Category Archives: Government IT

HM Courts Service hides “Libra” IT’s new shortcomings

Posted on 15/12/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

A report published today by the National Audit Office highlights how limitations in Libra, a case management IT system in use across magistrates’ courts, has contributed towards  HM Courts Service’s inability to provide basic financial information to support the accounts.

HM Courts Service claimed a success for the troubled Libra system in 2008 – but the failure of the system was more enduring and deep-rooted than thought. The problems were kept hidden until today’s NAO report because the present and past governments have kept “Gateway” progress reports on IT-based projects confidential.

In an unusual step, the head of the NAO, Amyas Morse, has “disclaimed” his audit opinion on the accounts of the HM Courts Service, largely because of a lack of financial information.

Disclaiming an audit opinion is more serious than qualifying the accounts of a government department or agency. Qualifying the accounts means that Morse has reservations on whether figures presented to the NAO are accurate. Disclaiming an audit opinion means that Morse lacks the basic information on which to give any opinion on the accounts.

MP Richard Bacon, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, says that disclaiming an audit opinion is the “auditor’s nuclear button”.

The NAO report today puts the focus on inadequacies in the “Libra” system which is supplied by Fujitsu and STL, with integration work by Accenture.

Fujitsu originally estimated the cost of Libra, a case management system for magistrates’ courts, at £146m. By March the estimated costs were £447m and were expected to rise further. The Libra project took 16 years to complete.

Problems and cost increases on the Libra system were well known in 2003 when the NAO criticised the management of the project. After that all went quiet until in 2008 when HM Courts Service declared Libra a success.

Now the NAO’s Morse says:

“Because of limitations in the underlying systems, HM Courts Service has not been able to provide me with proper accounting records relating to the collection of fines, confiscation orders and penalties. I have therefore disclaimed my audit opinion on its Trust Statement accounts.”

In a statement the NAO criticises the Libra system directly:

“Today’s report highlights how limitations in Libra, the case management IT system in use across magistrates’ courts, and similar systems have contributed towards  HM Courts Service’s inability to provide information at an individual transactions level to support the accounts.”

The NAO says that the Ministry of Justice plans to investigate further the functionality of Libra to determine whether it is possible to provide evidence to support accruals-based financial reporting.

Says the NAO:

“In particular, the Ministry and HMCTS [HM Courts and Tribunals Service] believe that it may be possible to obtain evidence over fines and confiscation orders if a suitable report is run shortly after the month end.

“ However, the Ministry and HMCTS have informed me that they may not be able to address these fundamental issues until Libra is significantly enhanced or replaced with a new case management and accounting system. The timing of this enhancement or replacement is currently uncertain. However, the Ministry have committed to ensuring that any replacement for Libra includes accounting functionality to enable financial reporting.”

MP Richard Bacon, who has followed the Libra project for many years, says:

“This is a disgraceful position for the Courts Service to have reached.  It is true that the Libra computer system is both expensive and useless but we have known this for many years (Cost of Courts’ IT system triples) and public bodies still have a duty to keep proper records.

“We are now looking at a possible £1.4 billion loss in uncollected fines and penalties partly because of the longstanding shambles that passes for record-keeping in the courts service.

“For centuries, people have kept accurate records and accounts using pen and paper. This could still be done now if needed and if there were sufficient will to do it.”

Margaret Hodge MP, Chair of the Committee of Public Accounts, said:

“It is really worrying that HM Courts and Tribunals Service can’t produce basic financial records.  HM Courts Service is responsible for collecting fines and penalties, but we can’t tell if this money is accounted for properly.

“The Comptroller and Auditor General has taken the rare step of disclaiming his audit opinion – the Committee will be looking for HM Courts and Tribunals Service to improve.”

Comment:

It is astonishing that HM Courts Service has been able to continue in operation without MPs having idea until today that the costly Libra computer system was unable to provide basic financial information.

Parliament was kept in the dark about Libra’s new shortcomings because “Gateway” review reports in IT-based projects and programmes are kept confidential. It is a pity for taxpayers and accountability on major projects that ministers are surrendering to the wishes of civil servants who want Gateway reports kept confidential.

NAO report on Courts Service.

