In government tech, hiring vendors is often seen as a way of deflecting risk. The thinking goes like this: “If the vendor fails, we can fire them or pass off the blame for poor delivery or missed deadlines.”
But if a vendor fails, it’s the resident who suffers. If they can’t access critical government services, they’re not going to blame Deloitte or Accenture. Their government failed them. This is where risk-deflection thinking breaks down.
In their guide for de-risking government IT projects, 18F emphasizes that for a government software project to be successful, it needs strong product ownership by a government employee who understands users needs and can quickly make critical product decisions. A vendor may still get brought in to assist; but the strategy, oversight, prioritization, and key outcomes are all driven by the government product owner who is deeply connected to the needs of the users they serve.
This is one of the ways government technologists can better partner with the people we serve: by taking greater responsibility for the outcome.
“Treating software as just another commodity overlooks the fact that mission-critical software cannot simply be bought the way you buy a truck or even a building. It’s an integral part of the service you provide, and that service and the environment in which it operates are dynamic.” —Jennifer Pahlka