National Statistics of Enlarging RON - Report Example

The Registration Online (RON) was a highly ambitious project undertaken without proper planning both at the administrative and the technicallevel. The project was outsourced to private parties and data security risks existed. Within a few days of operations, the project had to be abandoned because of software glitches. Investments were not adequate and change management was not implemented. The government claims that pilot tests were run to ensure smooth transition but the technology seems to be the main case. Only about 30% of the UK governments IT projects have achieved success and this is because of lack of coordination, lack of training of the staff that would be implementing the project and lack of planning. The internet users in the UK too do not have much interaction with the government electronically. The project can meet with success provided effective communication with the staff can be maintained and change management is implemented. Introduction The UK government had started with a highly ambitious project of digitizing the births, deaths and marriages without proper planning. The Registration Online (RON) was a system which would enable rapid capture centrally of new registration. However, glitches in UK government IT projects are not unexpected as a government expert has revealed that only 30% of the government’s technology-based projects are a success (Marin, 2008). Risks Inherent risks affect the success of any project. The project was outsourced to the private sector and it is believed that the private company had pocketed million of pounds of the tax payer’s money while leaving the work incomplete. The contract was awarded to German computer giant Siemens who in turn outsourced the work to India (Hencke & Booth, 2008). This had inherent risks because the civil service unions feared that data security was put at risk and the task was too complicated to be delivered on time. Since the perceived challenge and benefit was to bring about reform in the delivery of service. Even a minor security lapse can lead to personal information being available to public (Bennett, 2007). Other risks that exist in digitizing birth records is that a lot of other services could be associated with the birth of a baby (Lettice, 2003). Other databases could be accessed by people and other records could be added to the central database. These databases could be linked together but there was provision that these databases would be permission-based. Only authorized users would have access to the database and would be permissible only to the businesses that may require access to the restricted information. The authorities had also planned that the linking would not be made public. The idea behind the project was that once the register held the core data (name, address birth date) this could be a unique identifier and could be used by other public sector organizations to verify that they have the right records about the right people at the right time. Problems encountered The implementation of the RON that started on 26th March 2007 but had to be brought down on the 10th April as the system encountered several difficulties with its implementation (National Statistics, 2007). The system supplied by the General Register Office (GRO) and the local IT infrastructure, both had problems. The GRO determined that unless the registration of births and deaths were operated for a period of six months without any difficulties, the notices of marriages would not go live (Gent, 2009). Training of the staff too was inadequate to handle a project of this stature. As the system was designed for the US and its adaptation was incomplete in the UK, it was vulnerable to identity thieves. Identity theft was inherent in the technology used for the project. Prior to starting the project of digitizing data, the system was adequate for capturing information as per UK legislation and requirement (Thomas, 2007). This new system had fields that were not necessary and was moreover, pertinent to the US. This is despite the hardware and software being tested extensively before being introduced in the UK. However, volume testing was not done – the number of staff that would use the system simultaneously was not taken into account (Bennett, 2007). This is sheer negligence on the part of the software vendors and also on part of the government team responsible to source the system. The government officials however, claim that they had run pilot tests and also considered the maximum usage during peak hours. The system came to a virtual halt and when the IT staff tried to sort it out, they found it could not reliably save data. When the staff pointed out the flaws in the system the management did not pay heed to it. This implies that there was no trust between the management and the subordinates and bureaucracy prevails at the government level. The chaos led to the officials calling up the public more than once because the data captured had been lost. According to the GRO, the new system did not operate well in some areas but it was received positively in some other areas (Murphy, 2007). When it is fully functional, it will be an efficient and faster method to bring together the registration details. Resistance to change is a perennial problem by government officials. Whenever the government tries to bring about change and introduce technology to enhance efficiency, there is resistance to change. The staff starts feeling insecure about their job and job