1 Comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, change management, Gateway reviews, Government IT, IT projects, managing outsourced services, openness and transparency, private sector lessons for the public sector, project management, public sector, public services, supplier relationships

Tagged , ,

CSC criticised again in The Times

Posted on 09/12/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

The Times has followed up its three pages of coverage of the NPfIT yesterday with an article in which the chair of the Public Accounts Committee, Labour MP Margaret Hodge, criticises one of the programme’s main suppliers CSC.

Hodge tells The Times she was surprised to learn that CSC was hoping for a revised NHS deal – worth about £2bn – after it failed to deliver fully functional software to any of 166 NHS trusts in England.

CSC has said in a filing to the US Securities and Exchange Commission that, based on events to date, it does not does not anticipate that the NHS will terminate its contract.

CSC gave a series of reasons in its SEC filing why the UK Government may retain CSC and its NPfIT contracts, though it conceded that the outcome of its talks with the Department of Health, is uncertain.

CSC also said it has cured or is in the process of curing the alleged events of default. It asserted that failures and breaches of contract on the part of NHS have caused delays and issues; and it said that if the NHS wrongfully terminated the contract on the basis of alleged material breach, CSC could recover substantial damages.

Hodge told The Times:

“Any private sector company that cares so little about the public interest that they are prepared to extract this kind of money from the public purse should not be given the right to work for the Government again.

“If they are going to take such a private sector attitude to it that they don’t give a toss about the public interest they should be treated like a cowboy builder.”

CSC says it has made a significant investment in developing systems for the NHS and has demonstrated a strong and continuing commitment to improving the quality of healthcare in England. It says it has a demonstrable track record of successful and widescale delivery to NHS within the National Programme and beyond.

The Times also reported that Christine Connelly, the Department of Health’s former CIO,  was bought a £416 first-class train ticket for a visit to a hospital at Morecambe, and was flown to San Francisco and Seattle at a business-class rate costing £8,278.80.

American “cowboys” blamed for NHS fiasco – The Times

CSC confident on £2bn deal says The Times

1 Comment

Posted in change management, government, Government IT, IT projects, law, legal disputes, managing change, managing outsourced services, NHS, npfit, outsourcing, procurement, project management, reducing cost strategically, supplier relationships

Tagged , , , , ,

CSC confident on £2bn NPfIT deal says The Times

Posted on 08/12/2011 | 9 comments

The Times reports today that CSC is confident that the Department of Health will not terminate the supplier’s contracts despite the Government’s pledge to dismantle the national programme.

The paper says that “taxpayers will foot the bill for a further £2bn on a failed NHS IT project even though the Government has already pulled the plug on it”.

It adds that the “American technology company Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC) has boasted to Wall Street that it expects an extension of its contract to provide electronic patient records despite failing to deliver a fully functional version of its software”.

In a series of articles on the NPfIT, The Times suggests that the Government is locked into CSC, at least until 2017.

“The Government’s pledge to dismantle the failed NHS programme to computerise patient records is in tatters because it cannot afford to break its contractual commitments and start a search for alternative suppliers”.

The Times quotes a CSC filing to the US Securities and Exchange Commission in November which says: “Based upon events to date, the Company does not anticipate that the NHS will terminate the contract.”

CSC, the Department of Health and the Cabinet Office are still discussing a memorandum of understanding which may end with the supplier’s cutting £764m from its NPfIT contracts, leaving about £2.1bn in place.

CSC discloses in its SEC filing that the Memorandum of Understanding anticipates that the contract term will be extended one year to June 2017 and that CSC anticipates revenue of £1.5bn to £2bn over the remaining term.

With certain amendments “ the contract remains profitable and the Company would recover its investment,” says CSC in its filing.

But MP Richard Bacon, a member of the Public Accounts Committee, has received Parliamentary replies to his questions on the costs of NPfIT deployments at University Hospitals of Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust and North Bristol NHS Trust which show that the costs of installing and maintaining a system under national programme contracts are more than twice that of systems bought by trusts outside of the NPfIT.

Health Minister Simon Burns said in a reply to Bacon that the costs of a Cerner Millennium deployment at the North Bristol NHS Trust are £15.2m for deployment and an annual service charge of £2m. This brings the total cost of the Cerner system over seven years to about £29m, which is more than three times the £8.2m price of a similar deployment outside of the NPfIT at University Hospitals Bristol Foundation Trust.

