NAO: 1 in 5 of Whitehall's mega projects at risk of failure

Institutions never solve the problems they were created to deal with

The easy way to avoid failure is to avoid defining success. If you can avoid measuring the initial problem, so much the better.

Ooh, it's sooo difficult!

"The cost, ambition, complexity and risk of major government projects have increased hugely over the past decade"

No, cos we've never built an aircraft carrier before, or had civil service administrative processes which at one time were capable of running the largest empire the world has ever seen (feel free to wax lyrical at any point)....

Standard bureaucratic response

> "The government agreed with our assessment that the central system for assuring major projects was not optimal," the NAO says, and the government has since set up the Major Projects Authority (MPA)

Add more committees and paperwork. It's a poor substitute for talented project leaders, but it's the only substitute we have.

How to do things right - or wrong

Let's assume that you wanted to run a project well.

You'd develop some requirements, and fix them, but with build in contractual means at scheduled intervals to manage upgrades as technology moves on. You'd hire a skilled and experienced project manager, pay them a decent wage, and give them appropriate delegated authority in decision making, hiring/firing, and even pay (to motivate/retain the best personnel). You'd also contract the project manager for the duration of the project, with major and attractive long-term incentives based on the performance of the project. You'd then back off, and let them run the damn thing, only getting involved as a senior manager to help smoothe the worst problems.

Let's assume that you're the government.

Requirements change every few months. Civil servants gain project management qualifications, but with few exceptions, their grade and pay bear scant resemblance to their levels of skill and experience. Delegated authority is non-existent, and while the ability to hire staff is merely lethargic and painful, we are nearly unable to fire. One of our current team on an un-named but many-many-million-pound project is a barely-functioning alcoholic. He has threatened that, if we try to dismiss him, he will bring a discrimination case, which, although he won't win, will cost the department hugely in both time and money. The unions will, of course, back him on this. Senior management only get involved in projects if they think it'll make them look good. Generally, they do this by taking Industry's side in any dispute, because the civil service doesn't give out directorships...

Anonymous coward because, although on any given day I find the governance anywhere between frustrating and woeful, I do actually believe that the job I do is, or at least can be, worthwhile, and I don't want to lose it.

the solution.....

Is not to have big projects. Whether its the public or private sector big projects are more likely to fail than not. Most "succesful" large projects have had "success" redefined beyond all recognition.

So the answer is to knock all grandstanding ego driven large projects on the head before they get any budget.