Page 61 - DCAP307_PLANNING_AND_MANAGING_IT_INFRASTRUCTURE

Unit 3: Project Management

Philadelphia Chief Information Officer (CIO) Dianah Neff cited technical complexity, Notes
administrator turnover, and Oracle’s inexperience building such a system as the reasons
for Project Ocean’s problems. Alan Butkovitz, the City Controller, said that his office is
currently reviewing what happened with Oracle, but that it is too soon to speculate as to
what went wrong with Project Ocean? An official at Oracle has said that they would
deliver on their promise to complete the project and that implementation is “still in
progress, and Oracle believes that the work performed to date conforms to the current
agreement.” Project Ocean is currently on hold until the Mayor’s Office of Information
Services (MOIS) and other city officials can reach an agreement with Oracle to put Project
Ocean back on track. Neff stated that she believes a workable solution can be delivered
within 18 months to protect the city’s investment.
Former City Water Commissioner Kumar Kishinchand was a vocal critic of Project Ocean
since before leaving the Commission after 12 years. Kishinchand believes that Project
Ocean was doomed from the start. “One reason is that they picked a company that had
never done a water billing system. Oracle had only done viable customer service systems
with a small portion for billing purposes. Municipal billing Systems tend to be
tremendously complex. The off-the-shelf components of such systems have to be heavily
modified, a complex and time-consuming effort.” Kishinchand also believes that the project
managers did not have much to lose if Project Ocean failed because the city’s Finance
Department was in charge of the project—not the Water Department, which is the main
operator and user of the system. He believes that Neff and the MOIS were interested in
building empires because the water billing system takes in over $300 million in revenues
a year. Kinshinchand also accused city officials of “putting all of their eggs in one basket
[Oracle], without consulting the Water Department.”
In rebuttal, Neff contends that MOIS chose the Oracle Enterprise Resources Planning E-
Business suite for a number of city uses that include human resources and that the Finance
Department made the decision to make water billing the first application. MOIS was then
brought in to implement the system once the decision was made. As Neff contends, “it [the
water billing system] was a big system, very complicated with very unique features.
Hindsight is 20/20 and ERP is difficult anyway.” In addition, the system was designed to
be run by a number of city departments, but there was constant turnover among executive
sponsors. Neff contemplated “Continuity was a problem, and we could have had better-
defined business processes. Problems came up between the contractor and business people.
As we put it, it was a project that ‘washed ashore’ for IT to handle.”
About 12 months ago, MOIS was assigned to review the work completed on Project Ocean
so far. This led to a work stoppage and the suspension of several consultants, Oracle
employees, and a private contractor who had been indicted by a federal grand jury in
Connecticut on unrelated charges that she had paid a state senator to help her win consulting
contracts. While negotiations between the city of Philadelphia and Oracle continue, Neff
is preparing to start a new job as a consultant in another city. After five years as CIO, Neff
maintains that her impending departure is unrelated to Project Ocean.
Questions
1. Do you believe that the trouble with Philadelphia’s water billing system is a technical
problem or a people problem? Why?
2. What factors contributed to the problems associated with Project Ocean?
3. Compare the different views the city’s MOIS and Oracle may have when negotiating
a new agreement that will continue that project.

Source: Matt Hamblen, Philly CIO: Troubled Water Billing System Can Still Work Computerworld,
August 10, 6006.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 55