Hamilton Technology Management

Independent Project Assessment, Recovery, and Control Services

 

Hamilton Technology Management

supports Full Disclosure Consulting
and the Contractors Bill of Rights


Acid Test

 

“In war, truth is the first casualty.”

 -  from “Agamemnon”, Aeschylus, c. 500 BCE

 

“Ye shall know the truth and the truth shall help keep the Audit Committee off your back.”

    - Hamilton Technology Management, 2010

 

Can you trust your "trusted advisors"?


Do you know if the decision support information you are getting from"trusted advisors" is truly complete and unbiased? Senior executives with oversight and approval responsibilities for major Information Technology investments need the unvarnished truth, unfiltered and free of "magical thinking" about whether or not:
HTM 1
  • Business cases and project plans include unverifiable estimates of costs, benefits, and risks, and uncertain accounting for "black swan" events
  • Solid, independent due diligence supports sponsor approvals of vendor proposals
  • Current projects will exceed, meet, miss, or REALLY miss their goals
  • You should save, scale back, reprioritize, reschedule or kill troubled projects
  • "Project risk management" is actually managing risk

Finally, of all the "trusted sources" you rely on for decision-support, which ones are on your side, and
only on your side?

Rational investment decisions depend on transparent information


Transparent information is simply the unvarnished truth about every significant factor in an investment decision. Adam Smith recognized its importance, even if some of his most ardent contemporary disciples ignore it.  But all too often, incomplete and biased information - laundered, rinsed, and spun until it becomes  "Asymmetric Information" - is what most decision makers get.

Asymmetric Information comes from sources with a personal or financial interest in what you decide to do with it.  If you have ever bought a used car without benefit of Carfax, or a house with a glossed-over home inspection report provided by the seller or the seller's real-estate agent, you know what Asymmetric Information can cost you.

Those responsible for IT investment decisions often get 
nothing but Asymmetric Information, such as
  • Business cases with unverifiable estimates of costs, benefits, and risks, and uncertain accounting for "black swan" events
  • Vendor proposals approved by sponsors and project managers with unverifiable, often missing evidence of due diligence
  • Progress and status reports that shade or spin reality to ensure continued funding

The high cost of Asymmetric Information


Relying on Asymmetric Information can lead to bad or late decisions at every step, from the initial decision to fund a project to subsequent decisions about changing direction, adjusting funding, changing vendors, or cutting losses.

Most major investments in information technology fail to deliver the results expected from them.  According to a 2008 survey by IAG Consulting, only 32% of the companies surveyed had the kind of IT project controls that made it likely their projects would succeed.  In the other 68%, successful projects happened - but only by accident.  The costs of these failed investments are estimated in billions of dollars each year.

Asymmetric Information accounts for most of those costs and also increases the risk of "long-fuse failures".

The high cost of Long-Fuse Failures


Asymmetric information leads to many projects that, even if they come in on time, within budget, and with all their features intact, simply don't add enough business value to justify their cost.  These superficial successes are really "long-fuse failures", investments that take away resources from better opportunities to add business value.

Some studies have shown a consistent, year-over-year failure rate of 15% or more attributable to long-fuse failures. Long-fuse failures are harder to spot, unless you have expert resources who can help you objectively evaluate and decide among ALL your options.

Whether a wasted investment is a short-fuse crash-and-burn or a long-fuse failure, every failed project represents a unique story of things gone wrong.

 

Where we come in


We serve senior-level finance and operations executives who are responsible for approving the right investments and avoiding the wrong ones.  Our clients know that, to at least some extent, EVERY approval represents a gamble.

They also know that, even in the giant casino of IT investments, some gamblers regularly win more, and lose less, than  others.  They know how to read the cards and the players. They can sense the loaded dice and the stacked decks. They know what to do before they need to do it.  In other words, they know how - and when - to make the right calls.

Our job is to help you make those calls with complete and unbiased decision-support information.

We help you cut through to the unvarnished truth

We provide independent, unbiased, expert opinions on the most important information you need to make informed decisions about technology investments. We can help you make sense of the information you get from project sponsors, vendors, and project managers, quickly spotting the important omissions and asymmetric information in
  • Technology business cases
  • Project plans and estimates
  • Risk management plans
  • Stakeholder communications

We can also help you respond positively, with guidance and support for improving these and other deliverables including
  • Business and technology alignment
  • Requirements
  • Documentation
  • Mid-phase and phase-end reviews and gates

It doesn't matter where you are in the investment life cycle.


