ICT: fun for everyone and Projects vs Products
originally posted 2025-03-11
here we have a mash up of notes from a meeting on resourcing issues, a chunk of a business case for a new post, and a response to user research on BOPS uptake.
ICT as a business area priority
- Computer systems aren't just ICT's job - they're part of everyone's work
- Tech is what staff use all day, every day
- It's how residents mainly deal with us - most people experience the council digitally
- Even the behind-the-scenes stuff matters - integration and automation affects service quality
- Affects individual transactions (how long things take, how much info residents have to re-enter)
- Affects workload (better automation = more productive staff, higher capacity, better use of data, less manual input needed from residents)
- Outdated, maintenance focussed attitude to software - years ago ICT installed updates, system admins would be required to do basic config and training, changes were minor and infrequent. Modern software packages offer much more scope for customisation and integration.  The ICT / system admin requirement is now more of a change management, business improvement function than a maintenance function. It requires different skills but can deliver a lot more value if its resourced appropriately.
- The Councils digital presence is about more than just individual programs – in the back end we now have automation and integrations between multiple packages. The customer facing experience includes the website, online forms and emails and reports they receive. There is a huge scope for ongoing digital innovation but resources are focused on maintenance and reactive work. Modern software has more capability for integrations and customization (e.g. automating reporting with Power BI, integrating system data with MS Teams into workflows) but this requires leadership and resource from the business side as well as ICT.
- Need to stop thinking about digital as just separate tools (Microsoft Office, NEC, IDOX, Capita, Granicus)
- Should see our entire digital ecosystem as an asset that benefits from active management and development - like a property portfolio.
Strategy challenges
- Teams in a small ICT department juggle long-term projects and fixing immediate problems. We're mostly reactive to narrow requests and lack capacity for strategic transformation
- Officers across the org spread too thin across many projects - each one moves slowly as a result
- Modern software needs less maintenance but offers more customization options. However it's easier to measure and justify resources for maintenance than for development and enhancement as the possibilities for development are so open. Installing X number of updates X times a year is simpler to quantify.
- Digital maturity varies across the organization and change projects are often delayed by day-to-day work
- Getting the most from our software needs strong user-centered design and change management skills. Configuration isn't just using supplier presets in a predefined way anymore - needs design leadership and skills. The same goes for using our data to improve services. There is no instruction manual or user guide to follow.
- All these things will deliver efficiency savings and / or improvements that translate into monetary savings (over any initial increase in resourcing). But they require more work and a more strategic approach to quantify the realised benefits. It's not as simple as comparing the licence price of a couple of software packages.
Projects vs products
- We do minimal development - resources have been cut back so ICT provide mostly maintenance and supplier management. Preference towards cloud based, managed systems.
- This pushes us toward what's easy to run and implement
- Senior mgmt wants ready-made solutions - not things needing development
- Resource constraints are a big factor:
- Often easier to find budget for products than to get new staff positions approved
- Supplier consultancy days are expensive but seen as quick, one-off solutions
- Decisions tend to be siloed - looking at one area or package at a time, which again favours spending on supplier consultancy days rather than additional posts
- Contract end dates drive many decisions - favouring quick renewals with current suppliers
Funded projects
- Funded projects often remembered as they were at the start - as "alpha" work-in-progress
- Would help if comms to senior staff made clear these are now legitimate, finished products
- In our non-development focused council, leaders want finished products, not projects
- Software sold as "constantly improving" is seen as negative - unfinished and resource-hungry
- Leaders unfamiliar with agile development see it as forever unfinished, not as a strength
- Need to help them understand agile means a finished product that gets better and adapts to change, not an unfinished one requiring constant work and retraining.
- Some orgs may be tempted by the idea of joining the group project and shaping the direction of the product, others will be looking for a simple, managed service.