At Morecambe Bay, the trust’s costs of being involved with the NPfIT (including the deployment of CSC’s Lorenzo 1.9 system) are £6.2m, according to Burns in his reply to Bacon, whereas the typical internal trust costs of deploying of a non-NPfIT system, excluding the cost of the system itself but including training, project management and additional corporate reporting tools, are about £1m-£2m.

Is the Department of Health locked into CSC?

CSC in its filing to the SEC says that the NHS, when considering its options of maintaining or terminating the contract, will “consider costs and risks that NHS may incur over and above those related to termination fees”.

These include:

– damages and costs that may be payable to CSC

– the cost of initiating and managing a public tender, procedure or procedures to obtain one or more suitable replacement suppliers

– the operational risk of switching suppliers at this stage in the contract with CSC

– the cost of alternative suppliers

– the cost of obtaining exit management services from CSC to ensure an orderly transition to one or more replacement suppliers.

In addition, said CSC in its filing, if the NHS terminated the contract for convenience, possible claims that the Company has against NHS include “claims for compensation due to delays and excess costs caused by NHS or for contractual deployment delay remedies or for costs associated with change.

If the NHS had terminated the entire contract for convenience with immediate effect at September 30, 2011, the termination fee would have been capped at approximately £430m.

CSC would also be entitled by way of termination fee to a sum to compensate for the profit that CSC would have earned over the following 12 months had the contract not been terminated.

CSC recognised in the filing, however, that the signing of a new NPfIT deal was uncertain.

Lorenzo “not right yet”

The Times quotes Dr Simon Eccles, the medical director of Connecting for Health, as saying “Lorenzo has had an extremely painful gestation. Lorenzo may yet be a great success because it is a brilliant bit of software but they haven’t got it right yet.”

In an editorial on its NPfIT investigations, The Times said that government IT failures have in common the fact that “we don’t really know who was to blame”. It says:

“Nobody took responsibility and nobody apologised. It is perhaps too much to hope that there will not be more disasters. But if there are, someone must carry the can.”

NPfIT to be dismantled – brick by brick

9 Comments

Posted in Campaign4Change, change management, Government IT, IT projects, legal disputes, managing outsourced services, NHS, npfit, outsourcing, procurement, public sector, public services, reducing cost strategically, supplier relationships

Tagged , , , ,

Strewth! Managing public sector IT projects is also a challenge Down Under

Posted on 30/11/2011 | 1 comment

By David Bicknell

A critical report by the Ombudsman in the Australian state of Victoria has meant that taxpayers will have to bear an additional A$1.44bn of costs because of mismanaged IT projects.

The Victorian Ombudsman George Brouwer looked at 10 major IT projects which suffered cost overruns under the Labour government, including the public transport ticketing system myki.

Mr Brouwer found each that project failed to meet user expectations, was delivered late and overran on cost.

The original budget for the projects was $1.3 billion but new estimates suggest the costs have more than doubled.

The report found the two largest projects, myki and the hospital IT system HealthSMART, would need almost $600 million more than originally planned, while Victoria Police spent $5 9 million on a Link crime database  over four years before it was cancelled. VicRoads spent $52 million on a licensing system RandL, which had not yet made it past the design phase.

The Ombudsman’s Report says:

“In Victoria over the last few years, in our respective roles as Auditor-General and Ombudsman, we have tabled in Parliament a number of reports relating to ICT-enabled projects. These reports have identified significant shortcomings in the public sector’s management of such projects and have included numerous recommendations about how such management can be improved.

“Despite these reports, we see little sign of lessons learnt in the public sector. The evidence to date is that the public sector is not managing ICT-enabled projects effectively, as demonstrated by the current difficulties that Victoria is facing in this area and the increasingly adverse public comment about major ICT-enabled projects. A new and more disciplined approach is required if the government is to avoid being faced with continuing cost overruns and failures to deliver.”

You can read the Ombudsman’s report here

1 Comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, change management, Government IT, IT projects, project management, public sector

Tagged , , , ,

Officials pay supplier invoices – then raise purchase orders

Posted on 24/11/2011 | 1 comment

This morning the National Audit Office has published a report that says the Equality and Human Rights Commission, in up to 35% of cases, raises its purchase order after it gets the invoice from suppliers.

