Tag Archives: procurement

Cabinet Office takes on open-source specialist

Posted on 28/06/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

“Let’s not waste this great opportunity to make British government IT the most effective and least expensive service per head in Western Europe.”

 An open source advocate and critic of the high costs of government IT, Liam Maxwell, is joining the Cabinet Office for 11 months  to provide expertise on how civil servants can use innovative new technology to deliver better, cheaper solutions.

His secondment from Eton College where he is ICT head underlines the determination of Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister, to continue bringing in strong people to oversee major changes in the way government works.

What remains unclear, however, is how much influence the Cabinet Office will have on autonomous government departments and their permanent secretaries.

Although David Cameron has given his personal backing to the changes being sought by the Cabinet Office, the PM has  little or no direct control over what departments do or don’t do.

Simon Dickson at Puffbox points out that Liam Maxwell has said all the right things in the past. Maxwell co-wrote a 2008 paper for the Tories on ‘Open Source, Open Standards: Reforming IT procurement in Government’, and also a 2010 paper Better for Less‘ for the Network for the Post-Bureaucratic Age, which said:

“British Government IT is too expensive. Worse, it has been designed badly and built to last. IT must work together across government and deliver a meaningful return on investment. Government must stop believing it is special and use commodity IT services much more widely.

“As we saw with the Open Source policy, the wish is there. However, the one common thread of successive technology leadership in government is a failure to execute policy.

“There is at last a ministerial team in place that “gets it”. The austerity measures that all have to face should act as a powerful dynamic for change. Let’s not waste this great opportunity to make British government IT the most effective and least expensive service per head in Western Europe.” 

In a statement, the Cabinet office said that Maxwell will help to develop ideas for how technology can:

– increase the drive towards open standards and open source software

– help SMEs to enter the government marketplace

– maintain a horizon scan of future technologies and methods

– develop new, more flexible ways of delivery in government

Ian Watmore, the Government’s Chief Operating Officer said: “Liam’s insight and knowledge will make him a valuable source to the team over the coming year. He has a strong track record of delivering success in government ICT and he also brings significant experience of turning the theory into practice.”

Dickson said that Maxwell was a Windsor and Maidenhead councillor who drove the debate a year or so ago on councils switching to Open Document Format, part of OpenOffice.

The Guardian said Maxwell has been an adviser to the  Conservative party on government ICT.  At the Cabinet Office he will advise the Efficiency and Reform Group and Ian Watmore. He will begin the job in September and is taking a sabbatical from Eton.

1 Comment

Posted in innovation, open source, public sector, public services, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Who’ll support the NPfIT now?

Posted on 23/06/2011 | 5 comments

By Tony Collins

The departure of Christine Connelly as health CIO at the end of this month will leave the NPfIT’s main civil service supporter, Sir David Nicholson, Chief Executive of the NHS and Senior Responsible Owner of the NHS IT scheme,  more isolated.

That Nicholson is a supporter of the continuance of the NPfIT is not in doubt. He spoke about the NHS IT scheme last month in terms of life and death. At a hearing of the public accounts committee on 23 May 2011, Nicholson said:

“We spent about 20% of that resource [the £11.4bn projected total spend on the NPfIT] on the acute sector. The other 80% is providing services that literally mean life and death to patients today, and have done for the last period.

“So the Spine, and all those things, provides really, really important services for our patients. If you are going to talk about the totality of the [NPfIT] system … you have to accept that 80% of that programme has been delivered.”

But without Christine Connelly, who put detailed arguments in favour of continuing with iSoft’s Lorenzo, and who was solidly behind the costly implementations of Cerner by BT, Nicholson may not have the civil service backup he needs to promote the continuance of the NPfIT.

The Cabinet Office’s Major Projects Authority, under the directorship of the independently-minded David Pitchford,  is now reviewing CSC’s £2.9bn worth of NPfIT contracts. It is known that the Authority regards the new proposals worked out between CSC and the Department of Health as poor value for money, even with CSC’s willingness to reduce the value of its contracts by £764m, to about £2.1bn.

That promised reduction comes at a cost. A leaked Cabinet office memo said that the CSC’s proposals would double the cost of each Lorenzo deployment.

