Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 688 posts

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#471

Post by AdrianB1 »

I have 2 close friends that work or were working there. One was an application key user in a different company, he was hired as a deployment manager for that app for more than double the pay; I am happy for him, but he knows he is not a manager.

The other one was hired on a position, asked to do something completely different he was not qualified for, the work hours were around 70-80 per week (no overtime paid), zero management implication so he left after a few months. They went in panic mode, offered him double the pay and less work hours, he refused to stay there so they become aggressive.

They use to pay above the market for whatever they can hire, but the chaos inside is making any competent people leave asap, so they pay a lot to retain whatever they can, not the experts. It is just a bubble with nothing than hot air inside.

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#473

Post by bitcharmer »

lmilcin wrote: post #17

I have worked with Deloitte on two projects (on clients' side, I would never willingly work for Deloitte). Generally expect them to do absolute minimum necessary to meet the contract. The code was obfuscated to ensure support contract. The people employed to write it were not interested in the quality in the slightest but were interested a lot in specifics of the contract.

I worked on huge projects in telco where big consultancies where a common thing. We had a joke about Accenture and their tactics. Upon being questioned about the quality of the software they delivered they would reply:

"There was no requirement that the whole thing should work. We can put in a change request and bill separately".

Also - the "no one has ever been fired for hiring IBM" syndrome among the higher management.

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#474

Post by tomcam »

brtkdotse wrote: post #415
aasasd wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reads like a copy of Russian government contract practices. Put up a contest, list requirements in such a way that only one company would satisfy them without going bust or mad, award the contract to that company. ‘Make the thing using this and that technologies’ does appear regularly.

There was some hubbub in Sweden a while back about the armed forces putting up a _really_ specific job ad, like it was tailored to one person. Well, it turned out it was, because the person posting the add forgot to take out the phrase “Make sure Björn meets these requirements” in the middle of the ad.

That’s beautiful

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#475

Post by Aeolun »

zaroth wrote: post #115

> Deloitte is the only contractor that can meet the project requirements, because configuration of the VAMS application is occurring using Deloitte’s propriety GovConnect platform. Therefore, no other contractor has rights or access to leverage the system to carry out O&M activities, such as the administration of the system, change and defect management and end user support. As the only contractor with the GovConnect…

> Deloitte is the only contractor that can achieve the O&M scope and contract requirements

Clearly not. Unless... the requirements were garbage to begin with?

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#476

Post by anticapit »

brtkdotse wrote: post #415
aasasd wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reads like a copy of Russian government contract practices. Put up a contest, list requirements in such a way that only one company would satisfy them without going bust or mad, award the contract to that company. ‘Make the thing using this and that technologies’ does appear regularly.

There was some hubbub in Sweden a while back about the armed forces putting up a _really_ specific job ad, like it was tailored to one person. Well, it turned out it was, because the person posting the add forgot to take out the phrase “Make sure Björn meets these requirements” in the middle of the ad.

This is exactly how American companies game the h1b visa system. When I worked at AVG we would write job requirement so specific to an Israel developers who worked for one of our subsidiaries that it was clear no other human being in the world could qualify for it.

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#477

Post by bitcharmer »

rmason wrote: post #462

If I was to guess the CDC wrote poor specs. Probably never talked at length to a variety of different county health departments to understand their needs. Never had a persona written so they didn't understand the need for IE or that people might be using it on a mobile phone. Deloitte just coded the spec, cashed their check and walked away. Deloitte probably outsourced development overseas. I know some smaller govern…

No. Big consultancies are hired to - among other things - capture the requirements (simply because many of their clients don't know how to do it properly). But they intentionally do it in a form that lets them over-charge and under-deliver. Seen it too many times.

Re: CDC website built by Deloitte at a cost of $44M is abandoned due to bugs

#480

Post by hef19898 »

rlonn wrote: post #432
StavrosK wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the analogy. Why would I give the requirements for making a website to someone who doesn't make websites? The government should do whatever anyone who wants a website does, hire someone to make a website. What's the issue?

I think this is what usually happens and what causes many public projects to fail: the customer has no competent staff that can a) write requirements or b) evaluate tenders. They're often incompetent enough to even hire someone competent to do those things. The government should maybe have a dedicated unit that assists other units with procurement of IT solutions. Where the staff gets very well compensated when a pro…

I used to work for a consultancy that almost exclusively worked for the German armed forces. And pretty signficant chunk of these contracts evolved around requirements and specification documents. Basically we wrote them, the way the armyed forces wnated them to be written, and they just signed of on them. That was equally shocking as it was hilarious sometimes. The sad thing, almost the complete management of that firm, and the majority of employees, used to be former Army, Navy or Airforce. Or from the civil admin staff. I always wondered how much value we actually created, the amount of additional expertise was quite limited.
Post reply on HN