The Puerto Rico Education Project: Case Prep & Reflection

Problem/Issue Statement:

The Puerto Rico Education Project (PREP) is a three year information technology project worth fifteen million dollars that involves designing, implementing and installing a mainframe computer, systems and application that would allow the Puerto Rico Department of Education to evaluate the effectiveness of their current education programs. This project is required to be performed on-site in Puerto Rico (PR) and it will be performed by a large US company funded by the US Government. The PREP would also require that the staff and their families move to PR stay for the entire duration of the project.

The main objective of the PREP is for the USCO to design and implement effective data collection as well as develop mathematical models to continually assess and evaluate the educational programs in PR. Since planning is such a crucial aspect to this project we can see from this case study that the USCO failed to complete proper research and preparations.

Situation Assessment:

The USCO has procedures in place to help classify projects as either domestic or international. USCO upper management misclassified the PREP as a domestic project and even though  PR is part of the US it has a vastly different culture/environment than the rest of the country, therefore it should have been classified as an international project.  But since it was classified domestic none of the staff or families were given any cultural training or background information. When they got to PR they were completely shocked at the living conditions and they were not prepared to conquer the language barrier or prepared for the vastly different lifestyle. It got so bad that the USCO employees had to ask the USCO to give them a temporary increase in salary so they could afford private schooling for their children because the public school system in PR was so inadequate.

List of Plausible Alternatives:

The USCO has two alternatives:

1) They can send their employees who are not willing to stay in PR back to the US.

2) They could tell their employees that they have to stay in PR until the project is finished since they are on contract.

Evaluation of the Alternatives: 

When examining both alternatives there are pros and cons to both. Looking at option #1 - to send back the employees who are not willing to stay - it would allow the company to keep their employees happy by sending them back to the US and it would allow the USCO to hire other employees who can speak the language and are more comfortable living in PR. On the reverse side of this is finding new jobs for all the employees they send back to the US and the financial burden of sending all of those employees back to the US after they spent time and money sending them to PR in the first place. There is also the potential burden of a legal issue with breaking the contract or the backlash from employees they can not find replacement work for.
The second option - forcing their employees to stay in PR  due to their contract - would have a pro of keeping their investment in their employees and the sunk costs of the project working for them rather than giving that all up. On the reverse side this decision would continue to lead to low moral and very unhappy employees, which would incur low productivity and poor work performance rates.

Reflection:

As per the consultants presentation they brought to us three solutions. 

1) Keep the employees that are already contracted for the project and find ways to boost moral and productivity through incentives such a cars, vacations, bonuses, overtime etc.

2) Keep the seven "happy" employees and hire Puerto Rican programmers to replace the unhappy workers being sent back to the US.

3) Cancel the project all together.

After weighing all of the options and details outlined I have come to the following conclusions. I think our first step should be to should keep the current employees. We need to set up a meeting with all of the team members and attempt to find out what would make them happy and discuss some potential incentives for them and their families. An example would be providing a shuttle bus to work, which would allow the remanning family members to have access to a car. We could also look into and discuss some productivity driven bonuses. I think as a company we need to accept some failure in setting up this project (classifying it as domestic instead of international) and in not properly preparing our employees and their families for what they were being thrown into. I think trying to see if we can properly motivate them and finding some middle ground between making them happy(and motivated) and keeping costs at a minimum should be our first step. I would personally set a time limit to this aspect - say 2-3 months.  If this step doesn’t correct the behavior and improve the timeline of the project then I think we need to look into letting the unhappy employees out of their current contract - contingent on them signing a new agreement that will state that they will be let out of this contract with a promise of not facing any legal action from USCO, but that we will attempt to find them jobs for an "x" amount of time. If within that given time we have not been able to place them then they are on their own to find work because we will not be guaranteeing them a position in this new contract.  We would also have to bite the bullet and eat the cost of transporting them and their families home again since we were the ones who brought them here ill prepared.  Once all of the unhappy employees have left then we would replace them with Puerto Rican programmers at entry level pay (provided we can find the talent necessary for the job) and continue to work on bridging the language barrier by providing a language teach for "x" amount of hours/week for all employees to learn/improve their non native tongue. We could also institute in-house team building exercises and many a project wide employee lunch once a month to help foster the relationships between all of the employees. I believe that this would help circumvent any potential rift between the US and new PR employees. 

 Since I think there is a 0% chance of canceling the project without incurring severe repercussions and backlash to our reputation That leaves option three completely off the table. Besides we wouldn't want to run the risk of making the PR education commission unhappy, which is not the case currently.  I think the customer/client’s satisfaction is the most important for us  - high customer approval is key to our reputation.  Cancelling the project also runs a very high legal risk, which I think (even though it is only potential at this point) steering clear of is a very high priority.

I think a combination of option one and two gives us the best chance for success overall. We have the potential to get this project back on track in both time and employee productivity/moral. I think working with the current employees is an important first step in bridging the widening gap. If that doesn't yield any solutions then replacing the unhappy workers with new native programmers is the next best option. 

Business Impacts of Ubuntu

Ubuntu is a free, complete desktop Linux operating system. It included more than 1,000 pieces of software, such as Linux kernel and Gnome. It also covers every standard desktop application from word processing, spreadsheet applications, internet access apps, web server software, email software, programming language and tools.

In answering the question, whether or not my company should virtualize their workstations through the use of Ubuntu, there are two key aspects to examine before a decision can be made.