The easiest thing for Nicholson and the Department of Health would be for the Major Projects Authority to approve the deal worked out between CSC and the Department of Health, and simply sign a new Memorandum of Understanding which would be, in part, legally binding.

Strong grounds for ending CSC’s NPfIT contracts

The more difficult but more practical alternative is for the Cabinet Office to require the Department of Health to end CSC’s NPfIT contracts, which would leave the NHS more able to decide its own IT-based future.

Indeed the signs are in some trusts that officials are not unhappy about Connelly’s departure in that they perceive it may weaken the centre’s control over NHS IT.

Legally it appears that an end to CSC’s contract would be feasible. The Department of Health has accused CSC of a breach of contract because of its failure to achieve a key milestone; the Department has also notified CSC of “various alleged events of default under the contract” which are “related to  delays and other alleged operational issues”. The Department is considering its position on termination of all or parts of the contract.

But the Department has not taken its claims to arbitration; its allegations are only a formal legal manoeuvre at the moment.

CSC accuses NHS of failures and breaches of contract

CSC has reacted by accusing the NHS of a breach of contract. The company’s formal legal position is that it has cured or is preparing to cure the faults that led to the alleged breach; it says that failures and breaches of contract on the part of NHS have caused delays and issues.

The DH could end CSC’s contract for reasons of convenience which could trigger a request from CSC for a large sum in compensation. But the Department could give strong legal reasons for not paying. Although CSC could pursue its claim for compensation, it may be on soft ground because of its failures. Also, CSC, if it pursues any legal action, could jeopardise its other work for government: some of its other major contracts with the UK government are with the Identity and Passport Service, which is part of the Home Office.

The Coalition is now supervising its major suppliers, including CSC, in the round, which is reason enough for CSC to do all it can to maintain a good relationship with the Cabinet Office.

CSC would support NHS trusts even if its contracts ended

The  Department of Health is concerned that if it ends the NPfIT contracts with CSC, the supplier may leave unsupported many trusts that have CSC’s iSoft software installed. That is highly unlikely, however, because CSC has a $1.03bn investment in the NPfIT contracts according to the regulatory reports to US authorities.

In the NHS CSC has a large customer base. Through its acquisition of iSoft, CSC will want to capitalise on its investment in iSoft’s Lorenzo software by selling it across the globe. That’s its stated plan. So CSC’s continued support for NHS trusts that have installed iSoft software is not in doubt.

What NHS Trusts want

The best outcome of the negotiations with CSC, for NHS trusts that have installed iSoft software, is that they have the:

-choice to continue with CSC if the price is right

– buy support elsewhere, or

– choose a different product.

Will CSC’s NPfIT contracts end by mutual agreement? – it’s possible

The question is: does the Cabinet Office have the courage to end CSC’s contract, freeing up billions of pounds that would otherwise have been spent on the NPfIT without a commensurate return for taxpayers, the NHS or patients?

It seems  so, even if it means paying a relatively painless sum to CSC as compensation for termination.

Leaked memo reveals CSC’s plans.

A sign that coalition reforms will change behaviour of major suppliers.

Health CIO resigns – Cabinet Office executive steps in.

Example of a trust that’s succeeding without the NPfIT – Trafford General Hospital.

Connelly at odds with PM over NPfIT value for money?

NHS CIO in dramatic resignation.

5 Comments

Posted in NHS, npfit, outsourcing, public sector, public services, supplier relationships, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Agile is brilliant says DWP’s head of major programmes

Posted on 17/06/2011 | Leave a comment

Steve Dover, head of major programmes at the Department for Work and Pensions, is qu0ted in Computer Weekly as saying of agile methods:

“It’s a brilliant, brilliant methodology … Get it right. Don’t pay it lip service.”

 Mark O’Neill, CIO at the Department for Communities and Local Government and leader of the government’s “skunkworks” team to promote innovation, is quoted as saying: “SIs [systems integrators – large IT companies] must recognise that the old world is dead and they have to change their model”.

But Malcom Whitehouse, DWP deputy CIO, implied there was some work only systems integrators could handle.

Agile can fix failed GovIT says lawyer.

Steve Dover on YouTube – the benefits of agile in GovIT [for the Institute for Government]

Cabinet Office turns to agile SMEs to reform Whitehall IT.

