Governance vs Outcomes

I hear the constant refrain, why do so many projects fail, and not for one minute would it make sense to try and ascribe one single reason for this.

It is normally as a result of a range of issues, but on large projects there is one that drives me crazy, because it is avoidable.

For some years there has been this heavy emphasis on Governance.

Loads of red tape, procedures and processes to ensure the procedures and processes are adhered to. More often than not these are "feelgood" processes are completely disconnected from reality and the objectives of the project.

There is a simple measure here, if these governance processes were so good why do we have all these project failures?

There appears to be a disconnect, between governance and project outcomes.

The "administrators" managing the governance processes are often completely ignorant of the project content or implications.

We end up with monkeys making decisions about matters other than bananas. 

I spent four years examining a government ICT project where governance was ladled out  by the bucket load.  They had scores of committees, internal and external probity officers, risk management teams plus three "super" committees.

These three committees consisted of the same people, bar one, and simply rubberstamped all decisions no matter how senseless. I suspect Monty Python would be able to deliver a good sketch on this.

This project, so I am told, has passed a number of audits, yet it ran almost $ 80 Mil over budget before it was closed down, incomplete, and declared a success.

This reveals the further disconnect between auditors, governance experts, administration and the people trying to deliver the four hump camel initiated by these "flowerpots".

 

Definition

Flowerpots Marginally decorative but functionally useless.

Food for thought

Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage, and those who manage what they do not understand. - Archibald Putt