Slashdot Mirror


US Air Force Scraps ERP Project After $1 Billion Spent

angry tapir writes "The U.S. Air Force has decided to scrap a major ERP (enterprise resource planning) software project after spending $1 billion, concluding that finishing it would cost far too much more money for too little gain. Dubbed the Expeditionary Combat Support System (ECSS), the project has racked up $1.03 billion in costs since 2005, 'and has not yielded any significant military capability,' an Air Force spokesman said in a statement. 'We estimate it would require an additional $1.1B for about a quarter of the original scope to continue and fielding would not be until 2020. The Air Force has concluded the ECSS program is no longer a viable option for meeting the FY17 Financial Improvement and Audit Readiness (FIAR) statutory requirement. Therefore, we are canceling the program and moving forward with other options in order to meet both requirements.'"

53 of 362 comments (clear)

  1. New project by Director+of+Acronyms · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd like to see them implement a CRM system instead

    --
    Never look back at the carnage.
    1. Re:New project by c0lo · · Score: 5, Funny

      I'd like to see them implement a CRM system instead

      Are the victims of drone attacks complaining much about the quality of service?

      --
      Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
    2. Re:New project by Spy+Handler · · Score: 4, Funny

      CRM? Good idea. Then the Air Force can keep better track of its customer data like which Buckwhupistani wedding received a Predator strike package and which one got a JDAM shower and so on.

    3. Re:New project by jhoegl · · Score: 4, Funny

      A gift is a gift!

    4. Re:New project by crutchy · · Score: 4, Funny

      just be thankful the Buckwhupistani's don't return the gifts

    5. Re:New project by evil_aaronm · · Score: 4, Funny

      If they are, they should: if a drone fired at them can't take 'em out, something's not working correctly. /* Note: I'm not for drone strikes, necessarily, but, dammit, if you're targeting something, you'd better take it TF out. */

    6. Re:New project by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Are the victims of drone attacks complaining much about the quality of service?

      Most drone attacks are done by the CIA, not the Air Force. If the Air Force launched the attacks, the results could be second guessed by CIA analysts evaluating satellite photos. But if the CIA both launches the attacks and evaluates the results, it is all wrapped up in a neat little package with no loose strings of accountability.

    7. Re:New project by wooferhound · · Score: 4, Funny

      This project has grown too big to fail . . .

      --
      We are Dead Stars looking back Up at the Sky
    8. Re:New project by Antonovich · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't worry, such gifts are remembered for many generations - the Buckwhupistanis will likely return the gifts at some point... That's just the cost of being so generous.

    9. Re:New project by TheLink · · Score: 4, Funny
      --
  2. Ouch. by Sorthum · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Seems that this is a common theme with ERP rollouts-- scope creep tends to get them all in the end. Granted, most organizations seem to wave off long before the $1 billion mark...

    1. Re:Ouch. by Sorthum · · Score: 5, Informative

      Oh wow, it gets worse. Oracle won this with a $88.5 million bid; what the hell took the Air Force so long to pull the plug with that kind of overrun?

    2. Re:Ouch. by cusco · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wow. I guess that this is a new record, eclipsing even the FBI's failure from a couple of years ago. Have to say, I am impressed. Leave it to the Pentagram to do things bigger and worse than anyone else on the planet.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
    3. Re:Ouch. by LeperPuppet · · Score: 3, Informative

      Granted, most organizations seem to wave off long before the $1 billion mark...

      Most organisations aren't connected to the DoD's endless money spigot.

    4. Re:Ouch. by Amouth · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I love how each branch of the DoD gets to pick it's own ERP solution. It says Oracle won it over SAP, not that i have a preference but SAP has a showing of being successful in the market via is use in the Navy. With all ERP solutions there are going to be issues, but overall the Navy has been very successful with their SAP deployment.

      Again, why isn't this pushed from the top of the DoD vs. every branch figuring it out and reinventing the wheel each time?

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    5. Re:Ouch. by icebike · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One has to wonder if the Navy was all that successful or just willing to handle a portion of the job, or willing to settle for half the result.