It’s unlikely that any private sector company could survive if it didn’t know what it owed, didn’t know what it had bought, and had to wait for an invoice from the supplier to raise the purchase order.

Amyas Morse, the head of the NAO, says in his report today:

“While I welcome the considerable improvements that the Commission has made in its controls over procurement, there are still areas where it needs to make improvements. In particular, up to 35% of the Commission’s purchase orders are still not raised until after the Commission has received an invoice for goods and services.

“This means that Commission staff are committing funds without going through proper processes and are avoiding some of the checking processes. Consequently the Commission does not have an accurate understanding of its committed expenditure at any one point in time.

“The Chief Executive has made it clear that he takes noncompliance with these processes seriously such that in cases of repeated non-compliance delegations will be withdrawn.”

A common practice? 

Is this absence of proper accounting worryingly common in central government and its agencies, particularly on IT contracts?

Auditors told us that in the case of NPfIT contracts they found some invoices that were paid when they came in, awaiting reconciliation with any past paperwork.

This, perhaps, ties in with the experiences of Conservative MP Richard Bacon, a member of Public Accounts Committee who, when asking civil servants for a breakdown of IT spending has, in the past, been referred to the department’s IT supplier.

On the C-Nomis IT project for prisons, the National Offender Management Service paid £161m without keeping any record of what the payments were for.

The Cabinet Office wants to cut the £17bn or so spent every year on public sector IT. But before departments, agencies and other organisations cut their costs they’ll need to know what those costs are. Maybe they should ask their major IT suppliers? We wonder if the domination of GovIT by a small number of suppliers has got to the stage where it’s the suppliers managing the civil service IT budgets. If that’s the case it is not the fault of suppliers.

1 Comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, capacity building, change management, Government IT, managing change, managing outsourced services, operational issues, private sector lessons for the public sector, procurement, public sector, public services, supplier relationships

Tagged , , , , ,

Chief procurement officer: “40% of government contracts in September were with SMEs”

Posted on 23/11/2011 | Leave a comment

By David Bicknell

The Government has put forward the Olympic Delivery Authority as an example of procurement best practice in the public sector.

Chief procurement officer John Collington told the Cabinet Office  procurement conference earlier this week: “They have delivered the Olympics in time and on schedule in terms of the work so far and they have done so with openness and transparency.

“We in government must take the same approach, so every procurement must start with the principle, what will that supply chain look like and how will SMEs be allowed into that supply chain.”

Collington said that in September 2011, 1600 contracts, or 40% of government contracts, were agreed with small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs), compared with only 5% in January.

Coillington has promised more business with SMEs in the future, along with new commercial contractual models, more instances of re-use of equipment and systems across government and more savings and value for money.

Banned – consultants on some procurements
Government is giving more business to smaller firms

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, government, Government IT, procurement, SME

Tagged , , , , ,

Government CIO to retire

Posted on 22/11/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

CIO reports today that Joe Harley, the Government CIO and CIO for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), is retiring next year.

Harley has been CIO for the DWP for seven years and just last year was promoted to Government CIO.

The DWP says on its website:

“After more than seven years of major accomplishments as CIO for the DWP and one year as the Government CIO, Joe Harley, CBE, has decided to retire from the Civil Service in the Spring of 2012.

“Joe has transformed IT in the Department which has made a huge difference to the efficiency and effectiveness of IT and of the DWP as a whole.”

Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith said:

“I would like to thank Joe for his significant and exceptional contribution to DWP and the Government – he has been instrumental in building reform and modernising our approach to technology.

“Joe leaves us with our highest regards having secured this Government well-placed to deliver major reform in the future.”

Harley said:

“It’s been a great honour and a privilege to have served the Department and Government over the years. It’s been a hugely fulfilling experience. I am proud to have made some contribution to improving Public Services for the benefit of the citizen and the tax payer.”

DWP Permanent Secretary Robert Devereux said:

“I want to thank Joe for his enormous contribution to the Department’s performance. He has been pivotal in establishing commercial arrangements which give value for money, and in the delivery of major changes to IT underpinning services which are critical for millions of people every day. The IT for Universal Credit, in particular, is on track. I wish him well in his retirement.”

Cabinet Office Permanent Secretary Ian Watmore said:

“Joe has accomplished great things in his time as Government CIO, having created and published a transformational ICT Strategy, along with plans of how it will be implemented.

