Why Government Tech Is So Poor

Click here to read this article from the 10-17-13 WSJ by Farhad Manjoo. The subtitle was "Fixing Procurement Process Is Key to Preventing Blunders Like Healthcare.gov." Excerpts:

"Apple spent about $150 million developing the iPhone. The health-insurance exchange—which, let's remember, is merely a website meant to connect citizens to insurance companies, something quite a bit less complex than Apple's groundbreaking miniature computer—so far has cost at least $360 million, and possibly as much as $600 million.

So how can the government spend so much more on technology and not get anywhere near equal results?"

"When Apple royally screws up, the world doesn't cut it any "slack""

"In consumer tech, performance matters. When things go wrong, customers balk, investors flee, and heads roll. In the government, despite several attempts at reform, few of these consequences seem to apply."

"Healthcare.gov—which has been described as a failure by many experts, including supporters of the health law—is only the latest in a series of faulty, overpriced governmental tech..."

"we could remake the nation's IT infrastructure using off-the-shelf hardware and software and the best tech practices employed by the world's most admired tech companies."

" two important factors stand out, experts say. The first is personnel—like many government IT projects, this was implemented by people who don't understand IT."

"outdated regulations and arbitrary-seeming requirements. For instance, your technology must be Y2K-compliant just to get in the door. The process locks out all but a tiny handful of full-time contractors—companies who also happen to be big federal lobbyists"

"The government should strive to buy tech like the rest of the world does, opening itself up to vastly more vendors, and aligning price with performance. Logistically, none of the steps he outlines would be very difficult to accomplish. It would just require a full-court press from political leaders to make it happen."