Guest Post: Public Sector Projects
A guest post by a reader:
Without knowing anything about this project but having plenty of public sector experience with projects I can tell you exactly what happened here.
Firstly, the service was unable to say with precision what it wanted from this project because its own strategic and operational objective-setting was hopelessly immature.
Secondly, the service was supported by an immature procurement function which was unable to challenge this outcome vacuum resulting in both these functions (the substantive service-owner and the procurement function) looking to each other to provide clarity as they went to the market.
Thirdly, the project management staff were not project professionals but generic public servants who thought they’d like to have a crack at something else and lacked formal expertise in project methodologies and the subject-matter itself, and spent their time perpetually anxious.
Fourthly, the first three elements resulted in supplier-capture with the public servants deeply grateful to find a supplier able to meet their undetermined needs and also well-placed to both overcharge and underdeliver.
Fifthly, while there was a chart showing governance relationships and an identified project owner and sponsor neither of these positions had the skill, expertise or heft to effectively challenge the project or its supplier as it went wrong.
Sixthly, over time as funds were sunk and progress stalled, the paralysing public sector risk-aversion came to the fore making it extremely difficult for staff who were already out of their depth to screw up the courage to escalate.
Seventh, the project sponsor who as we have already remarked lacked the ability to turn the project around found it simpler and less threatening to distance themselves from the project in the hope that any adverse consequences would stick to those involved in day-to-day activity rather than those “sponsoring” it from the lofty heights of the executive office.
Finally, the collegial and comfortable public sector ethos of distributed accountability meant the governance group members never felt compelled to stick their heads above the parapet and call out the emperor’s nakedness.
I hope any reports cover the following:
1. Executive sponsorship means exactly that and if anyone is to hang, that is where you start.
2. Public service risk-aversion is a blight on everything they do (much of it driven by politics one has to admit) and staff need to be encouraged to call out failure loudly and early rather than let it drift for fear of being the bearer of bad news.
3. Generic skills do not qualify particular people to be procurement staff, project staff or subject-matter experts; the public sector needs to recruit to the level the complexity of its tasks demands.