Presentation to #ITx2014- Peter Salmon looks at the root cause of project failure, why they continue to fail despite our best efforts, methodologies, and governance. Peter draws from decades of experience as a consultant, executive and project manager to consider the roles of managers, executives, vendors and consultants, and how governance itself affects project execution. He provides some common sense steps IT professionals can take to reduce the chance a project will fail, while poking holes in the conventional wisdom.

1. We Have Met The Enemy – He Is Us
or ICT Project Failure – The Human Factor
Peter M Salmon, CA, AIITP
Manning Charles & Associates Limited
ITx2014 – Auckland – 9 October 2014

2. My background
• Over 40 years experience with projects
• Formerly partner with Coopers & Lybrand
• Led professional services in Asia/Pacific for
Unisys
• Extensive involvement in project assessment
• Varied background in business consulting
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 1

3. Project “Failures” – some examples
• KPMG survey results showing that only one-third of
projects are delivering the desired outcome.
• Only a minority of survey respondents are
consistently using best practices to deliver results.
• Reported success rates vary widely across different
industries, with organisations in the IT sector
reporting better results
• Some notable failures Novopay, INCIS, Capital &
Coast DHB and UK’s –NHS IT project
• ??? And the rest
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 2

4. ICT Project Performance*
• Organisations in the Information Technology sector
view themselves as more successful than average at
completing projects successfully. They reported
above-average project success (21%) on key
measures of timely delivery, delivery on budget and
delivery of stated deliverables.
• The data does not explain the drivers behind this
trend. One explanation may lie in the higher maturity
in general of project management in the IT industry
*Source KPMG 2013 Survey
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 3

5. Impact of ICT Project Failure
• Cost of failure is huge – US$ 6.2 trillion p.a
worldwide by one estimate , for IT alone
• At a minimum a huge destruction of wealth and in
many instances a wasteful spend of money
• Many projects – are late, over budget or don’t meet
planned objectives
• Negative impact on services, productivity
• Many organisations fail to properly measure value
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 4

6. So then
• Why do so many projects fail?
• Why despite the news reports, enquiries,
conferences, papers, courses and books do we
still see such a high failure rate?
• Why are so many so quick to allocate blame to
the project managers?
• Given what appears to be waste on a massive
scale, why do we keep pouring money into
projects in this way?
• What stops us from achieving improvement?
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 5

7. The Villain
• Business Managers
• Consultants
• Vendors
People
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 6

8. Why are we the villains?
• A cynical, but quite possibly accurate post at
ComputerWeekly.com identified 5 probabilities
regarding the conduct of IT projects in the UK or US,
whatever the political complexion of the
administration:-
– 1) Over-optimism
– 2) A willingness to believe inspirational thought-leaders in the
private sector who say that, yes, complexity in government can be
simplified with technology (as opposed to changing the way things
are done)
– 3) An insistence by ruling politicians and senior civil servants that
what seems to be an IT-based disaster is, in fact, a success
– 4) What can be covered up will be
– 5)Knowledgeable critics will be dismissed as Luddites
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 7

9. Why are we the villains?
• A touching belief in silver bullets and the
benefits of snake oil
• The desire to be seen to be doing something
• Ego
• Organisational politics
• Our capacity for self delusion, despite
realities presented to us e.g. we are making
an investment = this does not stack up
economically
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 8

10. Contributory factors include
• Complexity impedes effective delivery – we
cannot resist the temptation to ‘solve world
hunger in one project’
• Inadequate or lacking business case – many
projects should never have been undertaken
• Failure to address underlying core business
issues
• Project management ineffective – KPMG
noted decline in use of PMOs
• IT procurement weaknesses
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 9

11. Contributory factors include
• Core management skills shortage –
leadership
• Treating governance as a mechanistic
process
• Organisational cultures which promote happy
talk rather than reality – communication
• Failure to share learnings
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 10

12. What can we do?
• Make informed decisions, thus avoiding the
degradation of value resulting from broad-brush
actions, which are often the kneejerk reaction to a
crisis
• Focus investment so as to create and maintain
value; enabling mitigating action where risk to value
emerges
• Rigorous assessment and delivery of new initiatives,
in a manner based on optimal benefit/value
achievement over the lifecycle, with appropriate risk
mitigation when required
• See as well Thorp: Using governance to navigate through troubled times
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 11

13. Leadership - the key to resolution
• Effective leadership at entity and project level is
critical
• Leadership must , in my strongly held view, be
combined with a sound ethical framework and
robust values of integrity and straight dealing
• Without leadership and values the plethora of
acronyms such as ISO 38500, CoBIT, SarBox etc will
be worthless; as will all the frameworks and
legislation
• The required leadership must be underpinned,
organisationally and personally by integrity and
strong values – cannot be over emphasized
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 12

14. Reducing the risk of failure
• Requires leadership, which means that leaders and others must
be coached and educated to necessary levels of understanding
• Implementing appropriate policies, processes and
organisations with unambiguous roles, responsibilities and
accountabilities
• Needs rigourous performance reporting :- Programme and
Project Reviews, Portfolio Management etc.
• Various studies suggest substantial value results (20% +)
• Requires strong senior executive commitment to make it
happen and to embed robust, effective governance in the
organisational culture
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 13

15. The Four Ares
10/10/2014
© October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 14
Are we doing the right
things?
Are we getting the
benefits?
Are we getting them
done well?
Are we doing them
the right way?
Enterprise
Operations
Business
Adapted from the ‘Four Ares’ developed by John Thorp in The Information
Paradox
Strategy
Organisation Delivery
Value
Alignment of process with
business objectives.
Organizational structure and
process, and the integration
of programmes within
Organizational capability,
resources available and
supporting infrastructure needs
Proactive management
of activities seeking to
maximize benefits

16. Conclusion
• Understanding the human dimension is imperative
• Important to develop a clear view of outcomes
required
• Clear focus on the overall perspective is invaluable
• Getting the engagement of all parties is critical
• Building a climate of trust aids resolution of
governance situations, rather than blame
• When setting up structures and processes, harness
culture and people to them, not in competition or
combat with them
• Organisational and personal values are critical
10/10/2014 15© October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd

17. Important Notice – please read
• This notice applies to all materials and information available in
this presentation.
• All information and materials are provided on an 'as is' basis and
are not intended in any way to be comprehensive.
• Any reader making use of this material does so at his/her own risk
and readers are advised to take independent professional advice
before acting on any information or materials found here.
• Neither Peter Salmon, nor Manning Charles & Associates Limited ,
accepts any responsibility for, nor do they give any
representations or warranties, express or implied, that any of the
information and materials contained in this document and
presentation are complete, accurate or free from errors or
omissions.
16© October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd10/10/2014

18. About Peter Salmon
• Peter Salmon is a senior executive and consultant with
Manning Charles & Associates, and has had a long career in IT,
working with C-level executives, management and staff to
provide successful business focused outcomes across many
business sectors.
• Peter's consulting experience includes IT consulting, general
consulting, financial investigations and litigation support.
• His other experience includes executive management,
professional services, practice management including service
economics and profitability, quality assurance and resource
management.
10/10/2014 © October 2014 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 17

19. Peter Salmon – Contact Details
Should you wish to contact Peter on this or any
other matter, where he might be able to assist then
please contact:-
Phone:- +64 21 533651, or
Email:- manning.charles.assoc@gmail.com
Web:- Some Thoughts – Peter Salmon’s website
10/10/2014 © October 2010 Peter M Salmon and Manning Charles & Associates Ltd 18