IT Project Failures

November 6th, 2009

18 truths: The long fail of complexity

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 5:55 am

Categories: CIO issues, Cultural issues, Governance, IT issues, Project strategy, Research and statistics

Tags: Accident, Failure, Enterprise System, Richard Cook, Complex System, Human Practitioner, Policies And Procedures, Human Resources, Michael Krigsman

Enterprise systems are inherently complex, often involving many business processes, people, and organizations across a company. Given this built-in complexity, it’s no surprise that failures abound; it’s amazing these systems function at all.

We could make these same comments about any complex, mission critical system. For example, look no further than the space program or health care delivery. In both cases, massive complexity is connected to a need to get things right: failure means potential loss of life.

To say that complicated systems are more prone to break down than simpler systems is obvious. But there are also other, more subtle truths regarding failure and complex systems.

A paper copyrighted in 1998, called How Complex Systems Fail and written by an M.D., Dr. Richard Cook, describes 18 truths about the underlying reasons complicated systems break down. On the surface the list appears surprisingly simple, but deeper meaning is also present. Some of the points are obvious while others may surprise you.

THE EIGHTEEN TRUTHS

The first few items explain that catastrophic failure only occurs when multiple components break down simultaneously:

1. Complex systems are intrinsically hazardous systems. The frequency of hazard exposure can sometimes be changed but the processes involved in the system are themselves intrinsically and irreducibly hazardous. It is the presence of these hazards that drives the creation of defenses against hazard that characterize these systems.

Read the rest of this entry »

November 4th, 2009

Please vote: Shortlisted at Computer Weekly

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 8:15 am

Categories: Blog annoucements

Tags: Information Technology, Computer, Strategy, Project Management, Tools & Techniques, Management, It Operations, It service Management, Michael Krigsman

UK-based IT news site, Computer Weekly, shortlisted this blog for an award in the 2009 Project Management category. Being shortlisted is an honor because Computer Weekly offers some of the best IT insight anywhere.

In addition, the magazine’s Executive Editor, Tony Collins, is one of the top journalists covering IT failures; Tony takes no prisoners but is always fair and impartial. His work has served as an inspiration to me.

SHAMELESS, UNREPENTANT PLUG

Yes, I want you to vote — for my blog! To make it easy, please follow this little guide.

Step 1. Click the voting page

Step 2. Scroll down to number 7, the Project Management category, as shown here:

Step 3. Do the right thing….

November 2nd, 2009

Five definitions toward the maturing of Enterprise 2.0

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 7:14 pm

Categories: CIO issues, Enterprise 2.0, Enterprise 2.0 Conference, Enterprise2conf, IT issues, SaaS, PaaS, and SOA

Tags: Apple iPod, Fragmentation, Enterprise 2.0, Conference, Miko, Enterprise, Michael Krigsman

The excellent Enterprise 2.0 Conference is currently in full swing in San Francisco. Given the excitement around this conference, now’s a perfect time to re-examine the “enterprise” part of Enterprise 2.0.

In this guest blog post, Miko Matsumura, Vice President and Chief Strategist of Software AG, offers a humorous look at the Enterprise 2.0 movement. In addition to his position at Software AG, Miko is the author of the book, SOA Adoption for Dummies.

Miko’s underlying message is important: to be successful, Enterprise 2.0 activities must remain rooted in the practical realities of real companies, processes, and corporate cultures. I share this perspective. Although the tone and images are funny, I assure you the message is serious.

———–

It’s a cool sunny day in San Francisco. I’m at the Moscone center where there’s some bustle around the Enterprise 2.0 conference. You can tell it’s an Enterprise conference because, unlike the Web 2.0 Conference, there’s no free pass even to the show floor. Also, the full pass is about $2500 bucks.

As I’ve been discussing on Twitter @mikojava and in my blog, here are my top five definitions of Enterprise. Feel free to chime in with your views via Twitter, email or my blog.