positions. This happened when the project to digitize records was started by the ONS as such projects also reduce their career opportunities (Parliament, 2007). Investment planning was not proper as mid-way, the authorities realized that the project would require more funds, for which they were not prepared (Parliament, 2007). Even if the system was in place, there were no funding arrangements for the overtime that would be required to input data into the system (Bennett, 2007). It is not just the technology and the management planning but the UK population is also not yet mature to be able to use technology. It was believed that public would have access to the new electronic resources through internet. However, in the UK only 33% of the internet users interact with public authorities or sites to obtain information (Appendix A) and only 7 percent of the internet users use the internet to send filled forms (Dutton, Margetts & Eynon, 2005). While the UK population uses the internet for e-commerce, only 24% of the population interacts with the government electronically. Approximately 40% of the population does not use the internet and 11% of these are adamant non-users of internet and e-government. Analysis This, from the above it appears that it was faulty planning from the beginning and it was an overambitious project. The software was specific to the US and was not compatible with the requirements in the UK. It thus suggests that it was not tested with the constraints in the UK before it was implemented. It also suggests that the technical team in the UK government was not equipped to handle such a project. Training the staff before implementation was not undertaken which is a prerequisite for any project. This brought about a major change in the operations but change management was not implemented leading to the staff feeling insecure. The staff has to be informed in advance of the technology and its benefits to the staff as well as the population. This reduces the resistance and may even motivate them to make efforts is early adaptation. Inadequate financial planning also contributed to the problems in implementation. Conclusion and recommendations Risks and possible losses need to be identified and assessed continuously. Risk can be controlled even if it is not identified in the beginning. Technology and process may be sophisticated but management is more important in change management (Gollan, 2006). Effective communication with trust and honesty can motivate the staff which is essential in change management. More than technology, lack of coordination in government e-projects is a barrier to success. The transition should be smooth that the impact is not felt (Schramm, 2007). The project team should be cohesive and have the larger interest in mind. Investment planning must be made in advance. The public too has to be encouraged to use the electronic media to interact with the government because even when the system is ready and people still want manual service, the efficiency is reduced. This can be done by creating awareness through regular promotional advertisements through the television and the print media. The benefits to the public and the government have to be highlighted. Thus, the problems in the implementation of RON were multiple – inefficient management and planning, technical glitches, lack of coordination at all levels, staff resistance and no change management planning. References Bennett, R. (2007, May 3). Chaos as register offices are told to abandon £6m computer system. The Times. Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article1739313.ece Dutton, W., Margetts, H., & Eynon, R. (2005). Barriers to eGovernment. Oxford Internet Institute. Retrieved from http://www.egovbarriers.org/downloads/June26Workshop/Barriers_to_eGovernment_perspectives_from_a_survey.pdf Gent, J. (2009). Annual Quality and Performance Review, 2009/10 of the Registration Service. Retrieved from http://www.wandsworth.gov.uk/moderngov/Published/C00000297/M00003074/AI00015293/$09999Appendix3RegisterOffice.docA.ps.pdf Gollan, P. J. (2006). High involvement management and human resource line sustainability. Handbook of Business Strategy, 279-286. Hencke, D., & Booth, R. (2008, August 16). Ancestry hunters stuck in past as web project fails. The Guardian. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/aug/16/genealogy.records Lettice. J. (2003, August 5). UK birth certificates to morph into your life story, and more? The Register. Retrieved from http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/08/05/uk_birth_certificates_to_morph/ Marin, L. (2008, September 8). Government IT Gone Wrong. (Web log comment). Retrieved from http://ukliberty.wordpress.com/government-it-gone-wrong/ Murphy, P. (2007). Registration Online. Office for National Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.ons.gov.uk/about/newsroom/letters-to-the-press/registration-online--the-times--3-may-2007.html National Statistics. (2007). Population Trends. National Statistics. Retrieved from http://www.statistics.gov.uk/downloads/theme_population/PopulationTrends128.pdf Parliament. (2007). Memorandum submitted by the ONS Departmental Trade Union Side. Retrieved from http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmselect/cmtreasy/483/483we20.htm Schramm, J. (2007). Managing Change. HR Magazine, March 2007. Thomas, S. (2007, May 3). Register office meltdown. The Times. Retrieved from http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article1739020.ece Appendix A Read More