Leave a comment

Posted in Agile, Campaign4Change, innovation, public sector, public services

Tagged , , , , , , ,

Alpha.gov.uk shows how agile can work in government

Posted on 02/06/2011 | 2 comments

By Tony Collins

Harry Metcalfe, managing director of Dextrous Web, has written an excellent article on Alpha.gov.uk.

Alpha.gov.uk is a prototype, built in response to some of the challenges laid down in a report by Martha Lane Fox last year. The two main objectives of Alphagov are to:

– test, in public, a prototype of a new, single UK Government website

– design and build a UK Government website using open, agile, multi-disciplinary product development techniques and technologies, shaped by a preoccupation with user needs.

It’s clear from Metcalfe’s post that he  understands the unbending ways of government. He sees the opportunities too. He says:

“As a technical solution, this [Alphagov] is brilliant. If you’re going to have a single [web] platform, this is the right kind of platform to have, because it embraces change.

“If you want some new functionality, add an app for it. If you need a new department, add a new instance of the department app, add your content, and you’ll have 90% of what you need.

“If you want to run a consultation using someone’s third-party tool, just have them brand it appropriately and write an app that gives you as much integration as you want, or as the tool can support. But this kind of flexibility is powerful. In many respects it’s anathema to the way government works.

“For a start, it requires something government unwisely gave up on long ago: an in-house development team…”

Campaign4Change comment:

Alphagov is not yet handling transactions. Indeed there are no agile-developed systems that handle passport applications or tax self-assessment.

As Metcalfe says: “…transactions are complicated, messy beasts, unavoidably bound up with business processes and legislation; empires, politics and entrenched positions; long contracts and vast sums of money.. it’s not primarily a technological problem. It’s a process problem, and those are much harder to fix.”

It may be a matter of time, though, before agile becomes far more prevalent in public sector IT. Universal Credit is based on agile, in a programme run in part by the redoubtable Joe Harley, the UK Government’s CIO.

Harley told the Public Accounts Committee last month:

“In the waterfall it takes quite a while to do a design – maybe a year or two … By the time we come to execute, things have moved on.

“In the agile world, it is a way of providing rapid solutions very quickly. Normally, and in Universal Credit it is monthly, one designs, develops, implements and produces a product very early on in the cycle. It is particularly useful and appropriate when the users themselves – in the universal credit, citizens themselves – can participate in the creation of it. It is about user-centric, rapid deployment solutions. That is what we hope to achieve.”

Ian Watmore, Chief Operating Officer at the Cabinet Office, told the same committee that the government objective is for the first claims under Universal Credit to be paid by October 2013. He said: “I would have thought that if we achieve that, it will become the precedent and benchmark for Government projects.”

We hope Universal Credit is a timely success and that it becomes a benchmark for government projects. It’s easy to talk down the chances of agile in government on the basis that it ill suits the way government works. But Francis Maude, officials in the Cabinet Office, and Alphagov’s developers want to change the way government works.

To say that agile won’t work in government is like telling someone who’s obese that they need not eat less because history shows they won’t be able to.

Government must spend less. And agile is one way to cut spending. Alphagov is showing the way.

How Alpha.gov.uk came about:

Last year Martha Lane Fox published suggestions on reforming UK Government’s online. At the launch of her report (subtitled “revolution, not evolution”) she recommended:

“…Putting the needs of citizens ahead of those of departments”

She made a strong case for the UK Government to adopt a single web domain, analogous to the BBC’s use of BBC.co.uk, and recommended a radical change in how gov.uk sites are produced:

“Government should take advantage of the more open, agile and cheaper digital technologies to deliver simpler and more effective digital services to users.”

Links:

How Alphagov might change UK government for the better.

Institute for Government: what’s wrong with government IT?

Agile in government IT – don’t knock it.

10 things Alphagov gets right.

10 things Alphagov gets wrong.

Alpha.gov.uk

2 Comments

Posted in Agile, Campaign4Change, innovation, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , ,

Agile in Government IT – don’t knock it

Posted on 20/05/2011 | 1 comment

By Tony Collins

Alistair Maughan, a lawyer who specialises in large ICT projects, argues that agile won’t work in government ICT.

