Public Sector Governance and Accountability Series: Budgeting and ...

326 Stephen B. Peterson
fail or underperform because the associated risks can be managed better
(Heidenhof and others 2002: 13).According to the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD),
Public sector budgeting systems can encourage the funding of large and highly
visible IT projects [that] often fail. A radical approach, increasingly adopted in
the private sector, is to avoid large projects altogether, opting for small projects
instead. One expert has called this change a shift from “whales to dolphins.”
Adopting dolphins does not mean breaking big projects into small modules.
Rather, it involves a shift to a different way of working and thinking, with total
project time frames of no more than six months, technical simplicity, modest
ambitions for business change, and teamwork driven by business goals.
(OECD 2001: 2)
Process change does not require whales. Dolphins will do. 5
The vision of an OTS IFMIS is appealing to many. It seems, all at the
same time, to install international standards, instill discipline, improve
efficiency, and strengthen control by connecting all the financial subsystems.
The menu of features offered is attractive and seems to provide a one-stop
shop for public financial sector reform. Indeed, it is not an exaggeration to
say that, in the minds of many authorities, an IFMIS raises the bar of financial
management and lifts it out of the reach of corruption. The apparent
virtues of OTS IFMISs in aid-dependent countries are very attractive to
donors and creditors concerned with fiduciary risk, as well as governments,
that wish to fulfill conditions to gain access to foreign aid resources. The
adoption of an OTS IFMIS is viewed as international best practice 6 and
seems to have become a tangible indicator of a government’s commitment
to reform.
In his comparative study of information systems in developing countries,
Richard Heeks (2002) found that systems with “design divisibility”that
feature modularity and are incremental promoted “improvisation”: that is,
they fit information system design (imported from developed countries) to
local conditions rather than change local conditions to fit system design.
Improvisation approaches were more successful than standardized
approaches that were rigidly integrated: 7
The design divisibility meant staff could learn from early, relatively small
failures, and could address subsequent improvisations of both design and
actuality [local context] to manageable project components. They were not
overwhelmed as they would have been by a single, whole system design. Design
divisibility is therefore a frequently cited prophylactic against failure that should
be adopted more widely. However, many donor-funded IS [information