      You will never know, because those who do have too much ass to cover, and they will be slipping in fixes and upgrades for decades, before deciding the whole thing is too top heavy.

      Systems of this size are grandiose and seldom successful. Not only government fails at systems this big, private industry does as well. But private industry learns from their costly mistakes faster. Google is a good example. They hold a house cleaning each spring and just arbitrarily kill off projects that have no chance of a ROI.

      Its amazing that two world wars were fought with this kind of stuff being handled by people.

      --
      Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
    6. Re:Ouch. by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Funny

      Oh wow, it gets worse. Oracle won this with a $88.5 million bid; what the hell took the Air Force so long to pull the plug with that kind of overrun?

      What's an order of magnitude between friends. :p

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    7. Re:Ouch. by Amouth · · Score: 3, Informative

      I fully understand where you are coming from, and i can't answer for the Navy on the system as a whole, but i will say their implementation PM (Plant Maintenance) portion of SAP is a very good example of a very functional implementation that is very effective at doing it's job.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    8. Re:Ouch. by pete6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously, has there EVER been an ERP implementation that was anything other than a colossal fuckup? Way behind schedule, overbudget, and not functioning properly are the general themes of ERP. And businesses continue to fall for this scam.

    9. Re:Ouch. by aXis100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's because it's usually the head of the accounting department that gets to approve it. Farking ridiculous.

    10. Re:Ouch. by purpledinoz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Did anyone also do a double-take on this story? $1B spent on software, and nothing to show for it? Let's say you pay a developer $100K/year, and the project lasted 10 years. That's 1000 developers working on this for 10 years! And after this, nothing to show for it? That's probably the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while... I wonder if a big chunk of this money went to crony suppliers like Halliburton.

    11. Re:Ouch. by raftpeople · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Most of the ERP implementations I have been part of have been successful. Every major corporation has a working ERP system, how do you think that happened?

      There are big failures, typically in situations where the size of the project exceeds the experience and capabilities of the people managing them. With something as big as the DoD, there just aren't too many opportunities for anyone to gain the proper experience to know how to make it successful. Something like that needs to be broken into much smaller pieces and you just have to forego some of the efficiencies of a completely integrated non-redundant system in favor of more manageable pieces.

    12. Re:Ouch. by raftpeople · · Score: 4, Informative

      Don't confuse the "Resource Planning" part of ERP with actually meaning anything. ERP used to be MRP when it was just focused on the manufacturing aspects of a business and specifically planning raw material requirements to meet the deman for the finished goods. But as companies added modules to the suite to encompass the entire enterprise, they decided to change the name to Enterprise Resource Planning because it sounded more "Enterprisey". Sure there is some planning in there and a whole bunch of transaction execution and tracking that really isn't related to planning.

    13. Re:Ouch. by allcoolnameswheretak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Actually, having 1000 developers working on one project is an excellent explanation for the cost, time taken and failure.

    14. Re:Ouch. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 5, Informative

      But private industry learns from their costly mistakes faster.

      lol.

      Let me restate that again: lol.

      This comment makes me think that you've worked in neither government nor industry. Or you've been very, very lucky with your employers. Or never worked at a very large company.

      Part of the reason (possibly the main one) they fail is due to people. That is the same for both sectors.

      With a project that large, it's a big embarressment if it fails, so it's in the interest of the people in charge of the project to force it through at all costs no matter what. Because they don't care about their host organisation (be it government or industry), they care about their own career. Having a big failure like that is a blot. So, instead some half-asses expensive, buggy and minimally functional heap of shit is usually foisted onto the hapless minions of the organisation, usually with a large loss of productivity.

      Oracle is usually the cause, and the event should be known as getting "Oracled".

      It happens in the public, private and education sector. Oracle knows no limits. They will screw anyone they can get their hands on with crap products. There is no escape.

      At least the USAF pulled the plug. After $1bn and a 10x overrun, there is not a single change in hell that the system would every be a net gain. It was a huge fuckup. But given where it was at that time, this was the only sane solution.