“The Government ICT strategy had some good ideas. Agile project management isn’t one of them,” says Maughan in a cogent and informed blog post for Computer Weekly.

I asked the Institute for Government to respond to Maughan’s comments. The Institute advocates agile in its report System Error: Fixing the flaws in government IT.

My thanks to Jerrett Myers, a senior researcher at the Institute, who has written the piece below, in response to Maughan’s comments.

Agile government ICT – a question of innovation

Like any management innovation, there are plenty of challenges in adopting an agile approach, but fortunately none are insurmountable.  The innovation guru Everett Rogers outlines a series of factors that influence the rate of adoption of an innovation – in effect setting out a test for how likely it is for an innovation to be implemented.

The first is test is the relative advantage of the innovation – the degree to which a new way of working is perceived as superior. Government departments and agencies have reported extremely positive results from agile projects. Indeed, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ordnance Survey and the Ministry of Defence have all used agile methods for delivering ICT projects.

Regularly changing priorities, advances in technology and the desire for more cost-effective and user-led solutions require a far more responsive approach to running ICT projects.  Of the thousands of people who have downloaded our recent report, we have had an overwhelmingly positive response to the idea for government.

So how can government make it work? The second innovation success factor is ‘trialability’ – can departments test out this approach on a limited basis.  Again, the good news is that at relatively low cost, departments can use an agile approach for running ICT projects – and indeed they are committed to doing so.

The third characteristic is ‘observability’ – are the results of the innovation visible to others.  Whitehall has committed to creating a centre of excellence across government and the private sector which can enable fast start-up and mobilisation for agile projects.  It will also establish a cross government approach and capabilities for agile.  This should serve to raise the profile and ‘observability’ of agile projects.

The fourth factor is complexity – how difficult is an innovation to use and understand.  Here, the government faces a greater challenge.  New skills will be required which are ‘in-house’ rather than bought in through contractors.  This includes making difficult trade-offs and prioritising effectively. Regular testing, planning and demonstration will need to take place to handle risks. And by taking part in agile projects, it can serve to internalise agile values, build skills and help to foster support, understanding and momentum for change.

The final factor is perhaps the greatest barrier to overcome – compatibility – the degree to which an innovation is consistent with existing values, norms and operating procedures.  Maughan underscores how different the agile approach is for running ICT projects. The project approval processes and legal arrangements governing contracts need to be adapted to be far more responsive and receptive to agile delivery.

Equally important is the culture of empowerment that needs to surround projects.  Fortunately, the experience in other large organisations in the public and private sector suggest this transition is possible.

At a large government agency, budgeting and governance processes have changed to accommodate and encourage more agile projects.  Its new investment approval process involves obtaining early permission to fund development immediately without a fully specified business case being approved (although a robust justification must still be provided). The projects are given permission to spend at a particular rate over a period of time and return to the investment board at specified intervals for further approvals and to update on progress.

On each of these points, it appears that agile can succeed with the right leadership and determination for change. Ultimately, however, this isn’t just about adopting a new approach to government ICT, reforming the procurement process or taking a more sophisticated approach to managing risk.  Instead, it is a test of Whitehall’s capacity for innovation.

**

Jerrett Myers is a Senior Researcher at the Institute for Government. The Institute for Government’s report, System Error: Fixing the flaws in government IT can be downloaded here.

Alistair Maughan’s blog post for Computer Weekly is here.

1 Comment

Posted in Agile, innovation, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , , ,

Can you outsource to cut costs and boost service levels?

Posted on 14/04/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

At an outsourcing conference on 7 July at the Barbican, London, two of the main discussion points will be around these questions:

– What is the role for outsourcing in cutting the public sector deficit?

– Can outsourcing cut costs and improve service levels?

Organisers of the “Delivering cost-effective public services” conference are hoping to have as a speaker  Katharine Davidson, Director, Efficiency and Reform Group, Cabinet Office, who is a linchpin in the Government’s plans for a radical reform of the machinery of central government.  

Davidson has been invited to give a keynote talk on private sector involvement in the way public services are delivered.

Confirmed speakers include:

– Veronica Mansilla, Project Director, Office of Fair Trading

–  Derrick Anderson, Chief Executive, Lambeth Council 

– Sue Gregory, National Director, Inspection Delivery, Ofsted 

Further details are here.