“I would like to thank him personally for his leadership and huge contribution to Public Service and the ICT Profession across Government.”

Minister for Cabinet Office Francis Maude said:

“Joe has played an integral role in the past year whilst as Government CIO – he has led the delivery of a new ICT strategy and strategic implementation plan.

“These will ensure that the old siloed way of developing government ICT projects comes to an end, and leaves us with all departments working together to produce a fit-for-purpose and cost effective ICT system potentially saving £1.4 billion over the next 4 years.”

The process for selecting his successor, as CIO for DWP, will begin immediately. The Cabinet Office will run a separate process for the next Government CIO along with the process that is already underway to replace Bill McCluggage, the Deputy Government CIO.

Comment

Joe Harley has achieved much within the DWP – including cutting costs and helping to set up the administration, based on agile principles, of Universal Credit .

But it was always going to be difficult combining a full-time job as DWP CIO with that of Government CIO.

Harley’s retirement gives the government a chance to appoint a full-time CIO who is passionate about structural change and can build a strong public profile on the need for it.

1 Comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, capacity building, change, change management, Government IT, managing change, managing outsourced services, operational issues, procurement, public sector, public services, reducing cost strategically, reforms, Universal Credit

Tagged , , , , ,

G-Cloud and agile briefings

Posted on 18/11/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

On 22 November the Government Digital Service is giving a briefing for potential G-Cloud suppliers. It’ll be streamed live.

Officials say the briefing will be particularly useful to suppliers whose employees have never participated in a government tender.

At the ApplyCamp, officials will explain G-Cloud, steps in the OJEU procurement process, what information potential G-Cloud suppliers need to give, and what happens next.

The event is particularly aimed at Infrastructure as a Service, Platform as a Service, Software as a Service and other specialist cloud service suppliers. It will be held at Google, 76 Buckingham Palace Road, London SW1W 9TQ – 3pm – 5pm.

Agile TeaCamp – 24 November

Between 4pm and 6pm at the Cafe Zest, House of Fraser, Victoria St, London, there will be talks on agile. Derrick Cameron, MD of software consultancy Eximium and COO of agile software house Procession will speak on “Becoming the Intelligent Buyer”.  Chris Parsons, a “freelance thinker, coder and trainer” will talk about the e-petitions project and the aims of the Agile Delivery Network.

Teacamps in November and December – Government Digital Service

Leave a comment

Posted in Agile, Business Intelligence, capacity building, change, change management, Cloud, Cloud Computing, EU procurement, G-Cloud, Government IT, innovation, Lean, managing change, procurement, public sector, public services, reducing cost strategically, reforms, SME, supplier relationships

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

UK GovIT often a barrier not enabler says Cabinet Office official

Posted on 17/11/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

In an interview for UKauthority.com Chris Chant, Executive Director at the Cabinet Office and head of the G-Cloud programme,  debunks the claims of some that GovIT doing a great job and should remain largely untouched.

Chant says: “IT is supposed to be an enabler. Quite often in my experience in government IT it is actually a barrier to getting things done. That’s no way to use IT. It is supposed to support what we do.”

His criticism puts into context claims by some in the civil service that GovIT is an unpublicised success because of the ease and success of online re-taxing of vehicles, the payment of benefits to millions of people and the collection of taxes.

Chant has made clear his concern that some departments are locked into major IT suppliers through costly, inflexible long-term contracts that, in some cases, are being signed anew.

“In the main we are not delivering good quality IT to government and public sector workers. We are not delivering good IT solutions to the citizen …”

He calls for internal change and describes SMEs as “front and centre to what we need”.

“It is with SMEs that agility and innovation lie, and it is that market we are really encouraging… Good IT is not developed by spending a long time trying to work out a definitive answer, and then taking ages over delivering it only to discover it is not what we needed in the first place. It is about iteration. I have said all along that we do not have all the answers. We will develop as we go and take SMEs with us.”

Asked whether the public sector is ready for the cloud Chant replies: “No we are not. We are quite a way from that… We are very well positioned to operate in a world where our IT is delivered by multinationals but now it is a different world.”

He says that the cloud has security limitations. “It is difficult to see the cloud in the short term handling some of the higher security aspects of what we do but for a lot of what government does it’s about commodity products and we need to get people in who know how to handle that.”