For over 20 years, industry, government, and university research has shown that most projects enter the "Yellow Zone" at some point. The Yellow Zone is the home of projects in trouble. A Yellow-Zone project can be anywhere from "not quite Green" (almost on track) to "Blood Orange" (just this side of doomed).

A project can fall into the Yellow Zone before it even becomes a project. Up to 20% of failed projects start when a bad idea pushed by a powerful sponsor gets initial funding instead of a flat-out rejection. 
Because of Asymmetric Information from those who need a "Yes", decision makers often have no idea when a project falls into the Yellow Zone, how far down it has sunk into the Yellow Zone, how to get it back to Green, or whether or not to perform mercy killing.

We help decision makers identify technology investments that should not get funded in the first place. We help them determine when and how to intervene in those already funded.  We help them determine how to help Yellow Zone projects stay on track, get back on track, or meet a merciful death instead of  wasting more time and resources.

We fill in the most dangerous blank spot on your project organization chart.


When jobs, reputations, and revenue are on the line, every project runs the risk of becoming an interest group. When key players need a project to continue, whether or not there is any business value to be gained from doing so, they are less likely to deliver the unvarnished truth. Few projects have "Exit Champions" - professionals who represent the interests of the investors, not the business sponsor, the developers or the vendors.

As your independent Exit Champions, we are ready, willing and able to tell you
"This project must die"

We help you assess and choose from ALL your IT investment options.

We follow a disciplined, easy-to-understand process, rooted in recognized best practices that
  • Assesses and compares your options.  We help you determine which of your investment options, including the project under review, gives you the greatest opportunity to add business value, both short-term and long-term.  We look at ALL the arguments for an against an investment, including both tangible and intangible benefits and risks.  Sometimes we even find better reasons for approving an investment than its sponsors have included. 
  • Maps key deliverables to one another.  We map business cases to business requirements, business requirements to functional requirements, and functional requirements to technical requirements.  We find disconnects that can be fixed and deal-breakers that can't be fixed.

We also review risk factors that often get too little attention, such as
  • Team instability and morale problems
  • Schedules that stretch across fiscal years
  • Overloaded requirements
  • Dependence on technology that is untried, likely to become obsolete before you get full value, or orphaned if its owner gets bought out or goes under
  • Poorly defined Service Level Agreements
  • Poor communications among developers, vendors and stakeholders

This information enables us to present you with a realistic picture of all your options, including whether to continue, rescope, reschedule, or cancel the project.  All our recommendations are vendor and technology neutral, so you can choose any qualified resource to do the follow-on work.

We don't care what you decide to do with the information we provide.

That's not exactly true. We DO want our findings and recommendations to help you make the right calls. We just make sure we have no financial stake in your decisions.  We also don't bid on any follow-on work that results from your decisions.  We will do it, but you'll have to ask us, because we won't ask you.

What if you have already decided to go ahead before contacting us?

We can represent your interests on the delivery team, with end-to-end oversight and support for project management, quality management, and risk management, including:
  • Quality reviews of key deliverables, including business cases, functional specifications, and business-driven test plans
  • Planning and management of quality gates and phase reviews
  • Identification of opportunities for process improvement
  • Post-implementation reviews
  • Project documentation

What Full-Disclosure adds to the value we provide

Full-Disclosure means that all our consultants know how much we charge and all our clients know how much we pay.  This transparency, as Adam Smith said, makes it possible to develop business relationships based on trust.

Full Disclosure also opens the curtain on the efficiency and effectiveness of our own operations. The consulting industry has a long history of maximizing margins by squeezing professional compensation instead of managing for efficiency and effectiveness.  We don't think clients should be expected to subsidize a poorly-managed service vendor.

We can pay our professionals more than "retail staffing" firms, charge you less, and still make a profit, because:

  • We don't have offices, so we don't have to bill you to pay the rent
  • We rely on networking and referrals, so you don't have to subsidize commissions
  • We don't have partners, practice directors, or a corporate parent, so you don't have to subsidize personnel who don't do anything for you
  • We base on delivery practices on recognized international standards, Bodies of Knowledge, methods and practices, so we don't have to bill you for the cost of packaging and marketing "branded services" with little, if any additional value
  • We provide each other with regular, low-cost, high-impact training, instead of buying high-cost training (and can do the same for you)
  • We require our team members to have at least one professional certification and earn - and DOCUMENT - at least 20 CPE credits each year, at their own expense, not ours, and not yours
  • We require anyone who wants to join us to undergo a background check at their own expense, so we don't have to bill you to cover our vetting costs

Contact us for more information

For information about our team, our experience, and how we might be able to help you, contact us

Copyright Hamilton Technology Management 2010