 

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, mutualisation, outsourcing, Uncategorized

Tagged , , , , , , ,

First major Government mutualisation announced

Posted on 12/04/2011 | Leave a comment

Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude, has today announced plans for the mutualisation of the 400-strong My Civil Service Pension , which administers the delivery of Civil Service Pension schemes.

This will be the first major mutualisation of a central government service. Mutuals, as they are known, give employees a financial stake in a business whose ownership is shared between the public and private sectors.

The Cabinet Office is also considering the potential for offering a stake to 1.5 million pension scheme members. 

Maude said:  “Too often there’s been a binary choice between the Government providing a service itself, or outsourcing it to the private sector. These choices have historically been driven by a belief that services have to be controlled centrally – with a one size fits all approach that has left little room for innovation.

“We are looking for more innovative ways to structure services. We know that employees who have a stake in their business, or take ownership of it completely, have more power and motivation to improve the service they run. They can also benefit from partnerships with private or voluntary sector organisations which can bring in capital and expertise.

“For the private sector, which can no longer expect the generous margins of the past, tapping the talent of frontline staff to improve efficiency will be a priority. The state too can keep a stake so that taxpayers benefit from the rising value of an improved service.

“I’m impressed with entrepreneurial zeal of Phil Bartlett and his team at My Civil Service Pension. They are pioneering the mutual joint venture model and the Government is committed to ensuring they have they right support to succeed.”

Phil Bartlett, CEO My Civil Service Pension, said: ” By taking the opportunity to mutualise we can better acknowledge our people and their expertise – and access valuable additional resources and expertise in the private sector.

“This new and innovative structure will give us the agility to exploit opportunities in the changing pension landscape and grow our business, and the taxpayer will benefit from the increased value of an improved and more efficient service.”

Mutualisation is being supported by dedicated resource within the Cabinet Office. Earlier this month Maude announced that the entrepreneur and business leader, Stephen Kelly, has been appointed as the Crown Representative to support the creation of mutuals from existing service teams within central government departments.

He also announced the establishment of an Enterprise Incubator to help civil servants create successful enterprises from within central government, including employee and management teams who wish to form mutual companies under the Right to Provide previously announced by the Cabinet Office.

The Government is developing mutual models through the Mutual Pathfinder programme which is supporting 21 existing and potential mutuals with mentoring and advice from experts in employee ownership.

Every department will put in place ‘rights to provide’ giving staff new rights and support to form mutuals.

The Cabinet Office has appointed Professor Julian Le Grand to head the Mutuals Taskforce which will support staff interested in mutualising their service.

Links:

Government signs over civil service pensions to private sector mutual.

 FSA Mutuals public register.

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, mutualisation

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,

12 “agile” principles

Posted on 07/04/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

The  principles (below), which are largely managerial,  highlight the challenges for government departments and suppliers of adopting agile principles for major IT-related projects such as Universal Credit.

Some in government have said that agile can deliver systems to support political policy quickly, say within two years –  but that’s far too long. Under agile principles, working systems should be delivered between two weeks and two months.

 I particularly like the tenth principle, which defines simplicity as the art of maximizing the amount of work not done; in other words not gold-plating requirements.

The second principle is also especially important for government IT-enabled projects and programmes: it states that changing requirements are welcome, even late in development.

The principles are from the excellent website of project manager Robert Kelly.

12 Principles behind Agile
 
  1. Our highest priority is to satisfy the customer through early and continuous delivery of valuable software.
  2. Welcome changing requirements, even late in development. Agile processes harness change for the customer’s competitive advantage.
  3. Deliver working software frequently, from a couple of weeks to a couple of months, with a preference to the shorter timescale.
  4. Business people and developers must work together daily throughout the project.
  5. Build projects around motivated individuals.  Give them the environment and support they need, and trust them to get the job done.
  6. The most efficient and effective method of conveying information to and within a development team is face-to-face conversation.
  7. Working software is the primary measure of progress.
  8. Agile processes promote sustainable development.  The sponsors, developers, and users should be able to maintain a constant pace indefinitely.
  9. Continuous attention to technical excellence and good design enhances agility.
  10. Simplicity –the art of maximizing the amount of work not done– is essential.
  11. The best architectures, requirements, and designs emerge from self-organizing teams.
  12. At regular intervals, the team reflects on how to become more effective, then tunes and adjusts its behavior accordingly.