First, what is the learning curve associated with Ubuntu. It seems fairly easy to install and to learn but when we break down the time spent installing and teaching all of the employees how to operate it effectively we are looking at some wasted hours that could have been spent processing orders, taking new sales, or meeting clients.  Along with this information we need to look at how useful a program like this would be to our company. Since we are so small (only four full-time employees) and all employees already work on a seamless and problem free system would Ubuntu be worth while? To that  I say no.  The fashion company uses a Windows based platform to do it's business. We use Microsoft Word, Excel, Gmail, Dropbox and Google Drive without any issues. Each of our employees already knows how to operate all of the above applications without any issues and we never have any problems sharing documents or photos on Google Drive or Dropbox.  Since working from home is not an option for us (if the weather is bad then our warehouse is closed because the trucks will not pickup or drop off any goods) Ubuntu doesn't seem to have any benefit for my company.  So we would be spending time and money in setting up this new software that we don't really have a need for I say save the money and keep using our current system.

Since we've already established that this would not be a useful tool for my company it may not be necessary to even touch upon this aspect but I feel like it should be mentioned none the less. Ubuntu states on their website that they a secure platform. "You can surf in safety with Ubuntu - confident that your files and data will stay protected - thanks to the built-in firewall and virus protection. And if potential vulnerability appears, we provide automatic updates, which you can install in a single click" (http://www.ubuntu.com/desktop).  Even with this built-in protection what can stop a hacker from getting into classified databases or accessing secure files? There are many sophisticated ways to hack systems and computers these days. My company, like most, have secure financial data on their systems and they wouldn't want that exposed to the outside world.

Overall, I am not quite sold on the idea of Ubuntu (maybe because I am not one to trust technology I do not know). I think the security risk is still too high but more than anything I feel like it would not be useful to my company. I think instead of transitioning to Ubuntu we could save ourselves time and money and keep using our current applications/processes that haven't failed us.

Strategic IT Transformation at Accenture

Problem/Issue Statement:

The main issue for this company deals with their struggle to decided whether to continue using their legacy system, developed by Arthur Andersen, or to create a completely new IT infrastructure.  This situation stemmed from the splitting and rebranding of Andersen Consulting from it's parent company Arthur Andersen in 2001.  Since then Andersen Consulting has become known as Accenture. Accenture decided that after the split they were going to do a complete IT overhaul.  They decided to go with one platform that housed streamlined applications. They also found new vendors/suppliers and were able to reduce their IT expense around the globe.  This feat is very hard for many organization to undergo but Accenture did it very successfully for a company their size. Accenture wanted a simplified process that still allowed them to remain on the cutting edge of IT.

Currently, Accenture is considering another IT upgrade. They are looking at two options: the first is  keeping their newly overhauled system and the second is the implementation of a governance system called Control Objectives for Information and Related Technologies (COBIT) to update their business standards and reporting. COBIT 5 is being highly considered due to massive amount of regulations and compliance standards Accenture has to comply with across the globe. If they switch to COBIT 5 it will help Accenture to "maintain high quality information to support business decisions, achieve strategic goals and realize business benefits through the effective and innovative use of IT, achieve operational excellence through reliable, efficient application of technology, maintaing IT-related risk at an acceptable level, optimize the cost of IT services and technology and support compliance with relevant laws, regulations, contractual agreements and policies." (Credit: http://www.isaca.org/COBIT/Pages/default.aspx?cid=1003566&Appeal=PR)

The current symptoms of the problem are a lack of sophisticated ability to measure the successfulness of IT projects,  an inability to address the many regulations and compliance policy standards that must be adhered to by law.

If Accenture decided to implement COBIT 5  the scope of rebuilding/re-crafting include the re-training the staff to get their accreditation on the system, the implementation of new staff or redistribution of staff to ensure that COBIT 5 is being used correctly, and expenses related to training and tech support.  Implementing this new system will affect Accenture's branches all over the world so the rollout would be massive.

List of Plausible Alternatives:


There are two alternatives for Accenture. To keep their current system or to adopt a new IT governance system - COBIT 5.

In order to make a comparison we need to look at the pros and cons of both options. Firstly, in keeping their current IT system it wouldn't cost them any additional funds, all the employees are familiar with the works on the system and one of the biggest pluses is that the system has been working since its inception in 2001.  On the opposing side there are questions as to whether or not the system is all encompassing or not. Their system is not as sophisticated as COBIT therefore one could wonder how accurately it measures and evaluates risk.

If they were to adopt COBIT 5 they would not only have one of the most common used systems but it operates on a best practices used method.  On the other end COBIT would cost Accenture a lot of money in re-training and certifying their employees on the new system. They may also suffer from their employees resistance to the learning the new program as well as the fact that COBIT might not be as specific and effective for their clients as their current system is.

Evaluating the Alternatives: 

When looking at these two options the two biggest issues seem to be system ability and cost. Accenture needs to figure out which option is best so they can keep moving forward and expanding as a company while keeping their costs as limited as possible. The bottom line for Accenture is evaluating if COBIT help cover gaps in their current system and make their IT governance system more cutting edge and accurate or is it not worth spending the money on a new system that might not be as specific and tailored as the one they currently have.

Recommendation: 

I believe that the best option for Accenture is to continue using their current IT system. Replacing it with COBIT would not only incur high costs in training, materials and consultants, but it could potentially create employee resistance, which could lead to lower productivity levels not just during the transition period but permanently.  Accenture's current IT governance system has been working without any hiccups or glitches since 2001 and they have not had any customer related issues during that time period. Why would they want to spend additional funds (approximately $312 Million) when they do not have to?  COBIT may be cutting edge and more widely accepted but it could potentially not fill as many gaps as they hope and they would be out of pocket a large sum of money for making the switch. I believe that Accenture should stay on it's current path and if they want to make a move I think the idea of applying for accreditation for their system and then potentially selling it to other companies to use might be an option to explore down the road.