 "What PSU CIOs Should Demand Of Their Vendors")
As I was talking to one of my CIO friends hailing from a PSU (name not to be disclosed, and yes, this conversation did happen), it hit upon me how difficult it is to wear the CIO hat in a PSU. Not that it’s very easy for his CIO counterpart in the private sector. But then who can deny the pain of bureaucratic underlining to all matters government and public sector, though there would be exceptions too. The relativity of the bureaucratic hurdles in the government departments and PSUs is a subject good enough for a separate debate altogether. And, I will skip it for now. Solely for the purpose of keeping it simple and focused, I would continue from a PSU perspective alone.
Just to clarify, my blog is not a ranting on the bureaucratic hurdles marring PSUs and the ensuing struggle for their CIOs. Nor was the tone of the aforementioned CIO akin to that of complaining. It was rather a very honest and matter-of-fact view-point around how the IT product vendors, implementation partners and consultants need to approach PSU IT projects. And, hence, I will try to present it too as a matter of factly rendition of what a PSU CIO should demand of his/her IT vendor/partner.
So, before signing on the dotted line here’s what the PSU CIOs need to demand beyond the requirements already listed in the RFPs. These may include some pretty obvious, but nevertheless completely unavoidable demands.
And, as I sit down to pen these pointers I realise that at least some of these can be broad-based with applicability to CIOs in general, whether from private or public sector.
Transparency
That’s the rule of the game. If your IT vendor loses out on this, the remaining demands stand redundant. Vendors need to understand the PSU culture very clearly. And, the first and foremost learning from this understanding is the need to be completely transparent in their dealings. Many a times what is promised during the selling of the product is not delivered. The vendor must promise and deliver. The success of the project is directly proportionate to the trust that the vendor can establish. While trust and transparency is a generally applicable attribute, its all the more critical in the public sector considering the stringent regulatory scrutiny. And, not to forget the fact that the scope for working around and bridging any transparency gaps at a later date are limited. You wouldn’t want to get into another long loop of floating RFPs for unmet demands owing to lack of vendor’s transparency.
Flexibility
In case of IT projects in a PSU, a lot of requirements get generated post the implementation as the users gradually start getting trained on the technology and start realising the issues they face with it and further requirements they have. Whether it is the product vendor, implementation partner or the consulting agency, ensure that your IT vendors take this into account and are flexible enough to deal with these additional requirements beyond the original scope of work post the implementation.
Iterative
Beware of vendors who want to sweep over. That’s what you might eventually be aspiring for: a fundamental transformation in the way your organisation conducts business through IT. But, the ‘big bang’ approach might do more harm than benefit.
Do not go for a ‘big bang’ approach. An iterative implementation approach can be more successful when working in a PSU. Yes, you can go for a big bang in terms of covering all the business processes, but identify certain milestones and break down your projects into very small wins. Do a small win, do a ‘go live’ of a small milestone and then build on that slowly. This will help in building confidence and trust of all the employees and getting their involvement. So, while it’s good to have your vendor to be ambitious and confident enough of transforming your processes, ensure that they are not too fast for the pace of your organisation’s progress.
Patience
Finally, you need your IT vendor to have loads and loads of patience. While processes in the public sector are well defined, on the flip side they are more complex with a lot of compliance requirements built in. Further, there are a lot more hierarchies of approvals and controls. As a result, the project implementation is slow – right from the floating of the RFP, vendor evaluation and selection to the final ‘go live’. The vendor should be patient enough to deal with this and stay inspired enough to last through the long journey.