Kelly’s contemplation – Robert Kelly’s blog

The Institute foir Government recently produced some case studies from its System Error report.

Leave a comment

Posted in Agile, innovation

Tagged , , , ,

Mutuals do things differently, unshackled by rules – Francis Maude

Posted on 17/03/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

Cabinet Office minister Francis Maude has asked MPs to visit public sector sites that have created co-operatives to see how they have changed their ways of working.

He told a committee of MPs:

“I can point you to some fantastic ones where people are just thinking in sometimes tiny ways, ways of doing things differently, that deliver a better service for less money because they have thought about it.

“And they are not subject to some hierarchy and some set of rules that prevents them doing it. They just do it.”

Ian Watmore, permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office, told the same hearing of the Public Administration Select Committee, that he and his colleagues will be publishing a White Paper on proposed reforms. 

“I believe mutualisation will be a big part of that and it will enable the Government to deliver on the reforms that it has already set out and it will trigger new reforms as people come up with more innovative ideas at the front line,” said Watmore

Maude said that mutualisation will help to bring about massive decentralisation. “I would recommend, with the interest this Committee has, going and visiting some of these mutuals because the way in which they operate.”

The workers “do things fantastically differently”, added Maude.

The committee’s chairman, Conservative MP Bernard Jenkin told Maude that if he wanted to develop good examples of decentralisation, his intentions should be set out in a plan.   

Said Jenkin“If your plan is to develop supreme examples and really good examples of decentralisation and innovative ways of doing things, well then set that out, because having a plan is an act of leadership and without an act of leadership there won’t be change.” 

Maude replied that setting out a plan and processes could kill mutualisation. He said:  “When we started talking about how we are going to support mutuals, the first response was: ‘Well, we need to have a plan, a programme, and devise rights and systems and processes.’ And when I reflected on that, I thought, ‘I could not think of a better way of killing the idea dead.’

“… The right approach is to find people who want to do this and support them, and as they try and set up their cooperatives and mutuals find out what the blocks are.”

Kelvin Hopkins, a Labour member of the committee, asked Maude whether mutuals would be less accountable to Parliament. Maude’s replies appeared, in part, contradictory.

He said mutuals could turn out to be more accountable. But when Jenkin said later that decentralisation means a “stretching of the elastic bands of accountability in the traditional sense”, Maude replied:

“Yes, totally.”

Leave a comment

Posted in Campaign4Change, innovation

Tagged , , , , , ,

Francis Maude tells civil servants: try new things and learn from failure

Posted on 16/03/2011 | Leave a comment

By Tony Collins

Francis Maude, the Cabinet Office minister who’s in charge of reforming central government, has told MPs that “good organisations learn as much from the things that are tried and do not work as from the things that are tried and do work”.

His comments will give top-level support to those in the public sector who are seeking small budgets to experiment with, say, agile approaches to software development.  The agile principle of failing cheaply and quickly and learning the lessons is unconventional in the public sector.

Appearing before the Public Administration Committee, in its hearing on Good Governance and Civil Service Reform, Maude said:

“You need to have a culture-we do not have this yet-where people are encouraged to try new things in a sensible, controlled way; front up if they have not worked – not have a culture that assumes every failure is culpable, and for every failure there has to be a scapegoat – but actually make sure that if something is tried and does not work: 1) you stop doing it; and 2) you learn from the things that have been tried and what the lessons are.

“I do not think we are good at that … part of the reason for that is the sort of audit culture, where everything has to be accounted for to the nth degree.

“I think we waste a huge amount of time and effort in stopping bad things happening and the result is we stop huge amounts of potentially good things happening as well.”

Maude was critical of the way government takes huge risks on big projects but is hostile to innovation at the micro level. He said: 

“Government tends to be quite prone to take huge macro risks, but then at working level, at micro level, to be very risk averse and hostile to innovation.

“You do not often hear of someone’s career suffering because they preside over an inefficient status quo, but try something new that does not work and that can blot your copybook big time.”

Leave a comment

Posted in Agile, Campaign4Change, innovation

Tagged , , , , , , , , ,