One way to define Enterprise is:

en⋅ter⋅prise:
/ˈɛntərˌpraɪz/ [en-ter-prahyz]
-noun

5. Stuff I wouldn’t do unless you paid me.

This definition puts Enterprise squarely in the camp of crime scene janitorial services. It adds a concept of “professional” to the discussion and establishes the Enterprise as the realm of uncomfortable clothing.

I recall reconnecting with Arthur Van Hoff after our adventures in Java and having him laugh at me because I was wearing (in his words) an “IQ Restrictor,” his parlance for a necktie. This definition also puts a dynamic tension between the “Suits” at the Enterprise 2.0 conference and the boho hipsters wearing the Emo Hair.

4. Software that sucks.

This was the definition I evoked in my post “The Human Enterprise.” To be honest, I introduced the idea of “The Human Enterprise” as a direct counter-proposal to “Enterprise 2.0.”

I think the piece that was missing from The Human Enterprise is the extent to which fragmentation plays a role in the essential nature of the Enterprise, which is a theme I’ve been addressing more lately in terms of the effect of sheer size on the Enterprise.

Read the rest of this entry »

November 2nd, 2009

Seeking IT failure experts on Twitter

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 6:22 am

Categories: Blog annoucements, CIO issues, IT issues

Tags: Twitter Inc., Information Technology, Strategy, Management, Michael Krigsman

I’m assembling the definitive Twitter list of folks who have demonstrated deep insight and commitment into analyzing the causes and prevention of IT failures. The list is called IT Failure Insights and I need your help to get it right.

If you know someone who should be on that list, please send me a message on Twitter.

Before adding anyone to the list I will ask to see blog posts, Twitter messages, papers the person has written, or other examples demonstrating clear connection between their professional life and this topic.

[Photo from iStockphoto]

November 1st, 2009

Amplifying 'weak signals' for IT success

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 3:29 pm

Categories: CIO issues, Collective intelligence, Cultural issues, Enterprise 2.0, Governance, IT issues, Project strategy, Risk, Tools

Tags: Technique, Information Technology, Organization, Asuret, Productivity, Michael Krigsman

Every seasoned executive knows that gaining detailed and accurate information about his or her organization’s activities is a challenging and ongoing struggle. Disconnects between operational data and management decision-making lead to inefficiency, waste, and ultimately to extreme failures of the type described in this blog.

Usually, some members of an organization do possess accurate early warning information regarding potential problems. However, as we have seen in situations ranging from Enron to financial industry practices that kicked off the current recession, surfacing that information can be difficult.

I asked top auditing services analyst and former BearingPoint managing director, Francine McKenna, to place this issue in context. Francine told me:

It’s a classic problem rooted in human nature. Information in large, complex, and geographically dispersed organizations tends to become diluted and distorted as it flows up the chain. Even worse, some individuals redesign information flowing through their hands based on personal goals and objectives.

The best organizations recognize this state of affairs and create standardized policies, procedures, and governance monitoring activities to overcome it. Despite these efforts, however, the problem remains a very real challenge.

Detecting and amplifying “weak signals.” Techniques that reveal hidden vulnerabilities are a valuable weapon in the fight against project failure.

My recent post, Learning from the weak signals of failure, discussed the importance of methods that detect and amplify these weak signals:

Read the rest of this entry »

October 26th, 2009

Can open source software stop IT failure?

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 9:19 am

Categories: CIO issues, Devil's Triangle, IT issues, Open Source, Project strategy

Tags: Software, Information Technology, Open-source Software, Failure, Dana, Custom Software Development Project, Devil, Tools & Techniques, Open Source, Strategy

In a post today. ZDNet open source blogger, Dana Blankenhorn, says the primary value of open source software is transparency rather than low cost. He then argues that open source software offers at least a partial solution to the problem of IT failures. Let’s examine that view.

Dana argues that open source code transparency aligns the interests of customers and vendors, which can have a positive effect on IT project outcomes:

With code visibility, you and your vendors become partners in trying to make something work. The vendor can’t over-promise, but you can’t over-assume either. This may be one of main hidden reasons for IT failure, the two sides of the transaction not being on the same page.

