HealthCare.gov As A Project (NOT An Editorial)

By -
Don't worry, this is not just another political rant for or against government involvement in the national healthcare system.  However, since the issues surrounding the launch of the US HealthCare.gov site have gotten a lot of attention there are some really good conversations around IT and business project success that are worth reviewing.
The NY Times on Sunday published From The Start, Signs of Trouble at Health Portal, citing the largest contractor on the project who noted that, although they were awarded the contract for in December 2011, actually coding didn't start until Spring 2013, and until late September, days prior to launch, some significant features and user requirements were still being debated.
James Turner wrote at Forbes.com that You Can't Legislate Away The Time, Money and Features Law, and in a few brief paragraphs captures many of the typical failures that occur in a complex project like the healthcare portal, not the least of which is full integration late in the game.
All the way back in September 2009 Bruce Webster wrote about the proposed changes from a systems design perspective, contrasting software systems design with social or human systems design.  Part II of his analysis contains some especially relevant heuristics from a couple sources, including these gems (see Webster's blog for source citations):
"A complex system that works is found to have invariably evolved from a simple system that worked."
"Don't assume that the original statement of the problem is necessarily the best, or even the right one."
"If you don't understand the existing system, you can't be sure you're re-architecting a better one."
The scope and scale of what has been attempted with the US government health exchange portal and all the related services is far beyond anything Backcountry has done. The closest project for comparison would be moving Backcountry.com to ATG.  Still, some applicable lessons include:
  1. If you set in stone at the beginning of a project the required features, the resource allocation (people/dollars) and the date on which the project must deliver, you're gonna have a bad time.
  2. If you attempt to entirely rip out an existing system and replace it with a new one, you're gonna have a bad time.
  3. If you assume development of a system is just a technology project and your users will figure out how to use the tools you provide so you don't need to involve them along the way, you're gonna have a bad time.
  4. If you think that the timing of decision making and prioritization at higher levels has no effect on the people responsible for developing and implementing a business solution, you should think again.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Severity, Priority, Impact and Likelihood - Managing Defects and Risks

By -
Defects and Risks are often dealt with in a subjective, emotional way.  That's unfortunate, because among all the things a software development team deals with, those are two that can be handled in a more constructive and empirical way. First, a couple definitions. Defect Severity: the degree of impact a defect has on system operation. A defect is something observed, so impact can be empirically quantified. Risk Severity: the degree to which a hypothetical event, should it occur, would impact system operation. A risk event is something that has not occurred, so impact must be estimated or extrapolated. The common element in both Risk Severity Assessment and Defect Severity is Impact on Revenue.  The FMEA framework that AKF recommends uses 1 = Low, 3 = Med, and 9 = High, to represent the exponential effect of a high impact risk or defect Impact on Revenue No payments being collected and/or payment data security compromised (Critical) Payment collection being de
Read more

Enterprise Agile Framework: The Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS)

By -
Image
Brian Rabon introduced me to the Entrepreneurial Operating System (EOS) as the framework he uses to manage his company, The Braintrust Consulting Group (TBCG). EOS is the missing element in organizations that are having some success with Agile at the team level, but not succeeding with change at higher levels or outside software development. As Charlie Rudd points out in his post The Third Wave of Agile , there is broad consensus on the value of Agile practices at the team level, but all types and sizes of businesses are struggling to scale Agile and to increase agility across their organization.  I think EOS addresses those challenges. EOS is comprised of the EOS Model : Having a model like this in place allows teams to function optimally as self-organized units that share the vision and goals of the organization.  Teams are able to align themselves with the organization's objectives, and can see how their outcomes affect the organization's performance. The EO
Read more

Chatbot Code of Ethics

By -
A  NYTimes article  describes efforts by a consortium of the largest technology companies to create ethical standards for AI. A related article in MIT Technology Review is titled  AI Wants to Be Your Bro, Not Your Foe . Artificial Intelligence has reached a level of sophistication, and is on the brink of being so pervasive, that we can have these serious conversations. In my work developing AI-powered chatbots to assist with learning, I work within the bounds of these 7 precepts: Right View - our chatbots honor humanity, human dignity, and the human quest for knowledge, understanding and technological innovation Right Intention - our chatbots promote human progress in the areas of intellectual pursuits and personal ethical development Right Speech - our chatbots use encouraging, prudent, and situationally appropriate language Right Action - our chatbots perform with integrity toward the aforementioned right view and intention Right Live
Read more