IT project failure

1. Prepared By –
Pranav Gulati
Neeralie Prajapati
Aditya Vaddaypalli

2. Table Of Contents
 Introduction
 Project specifications
 Why the project was initiated
 Issues with implementations
 Key findings
 Project costing
 Add on’s
 Conclusion

3. Introduction
 Sydney water corporation owned by NSW government
 Manage waste and storm water to provide drinking water to
Sydney residents
 Served 4.7 million in Sydney, Illawarra, Blue Mountains
 AU$13 billion assets and AU$1.4 billion annual revenue
 3,000 employees
 Capital expenditure AU$500 million per year
Auditor-General, N 2003, 'Review of Sydney water’s customer information
and billing system', New South Wales Auditor-General Vs Report to
Parliament, Volume One.

4. Project Specifications
 Project Started – 27th March 2000
 Contract was won by PwC (PriceWaterhouseCoopers)
 In June 2000 it invested AU$61 million in a customer
relationship management and billing system
 Project delayed by 18 months
 Project abandoned - 30 October 2002
 Total project costed AU$153.1 million (estimated initial project
cost AU$38.2 million) of public money
AVISON, D., GREGOR, S. & WILSON, D. 2006. Managerial IT unconsciousness.
Communications of the ACM, 49, 88-93.

5. Why was project initiated ?
 To improve service towards customers
 Upgrade existing information systems
 To integrate 12 existing internal standalone systems with 60
external interfaces
 It needed improvement in process

6. Issues with implementation
 PwC team was inexperienced in system integration
 Project team was working at too low a level
 Delayed communication, increased costs
 Numerous change requests/rescheduling
 Assessment of Auditor General was misguiding
 Lacked involvement and accountability of employees
 Risk management was not effective at corporate and project
level
CHARETTE, R. N. 2005. Why software fails. IEEE spectrum, 42, 36.

7. Key Findings
 Under-estimation of complexity
 Increased system integration costs
 Project planning and specifications were inadequate
 Board did not ask the financial department to review the
project’s business case and act proactively in financial issues
 Sydney Water in 2003 sued PricewaterhouseCoopers (PWC)
who had been contracted to implement the CIBS. It had paid
PWC $29.4 million by the time the project was cancelled
 External auditor was not appointed as per project governance
policy

8. Project Costing
 The contract with PwC was varied eight times over the
life of project

9. Add On’s
 Poor communication between project team and customer
service division
 Project was approved and later found that CIBS computer
architecture was not compatible
 During the project it reverted to only implementing a
computer system
 Testing was neither timely nor comprehensive
 Management did not always report important issues to
project board in clear, complete and timely manner
BANNERMAN, P. L. Toward an integrated framework of software project
threats. Software Engineering, 2008. ASWEC 2008. 19th Australian
Conference on, 2008. IEEE, 139-148.

10. Conclusion
 Sydney Water Board is held
responsible for the failed project
 Project lacked accountability and
transparency demonstrating how
important they both are
 Contractual obligations were not
properly understood until after the
project had commenced
 Acted as a watershed moment for
political accountability, as the
project misused millions of tax pay
dollars
THOROGOOD, A., YETTON, P., VLASIC, A. & SPILLER, J. 2004. Raise your
glasses–the water's magic! Strategic IT at SA Water: a case study in alignment,
outsourcing and governance. Journal of Information Technology, 19, 130-139.

11. Any Questions ?