Standish Group - Essay Example

In a pointer 1995 research, the Standish Group discovered that only roughly 17% of the IT projects could be taken as “completely successful,". According to the study, 52% were "challenged" (they did not meet quality, budget, or time goals). The research also found out that 30% were "impaired or failed." The latest update of that research done for ComputerWorld, Standish investigated 3,555 IT projects from 2003 to 2012 with labor costs of not less than $10 million. It found that merely 6.4% of the projects were successful (Keegan, Huemann, and Turner 2).

Combining the intrinsic problems connected with very big IT projects with out-of-date government practices significantly raises the risk factors. The Affordable Care Act – MNsure project in Minnesota cost more than $150M USD. The project failed due to the following:

• Poororvaguesponsorship
• Confusingandchangingrequirements
• Insufficientskillsorresources
• Poordesignandunsuitableuse of new technology

Strong sponsorship, as well as solid requirements, is particularly tricky to come by in a political setting. It is because many individuals along with group stakeholders argue with one another and then alter the project (Keegan, Huemann, and Turner 2). Applying the political course of lengthy arguments, consensus-building along with numerous agendas to define project requirements brings disaster.

To avoid this failure, the contractors doing government work should have discouraged changes. The contractors saw a chance to grow the project scope with work of a much higher margin because change orders are usually much more profitable compared to the original bid. Another way to avoid failure was to have adequate sponsorship and strong requirements. Insufficient sponsorship and weak requirements were merged with a waterfall development methodology together with the overall big bang technique used by the government procurement methods.