      The problem is inherent to large organisations. It's not a public versus private problem. It's a big versus small one. That means that the public sector experiences the problems more often due to its size. But basically, large companies suffer exactly the same problems too.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    15. Re:Ouch. by bfandreas · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All organizations should streamline their operation before even considering to introduce ERP. They all end up with a massive disaster because their procedures are inconsistent and there are a lot of differences how departments handle the same processes.

      Once you have modelled the 5th separate way to order stionary and the umpteenth vacation policy for a department of 5 you know that you are screwed. I wouldn't speak of a system as such but rather a set of specific exceptions.

      It is always the same pattern. And since you never start small and you never start flexible you will end up with a bloated, slow hairball that approximately does was the customer wants. Not what he needs.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    16. Re:Ouch. by ZahrGnosis · · Score: 5, Informative

      To my dismay, I worked on this project. The project started with controversy -- the Oracle bid that beat out SAP like seven years ago was surrounded by complaints. The article skips some details. CSC (Computer Sciences Corp, who is quoted) was the main driver of about $800-million of that spending. It is accurate to say that this change didn't affect them, but that's because hundreds of people had already been laid off or moved of the project between last September and last March.

      There's enough blame to go all over the place. Years spent in requirements that weren't turned into code; time spent passing blame back and forth across development teams who were so large and segregated that they rarely communicated properly, both within the Air Force and within CSC and between the other teams. At it's peak I believe the project had roughly 800 people on it. I don't know what the maximum size a development project should have, but it's got to be smaller than that. That number includes everyone, trainers, managers, and some key initial users and testers, but still it's a very high number.

      The Air Force tried several times to realign the project, but there were contractual disputes or, once that was over, difficulty deciding what to keep and what to scrap, which lead to a death spiral where everything went back on the drawing board and I think ultimately leadership just lost hope.

      It wasn't a complete loss, though. A few small teams, including the one I was previously on, have survived. We built a robust data quality system and are working on some enterprise data dictionary and master data tools, which will help the systems that are left behind. With hundreds of systems supporting a half million users, $1billion probably isn't off the chart -- at least not had this been a successful project, but the worst part is that there's still much work that needs to be done, and now someone will have to start over... again.

  3. jobs program by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know lots of programmers who can get the same result for half the price.

  4. Maybe a pattern here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From my observations, I've concluded that no organizational group works toward reducing its size, reducing the amount of its discretionary budget, or increasing its accountability for the preceding.

    Any exceptions?

  5. those billions by wbr1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Those billions could have put a man on mars, or housed many,many homeless people, or any of a bunch of other uses. When will we realize that most of out debt is crime useless military spending, not social programs?

    --
    Silence is a state of mime.
    1. Re:those billions by ThermalRunaway · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why should it go to social programs? Why cant I just keep my hard earned money for my favorite social program: buying ME beer...

    2. Re:those billions by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Those" billions? It's one billion, singular.

      The US government spends 19% on defense, 19% on social security, and 20% on healthcare. The last two items are expected to grow much faster than the first.

      Useless? Do you know what a "contested sea zone" is and how it affects commerce? No? Yeah, that's what I thought, and the reason why is overwhelming dominance. Assuming, of course, you like imported coffee at the hip indie coffeeshop and hipster fruits like the Durian instead of that crap domestically made junk.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:those billions by nateb · · Score: 3, Funny

      A billion here, a billion there. Pretty soon, you're talking about real money.

      --(sic)

      --
      -- Nate
    4. Re:those billions by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Because civilization is built with taxes.

      There a plenty of countries that have no to little taxes, you are welcome to move their and enjoy the squalor and disease.

      BTW, you benefit from social programs. Less crime, more industry, more entertainment, better beer.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    5. Re:those billions by geekoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The only thing you proved is you don't know what a Ponzi scheme is.
      It's missing 3 crucial elements
      1) A 'undisclosed' way of making money
      2) A handful of people collecting the majority of the money.
      3) Unsustainable under any condition. Meaning no adjustment can be made without collapse the whole thing.

      In a Ponzi scheme, the people 'late' the the investment(which is everyone who didn't start it) won't get anything out of it.
      Social Security is running really well, it has minimal overhead, it's accountable, has money set aside, and is designed to allow for adjustments along the way.

