By Joaquim P. Menezes -
“To err is human, but to really mess things up takes a computer,” runs a modern version of the old Pope proverb.
The notion surfaced during my recent interview with Prof. Peter Carr, Director of the Masters in Management Science program at the University of Waterloo.
The focus of the interview was: IT project management.
Carr, who over the years has observed and analyzed IT implementations in many companies, noted that project failures are far more common than many care to admit.
And while there could be a whole bunch of technology-related reasons why a project unravels, Carr is convinced that very often, when IT initiatives fail it’s because of “people- problems.”
Often it's because those spearheading the project cannot “coordinate a very diverse group of people, or because they lack the authority to do that,”said Carr.
Sometimes, he said, an initiative dies on the vine because it lacks executive buy in, or because key people in the organization don’t see eye to eye on the project.
Okay, so that’s the hard reality.
But on a positive note, “IT project failure” can also prove to be an invaluable learning experience.
As much as we should learn from those projects that are successful, Carr said, “looking at projects that failed probably teaches us far more.”
That view today is shared by leading industry experts.
I remember attending a conference on IT Project Failure, where one of the main speakers was Dr.Tom Rosenal, Medical Director, Electronic Health Record, Calgary Health Region (CHR).
Dr. Rosenal started off his presentation by noting that milking failure for all it’s worth can be more useful than basking in success.
He backed this up by sharing his experience with the rollout of TDS-7000, a patient care system that was deployed several years ago at a couple of CHR sites.
A prominent trade journal on clinical systems reportedly dubbed the project one of the two worst IT implementations in the world – along with the ambulance system in London, England.
“We did several things badly,” said Rosenal, and went on to provide a graphic description of the numerous things that were done wrong.
And yet, though clearly a painful experience the TDS-7000 implementation eventually set CHR up for where it is going now, Rosenal noted.
For one thing, he said, physicians at the two hospitals where TDS-7000 was implemented now have a definite idea of what they need and expect in an IT system. “If you ask them that, they will give you a clear and specific answer.”
The experience, he said, has not only created a knowledgeable group but an engaged group as well. CHR, he said, now has a Clinical Design Committee of 32 people, including 11 physicians. “We actually have problems keeping people off the committee.”
Like Peter Carr, Rosenal also believes that the biggest IT project challenges are usually not technology-related.
He said a key lesson from TDS-7000 is that the toughest challenges are people-related.
The pain from the project, he said, has driven several positive changes from a technology and people perspective.
“We understand our culture better, as well as the power shifts that have occurred as we’ve implemented systems. Maintaining a sense of humour has also been a key factor in all our efforts.”