From an IT failures perspective, this logic consists of two primary components:

1. Shared visibility into open source code reduces hidden assumptions and makes explicit what the vendor is actually selling to the customer.
2. Such transparency can reduce failure by forcing alignment between vendor and customer goals.

Although Dana raises an interesting and important question, I do not share his confidence that implementation projects based on open source software should more successful than those based on commercial software.

In my experience, most failures associated with packaged software arise from expectation mismatches in the business, rather than technical, domain. Custom software development projects are even more complicated, since these situations include creating something that does not yet exist.

This diagram summarizes my view regarding why many IT projects that are late, over-budget, or don’t deliver planned results:

Read the rest of this entry »

October 26th, 2009

Learning from the weak signals of failure

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 6:13 am

Categories: CIO issues, Collective intelligence, Governance, IT issues

Tags: Project, Dilbert, Chris, Leadership, Blogging, Management, Internet, Michael Krigsman

Many so-called “victims” of failed projects claim they were blindsided by problems that arose suddenly out of nowhere. In reality, the entire notion that failures spontaneously arise without warning is nonsense.

Still, this experience is sufficiently widespread that it appears in a Dilbert cartoon. Wally asks Dilbert, “How’s your project coming along?” Dilbert replies, “It’s a steaming pile of failure. It’s like fifteen drunken monkeys with a jigsaw puzzle.” When the boss asks, “How’s your project coming along?” Dilbert responds sardonically, “Fine.”

This Dilbert interchange expresses a fundamental truth for understanding failed projects: in most cases, someone associated with the project knew in advance about impending difficulty. For example, an engineering manager might realize early in the project that his team will not be able to achieve certain milestones on time.

Similarly, consider the game of project failure chicken. Management sets an unrealistic product ship date, which the Engineering and Design groups, for example, each know is impossible to meet. Since neither group wants to appear weak, they both tell management the schedule is workable, each hoping the other will admit defeat first. In project failure chicken, neither group wants to yield to the other, leading to the worst possible outcome for management.

In these examples, accurate knowledge about the true state of the project is present inside the organization, yet remains hidden from management because it is diffuse and unfocused.

If denial is the handmaiden of failure, then acknowledgment can be a strong harbinger of success. But what, precisely, should we acknowledge?

• Related: Denial: The secret IT killer

Respected CIO leadership expert, Chris Curran, addresses this question in a blog post about the concept of finding weak signals:

[M]aybe we are ignoring some fundamental, but less obvious signs that our projects are not positioned for success. These signs, or weak signals, require different mindsets and toolsets to gather, track and act upon.

Chris’ comments responded to an article in the MIT Sloan Management Review titled, How to Make Sense of Weak Signals, which offers this definition of weak signals:

A seemingly random or disconnected piece of information that at first appears to be background noise but can be recognized as part of a significant pattern by viewing it through a different frame or connecting it with other pieces of information.

The article goes on to summarize the key challenge:

There is a major difference between taking in signals and realizing what they mean. Managers as well as organizations tend to see the world in a certain way and confuse their mental maps with he territory. Weak signals that don’t fit are often ignored, distorted or dismissed, leaving the company exposed.

An upcoming blog post will explore this issue further and describe the efforts of several firms to address the problem.

[Photo from Wikipedia Commons.]

October 21st, 2009

Gartner Magic Quadrant lawsuit: Sour grapes or real gripes?

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 9:48 am

Categories: CIO issues, Project strategy, Research and statistics, Vendor relationships

Tags: Lawsuit, Quadrant, Analyst, Gartner Inc., Michael Krigsman

Industry analyst firm, Gartner, is the target of a lawsuit from software vendor, ZL Technologies, challenging the “legitimacy” of Gartner’s Magic Quadrant rating system. The suit has brought forth an array of divergent opinions.

Background. As one of the top analyst firms, with revenue in excess of a billion dollars, Gartner’s opinions and recommendations carry substantial weight with technology buyers and influencers.