      It should be held op up as one of Americans crowning achievements. Right there with the Hoover Dam, Golden Gate Bridge, the Interstate highway and putting a men on the moon.
      But republicans don't like it so they keep lying about it.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  6. Re:Someone care to explain what this is exactly? by brillow · · Score: 3, Insightful
  7. Naturally by sjames · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ERP is a bunch of disparate functions mashed together then held in place with a metric assload of duck tape. It's only natural that if you try to tacle the whole thing at once the result will be a sort of dynamic paralysis where you run back and forth in a nearly random pattern burning money all the way.

    Just as well, if you ever manage to build the thing, you'll create paralysis across the entire company if you suddenly drop this chimera on people's desks.

    Note, I am NOT claiming that the individual functions aren't necessary nor am I claiming that they shouldn't support common data formats.I am claiming that trying to build the whole thing at once and as a single 'solution' is wrong headed and doomed to failure.

  8. Worst of Both Worlds by Epicaxia · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Perfect application of Hanlon's Razor: Not so much a conspiracy to waste money as the worst combination of both world (defense acquisition and enterprise software development). Both fields are very prone to overruns, scope creep, and repeated waste of funds as manager after manager--or contractor after contractor--throws away work to start over again. Another great example is the FAA's version of enterprise software, which is currently at $63.4 BILLION and counting (though, to be fair, it's quite possible the most complicated software project in the world).

    Still, there are worse examples--specifically, when these kinds of overruns, violations, and program restarts are done deliberately to ensure continued funding to entrenched players in a limited field and / or to pursue minor permutations on someone's pet dream of a project. This can occur at the cost of throwing away many years and billions of dollars of decent work while never really getting closer to a functioning system. Space Launch System, anyone? (Not a software example, but the line between software and aerospace engineering is a lot thinner than most people realize.)

  9. Enterprise resource planning? by Namarrgon · · Score: 4, Funny

    If only they'd had a better ERP system, they could've planned this project more carefully, and put all those resources to better use.

    --
    Why would anyone engrave "Elbereth"?
    1. Re:Enterprise resource planning? by a_hanso · · Score: 4, Funny

      Did you... just... invent a bootstrapping ERP system?

  10. There IS accountability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Obama is in charge... the buck stops with him; he's the one who brags about his "kill list"... Oh, wait, this is Slashdot... Obama has a GREAT smile and a cool attitude and nobody is to blame for the drone strikes. Move along, nothing to see here. Dick Cheney is retired so there is no evil to be denounced.

    1. Re:There IS accountability by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Liberalism and leftism are not a fan clubs. Many of us might prefer the big O over the alternative whilst also deeply disaproving drone strikes against allied countries.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
    2. Re:There IS accountability by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 5, Informative

      disaproving drone strikes against allied countries.

      Huh ?!

      CIA launched drone strikes on Israel?!

      Oh, c'mon ! Pakistan isn't an "allied country". Them Pakis actively support the Talibans.
       

      --
      Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    3. Re:There IS accountability by TheCarp · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well you know...its ok to compromise on such a little detail like that. I mean, its not like people are going to die over it....oh wait...

      Yah, thats why I never voted for him. Being the scum floating on top of the other scum doesn't make it any more appetizing to me.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    4. Re:There IS accountability by DrLang21 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh to be young an idealistic again. Someday you'll understand that the world just isn't so simple. For example, while I do not condone Obama's actions in the Middle East conflicts, Romney would have been far more agressive and openly so. I actually believe he would start a war with Iran. So who am I to vote for in such a tightly contested race? Gary Johnson? We all know that he won't win because America won't even vote Libertarians into low level local offices. So it would be irresponsible for me to not vote for and support Obama.

      --
      I see the glass as full with a FoS of 2.
    5. Re:There IS accountability by TubeSteak · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Oh, c'mon ! Pakistan isn't an "allied country". Them Pakis actively support the Talibans.

      We have active drone campaigns against our "allies" Yemen and Somalia.
      Our "allies" in Saudi Arabia, Quatar, and the UAE are notorious for funding terrorism.

