Government IT budgets are a problem, but less of a problem than idiot managers. In my agency, we have at least four versions of a key database (some of which are incompatible with other versions), depending on the time period covered. When there's a major upgrade, all the big tech companies fly teams to DC for up to a month.
Each of those systems cost millions of dollars. Right about the time the bugs are finally getting fixed in one version, a contractor shows up at field offices to show us how much better the newest product will be.
Additionally, there are some legacy things that should have been replaced a decade ago or longer, so every COTS system bought must be patched to work with the old stuff.
There are also partner agencies, so there's a lot of integration work.
The real problem, IMO, is that government systems are much more complex than they need to be, that management does not have the will or the knowledge to reduce that complexity, that skilled techpeeps in the field offices never get to a level where their knowlege could help the whole organization, that contractors take key IT positions, and that constant contractor turnover deprives organizations of institutional knowledge.
This may or may not be the case in any specic agency, but contacts in a number of federal and state agencies tell me they have similar situations, except not all can get IBM, HP, Microsoft, Oracle, et cetera to fly their staff to IT-HQ to fix an issue.
Each of those systems cost millions of dollars. Right about the time the bugs are finally getting fixed in one version, a contractor shows up at field offices to show us how much better the newest product will be.
Additionally, there are some legacy things that should have been replaced a decade ago or longer, so every COTS system bought must be patched to work with the old stuff.
There are also partner agencies, so there's a lot of integration work.
The real problem, IMO, is that government systems are much more complex than they need to be, that management does not have the will or the knowledge to reduce that complexity, that skilled techpeeps in the field offices never get to a level where their knowlege could help the whole organization, that contractors take key IT positions, and that constant contractor turnover deprives organizations of institutional knowledge.
This may or may not be the case in any specic agency, but contacts in a number of federal and state agencies tell me they have similar situations, except not all can get IBM, HP, Microsoft, Oracle, et cetera to fly their staff to IT-HQ to fix an issue.