On a special website page devoted to the lawsuit, ZL Technologies claims that Gartner’s Magic Quadrant does not present a fair and accurate portrayal of the software market. The company says:

Gartner’s use of their proprietary “Magic Quadrant” is misleading and favors large vendors with large sales and marketing budgets over smaller innovators such as ZL that have developed higher performing products.

Here is the original legal filing:

Read the rest of this entry »

October 19th, 2009

Going commando: Four signs of CRM failure

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 7:31 am

Categories: CIO issues, CRM, Cultural issues, IT issues, Project success

Tags: CRM, Jill, Historian Barbara Tuchman, Schwarzenegger, Advertising & Promotion, Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Enterprise Software, Marketing, Software, Michael Krigsman

CRM failure remains a significant problem in many organizations. For that reason, it’s important to explore why so many of these projects do not achieve their potential.

• Related: CRM failure rates: 2001-2009

For this reason, I asked Jill Dyché, a Partner with IT services and management consulting firm, Baseline Consulting to write a guest post for this blog. Jill is the author of three books on the business value of technology, including her latest, Customer Data Integration: Reaching a Single Version of the Truth. You can reach Jill on Twitter (@jilldyche) or email (jilldyche@baseline-consulting.com).

Most folks involved in CRM don’t quickly recognize the warning signs of failure, causing bad projects that die a slow, agonizing death. These folks need Arnold Schwarzeneggers’ Commando to stop the madness and put their project out of its misery.

Arnold’s role of “exit champion,” in which he kills for the greater good, reminds us that not all CRM projects are fit to survive. However, most corporate cultures discourage naysayers, so even well-informed people who sense a CRM effort going sideways avoid making waves and don’t call out obvious warning signs.

This cultural condition creates groupthink and denial, a type of organizational neglect that researcher Isabelle Royer calls “the seductive appeal of collective belief.” We’ve all seen or heard this kind of logic:

Our project must be going fine, since no one is complaining, even though we’re already over-budget and the development team is still being trained on the software. After all, CRM is a hot topic with analysts and our executives are all on board. Someone must know what they’re doing. Right?

Although the warning signs of CRM-gone-wrong may appear vague, they are actually quite consistent across companies, vendor solutions, and development plans. Here are four to watch for:

Read the rest of this entry »

October 12th, 2009

Oracle's integration strategy: Customer trade-offs

Posted by Michael Krigsman @ 9:16 pm

Categories: CIO issues, IT issues, Oracle, Vendor relationships

Tags: Strategy, Car, Oracle Corp., Michael Krigsman

Oracle’s dual Presidents, Charles Phillips and Safra Catz, today opened the company’s OpenWorld conference, which is taking place this week in San Francisco. Their keynote speech emphasized Oracle’s efforts to integrate its diverse product line in a bid to make life simpler for customers.

Catz opened her part of the keynote by explaining what she called the “back story” behind Oracle’s acquisition strategy. She did this with a humorous look at what would happen if we bought cars the way we buy enterprise technology.

In such world, Catz said we would go online to buy thousands of disconnected parts from many vendors, which our children would assemble into a completed car because the parts would not come with instructions. Just as we finished assembling the car, she continued, a light would go on indicating that an upgrade or patch is required. Catz said, “We would then do it all again.”

Catz used this car assembly story as a metaphor for product complexity in the enterprise. According to Catz and Phillips, Oracle reduces this complexity by bringing together under one roof infrastructure, hardware, and database products that are “engineered to work together.”

This diagram expresses Oracle’s end-to-end vision:

Regarding the “open” tag line on the slide, Catz said, “We are slavishly devoted to open standards.” Wow, that’s a pretty strong statement.

THE PROJECT FAILURES ANALYSIS

From a project failures perspective, important truths lie beneath the cute story about assembling cars at home from parts purchased online. As Catz correctly points out, many organizations purchase enterprise technology in pieces from multiple vendors, which can make the selection and implementation process time-consuming and expensive for the customer, relative to buying from a single vendor.

I discussed these points during a follow-on conversation with Paco Aubrejuan, Oracle’s Vice President of PeopleSoft Enterprise, who explained the benefits of single-vendor integration:

Read the rest of this entry »