      That should tell you a lot about the quality of our "allies" in the Middle East and Asia.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    6. Re:There IS accountability by cusco · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And our "ally" Israel has launched terrorist attacks against Americans on US soil, attempted to bomb the offices of a Muslim US senator, has repeated been caught carrying out espionage against our intel agencies and businesses, deliberately feeds false intel to the State department, sells weapons to our enemies, sells our military technology to China, attempted to bomb the Mexican parliament, and boasts about carrying out false flag terrorist attacks so that the US will retaliate against their enemies for them. Hopefully Netenyahu shot himself in the foot with his open endorsement of Romney.

      --
      "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  11. Sipping the Kool-Aid by mschaffer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wouldn't be surprised that the DoD is encouraging this. In this way, each branch picks their own solution because they need to satisfy so many domestic "interests". (Yes, SAP America contributes to political campaigns and PACs, just like every other large ERP company in the US). Besides, the only reason that anyone has been successful is probably because they are sipping more Kool-Aid and sitting in a circle "reassuring" one another.

  12. Re:ERP is dead! by raftpeople · · Score: 3, Informative

    In what sense do you think ERP is dead? The functions are all required and if you buy best of breed individual packages, you still need to integrate them, so either you do it yourself or you buy the ERP package that is already integrated.

    I agree that some decisions can be made to break it up into manageable pieces and accept less efficiency, but with an organization of that size you still have a problem of complexity whether using an ERP package or creating point solutions and integrating them.

  13. Why? Becasue people know it sucks. by mschaffer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ERP is dead because word is on the street: Too many failed or seriously delayed implementations.
    I have seen (first hand) too many institutions decide to implement ERP, pay a tremendous amount of cash, and watch it fail. If it ever does get fully implemented (in a way that was originally envisioned) the institutions have spent so much time and effort to get it running that the institutions have lost their focus because senior management was distracted or the cost of full implementation has affected the bottom line. In some cases, the institution was irreparably damaged or failed.(often surpassed by their competition).

    In theory, ERP is a wonderful thing. In actuality, it can kill.

  14. Re:Why? Becasue people know it sucks. by erp_consultant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bullshit. I have been involved in dozens of ERP implementations over the years. The software works. When implementations fail it is always, in my experience, because of the people (i.e. management) making the decisions on how to implement the product.

    Me: "Let me show you how Product X handles Accounts Payable"
    Client: "That's not how we do it"
    Me: "This might be a good opportunity to take a look at your current business practices and see if they can be done in a more efficient way"
    Client: "But we've always done it this way"
    Me: "Why?"
    Client "Dunno...just always have. And I doubt that the team is willing to change"
    Me: "Ok, we can customize the product to make it work the way you want but it's going to take more time and money. And when you do an upgrade later on there will be implications as well"
    Client: "Fine. Just make it work the way we do it now"

    And so it goes. Time and again I see clients go out and buy an expensive ERP system only to customize the bejezus out of it to make it look exactly like the systems they are retiring. They are not open to better business practices. Too many political headwinds.

    What does this say about these clowns in the Air Force? It takes them 10 years and $1.03B to realize that the project is going to fail? On an original budget of $88M? One of the big problems with trying to shoehorn a best practice ERP system into a large government institution is that often they employ worst practices. They won't, or can't, change them so you have to end up rewriting the product to fit their ass backwards ways. The whole purpose of implementing an ERP system is to replace aging, stove-piped systems with modern integrated systems. It can work well if it's implemented properly and the right decisions are made along the way. But it's not a magic pill.

  15. Re:Why? Becasue people know it sucks. by GaryOlson · · Score: 3, Insightful

    BING! BING! BING!
    We have a winner. I am seeing this very poli-drama being played out right now at my institution. The multi-decade tenured staff will not change from business processes implemented to fit a bad system bought 3 decades ago; and will not listen because they don't have to.

    --
    Every mans' island needs an ocean; choose your ocean carefully.
  16. Re:Why? Becasue people know it sucks. by jackbird · · Score: 3, Insightful

    While I hear what you're saying, government entities, and especially the military, are also subject to legal requirements that they not do things in certain ways, or have unique requirements not accounted for in a 'best practices' system.