The focus he says must always be on the citizen – assumptions should not start from a departmental or systems standpoint. “We will need to change the way we do things; we will need some new people and I suspect a lot of retraining. I think we will need a lot fewer people working on the client side of government IT…

“We are in really tough times and the idea that we can operate with [current] cost levels is wrong…”

Government clouds take shape – UKauthority.com.

The unavoidable truths about GovIT – Chris Chant.

Vested interests will try to stop GovIT changing.

What exactly is HM Revenue and Customs paying Capgemini billions for?

DWP signs new large contracts with HP, Accenture, IBM and Capgemini.

1 Comment

Posted in Agile, capacity building, change, change management, Cloud, Cloud Computing, compliance with spending review, EU procurement, G-Cloud, Government IT, innovation, managing change, managing outsourced services, private sector lessons for the public sector, procurement, public sector, public services, reducing cost strategically, reforms, SME, supplier relationships, Value

Tagged , , , , , ,

What exactly is HMRC paying Capgemini billions for?

Posted on 16/11/2011 | 3 comments

By Tony Collins

When the National Audit Office published a largely-positive report on HMRC and its online filing systems last month, the department received some justifiably good media coverage.

What was little noticed was that auditors were unable to get a breakdown of what HMRC is paying its “Aspire” systems suppliers Capgemini and Fujitsu for online filing.

Collect your car after a service and your bill has a breakdown of the parts used, their cost, and the cost of labour. But when HMRC pays around £8bn to Capgemini for its Aspire IT service, a clear breakdown of costs is not provided.

Says the NAO report:  HM Revenue & Customs – The expansion of online filing of tax returns:

“HMRC has a high-level view of the overall costs of ICT provision through the ASPIRE contract. It has been taking steps to improve that information and achieve cost savings. It does not yet have a detailed breakdown of the costs of online filing services, so it cannot benchmark those costs to assess their value for money.

“HMRC is currently negotiating with the ASPIRE contractors to obtain a clearer breakdown of the costs of ICT services provided.”

In case you think the NAO has made a mistake, and that HMRC must surely have a breakdown of the costs of Capgemini’s services, the NAO makes it completely clear that the Department has no such breakdown.

“The ASPIRE contract includes a rolling programme of benchmarking the prices HMRC pays for the various contracted services, including those relevant to online filing … Since 2010, HMRC has introduced new processes to improve information on the cost and use of ICT and benchmarking of key ICT service lines. These processes cannot yet provide information in sufficient detail to benchmark and challenge the cost of individual online filing services…”

Unfortunately for taxpayers it is not unusual for a department to pay its main IT supplier without having a full breakdown of the bills.

Several years ago the Conservative MP Richard Bacon asked criminal justice officials for a breakdown of costs on the “Libra” contract for magistrates’ courts IT. The Department didn’t know. So it referred Bacon to Fujitsu, Libra’s main supplier.

Fujitsu eventually provided a breakdown so vague – with high-level categories such as “network services” – that Bacon had little choice but to ask the same questions repeatedly to find out how public funds were being spent with Fujitsu.

In the end Bacon failed – and he had little support from departmental officials.

Now, about 10 years on, Capgemini is keeping HMRC in a similar level of ignorance.

Can any department be trusted with the public funds to pay its IT suppliers billions of pounds without a clear and unambiguous breakdown of what it is paying for?

A supplier’s reluctance to supply a breakdown of costs is understandable.  A clear breakdown could clear a path through the fog of supplier pricing, so it could make price comparisons easier.

It is up to HMRC to insist on a breakdown.  Its IT services have been outsourced since 1994. Shouldn’t it know exactly what it is paying billions for by now?

Chris Chant, an Executive Director in the Cabinet Office, has deplored the high costs of locked-in long-term contracts with out-of-season monolithic suppliers.  Does the Aspire contract alone make a good case for the reform of central government?

The unavoidable truths about GovIT – Chris Chant.

3 Comments

Posted in business environment, capacity building, change management, Cloud, Cloud Computing, G-Cloud, Government IT, managing change, managing outsourced services, operational issues, private sector lessons for the public sector, procurement, public sector, public services, reducing cost strategically, supplier relationships

Tagged , , , ,