The Impact of Technology Insertion on Organisations

More documents

Recommendations

Info

HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 November 2007 • It is an effective Key Risk Management Tool, which helps with identifying potential risks and issues. • It will reduce the likelihood <strong>of</strong> making the same mistakes again. • Individuals who contribute will be seen as ‘team players’. • It will enable a project team to achieve its objectives. • It will reduce time to perform tasks. • It will reduce resources required to perform tasks. • It will reduce stress in staff. • It will improve project Planning and Scheduling through life. • It will ensure projects are delivered on time, to cost and performance. • It will provide measurable metrics <strong>of</strong> savings made to individual teams and to the organisation as a whole. An adage that the AMS uses to describe LFE goes: ‘You must learn from the mistakes <strong>of</strong> others. You can’t possibly live long enough to make them all yourself’. <strong>The</strong> LFE pages on the MoD AMS goes on to say that ‘Knowledge is a key, if not THE key, factor in much <strong>of</strong> what we do. ‘Knowing what we know’ is vital if resources are to be used efficiently and waste minimised. Effective knowledge management is not easy - it demands support at all levels and permeates throughout the entire organisation.’ Whilst no one would argue that sharing knowledge and learning from others’ experiences and mistakes can be no bad thing, research has found that knowledge management, and consequently LFE, face some significant challenges. As we have seen, the LFE program within the MoD’s AMS makes bold claims about reducing stress, improving project performance, reducing time on tasks and managing and mitigating risks. Significantly LFE says that it will ‘provide measurable metrics <strong>of</strong> savings made to individual teams and to the organisation as a whole.’ This author would be interested to know whether such metrics and performance data currently exist and whether they suggests that LFE has been found to be effective so far. As we have seen measuring the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> KM programmes is notoriously difficult, given the elusive nature <strong>of</strong> knowledge. Evaluating the effectiveness <strong>of</strong> LFE as practiced within the MoD does not fall within the scope <strong>of</strong> this review and so no data on its use, or its actual or perceived value were identified. However, it is probably fair to say that although LFE has potential benefits, it is unlikely to mitigate all possible technology project risks and organisational impacts. Regardless <strong>of</strong> the debates surrounding knowledge management, it is clearly no bad thing for colleagues to try to impart knowledge to one another and to pass on pertinent information. However, there are many challenges in this field and the capturing and communication <strong>of</strong> expert knowledge and experiences is not something that is easily achieved. Similarly, there are certain human characteristics that present serious challenges to effective use <strong>of</strong> existing risk assessment and knowledge management practices. 47
HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 November 2007 9 <strong>Technology</strong> <strong>Insertion</strong> Case Studies <strong>The</strong>re are numerous examples <strong>of</strong> case studies where technologies have failed or not achieved the desired effects once implemented. <strong>The</strong>re is not nearly as much detailed examination <strong>of</strong> the processes that lead to technology failure. One area in which there is more detailed consideration <strong>of</strong> failure cases is in the area <strong>of</strong> IS. <strong>The</strong> study <strong>of</strong> IS failure is particularly useful, as many <strong>of</strong> the systems in question are funded with public money and the result <strong>of</strong> investigations into the cause <strong>of</strong> failure are available in the public domain. In other domains, such as the military, detailed information is less freely available and has been predominantly gathered from subject matter experts. Where conclusions or findings are described these have either been highlighted by the relevant case study, author or by the subject matter expert (SME) describing the case. 9.1 Military 9.1.1 Eur<strong>of</strong>ighter Typhoon When originally selecting a component for the Multi-function Head Down Display (MHDD) for the Eur<strong>of</strong>ighter Typhoon, a number <strong>of</strong> component options were compared including Cathode Ray Tube (CRT) and Active Matrix Liquid Crystal Display (AMLCD) solutions. During comparisons, technical issues were considered including technology maturity and performance <strong>of</strong> equipment including visibility factors such as luminance and contrast ratio [204]. AMLCD components were considered but in the end, the technology was considered too immature. High on the list <strong>of</strong> reasons were the difficulties LCD experienced when operating over an extended temperature range, and a concern over the long-term stability <strong>of</strong> the LCD cell. Other perceived problems at that stage in its development were limited viewing angle, poor dynamic response and the low reliability <strong>of</strong> fluorescent backlights. One <strong>of</strong> the biggest CRT component options was chosen, measuring 6’ by 6’, which turned out to be non-industry standard dimensions. <strong>The</strong> component in question seemed like a good choice at the time, but soon caused difficulties. It was only manufactured by one company and the Typhoon developers were tied to one supplier. On top <strong>of</strong> this the component in question was subject to complex US International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) restrictions, which meant that the US DoD were in a position where they could restrict the way in which the component and the system was used. <strong>The</strong>se ITAR restrictions meant that the US could theoretically block the export <strong>of</strong> Typhoon aircraft to countries not possessing an ITAR agreement. In the end a decision was taken to replace the CRT displays with LCD components. <strong>The</strong> upgrade was expensive, time consuming and could have been avoided if issues surrounding international technology transfer, export agreements and supplier issues had been considered at an earlier stage <strong>of</strong> development. In the end, the upgrade to LCD was successful; a component was chosen that did not have ITAR restrictions and came with a wider supplier base. Price competitiveness, supply and choice was protected and the ITAR restrictions were no longer an issue. <strong>The</strong> technical issues with LCD were overcome. 9.1.1.1 Findings • Technical Issues such as product performance and maturity were given a high priority. 48
Page 1 and 2: The Impact
Page 3 and 4: HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
Page 51: HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No
Page 87: HFIDTC/2/12.2.1/1 Version 3 / 21 No

The Impact of Technology Insertion on Organisations

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?