that you are getting the system for which you paid. An outside perspective can produc- tively challenge the status quo, thereby improving internal processes and sub- sequent results. Changing the way you approach business projects will provide new opportunities for achieving business goals of cost savings, effi- ciency gains, outcomes improvement, and effective returns on investments.

implementation. Typically the planning vendor provides strategic planning, business requirements, project man- agement, testing, and training. The technology vendor provides design, development, and implementation of the technology solution. This approach introduces separation of skills so that you are purchasing the best domain- specific experience on the market. It also introduces a conflict-free phi- losophy that avoids perceived “gold plating” and creates more competition in the vendor marketplace. Investing effort up front in business service design or transformation will also result in increased project success. For years, you’ve been hearing about interoperability of systems. While this is a great idea, it might have been premature to think about how systems can interoperate, when the programs hadn’t yet figured it out. The movement to interoperable service delivery models across programs may allow for increased revenue maximiza- tion, decreased costs, and improved quality of service for recipients. There are many decisions and planning activ- ities that must occur. Focusing on these things at the outset, before bringing in an IT vendor, will result in improved business requirements for the ultimate technology solution(s) to support it. Another area of critical consideration should be the various procurement approaches and contract vehicles that are available. As you plan your project, you’ll need to evaluate funding options and work with federal partners to develop the appropriate planning documents, identify and evaluate various procurement options, and develop clear and comprehensive RFP scope language. Think clearly about the things that are important to you and that have business impact when creating service-level agreements and liquidated damages. Working closely with your procurement office and considering the pros and cons of all contract models are critical to creating a competitive procurement process and ultimately selecting the best vendor to meet your needs.

expedite a solution, you are inviting bias and limitations based upon their skills, experiences, available assets, and/or solution offerings. These solu- tions may not be the best answer to solve the problem at hand. Some contracts are 8–10 years in duration, and the incumbent IT vendor may be tapped to add functionality to whatever custom-developed solution it is responsible for supporting. Over time, the core functionality of the systems are so bastardized that they are unrecognizable, fragmented, and unreliable. Modules are appended in different code bases, duct-taped, and colored with paint to make them pretty. The result: a very unreliable and costly system to maintain. You may have saved some time in the procure- ment cycle, but you cost yourself more in maintenance dollars. There is also the opportunity cost of not procuring a potentially more innovative or robust New approaches to business-driven, holistic project implementation offer the ability to reduce project failures, make data-driven investment decisions, and quantifiably evaluate the return on those investments. These include the use of multi-vendor contract models, integrated service delivery models, and transformation of procurement approaches and contract vehicles. In addition to the technology components, many IT projects require data analytics, business process re-engineering, and organizational change management in order to truly succeed. The odds of finding any one vendor that can do all of these things well—and in a timely and cost-efficient manner—are slim. The use of multi-vendor contract models has become more prevalent in the public sector. This has evolved from the federal requirements for independent verification and valida- tion services. This model separates the business planning from the tech- nological design, development, and solution to meet your needs. Separating Business Planning from Technology Design

Carole Hussey is an associate manager at PCG Human Services.

August 2015   Policy&Practice 35