Having more raw data available through APIs would help private industry create new applications for citizens. Open source is a key importance to make governance as a platform.

Fizzled and failed IT projects in the recent decade have accounted to almost more than a trillion dollars, adn especially in the government sector, not excluding the multi-billion dollar AADHAR roll-out. In an opportunity to make better governance, there is always ways service providers can improve their skill-sets.

Quite not surprised by the lack of skill among the government agencies that compromised identity of several citizens in numerous cases. Forget identity, but if this is the case, even cyber security is a growing threat.

Herein listed are some of the reasons what one can infer from such failures, especially with those in the government sector. And, these are un-fictionalized hard truths. 0% transparency in how the tax-payer’s money is spent? No responsibility on who is accountable for controlling. Designers have restricted flexibility and impact to change the present state of affairs.

What really is saddening is a non-descriptive thumb rule to tender the process to the lowest bidder and non-use of free licensed and open source software.

Although 99% of these governance related enterprise-grade software are developed by product companies, service companies take up the process of customizing it. We can well appreciate if localization, a fancy word, drives some purpose. But, the work by most of the top service partners ends with deployment. Here’s the question. Are such partners really helping the tax-payers, and adds value for every citizen?

And, most software providers don’t experiment with multiple products, a mindset that is indicative of larger dysfunction. Most of the software service providers aren’t interested changing the approach and content with failing.

Developers are contracted to do as they are told regardless of the possibility that that bearing is an unmistakable way to disappointment. Lack of proper training among the staff, corruption, and bribery are unsaid reasons.

Why aren’t Governments able to build platforms that help tax-payers? Open sourced applications like GPS, which was previously used only by military, would not have been possible without the contribution from public.

Fact: Every System Integrator Hates a Government Contract?


It is becoming an increasingly common scenario in the US. The government invests a staggering sum of money on launching a new online service, and it fails to make the grade. The most recent embarrassment is the healthcare.gov website, which cost around $350 million to establish. It got unveiled to the public, and most users ran into problems right away. Whether it is frustrating login processes, lost customer data, or constant connectivity problems, the government does not have an accomplished record when it comes to software. The question is, why all the hiccups? It certainly isn’t a lack of investment, so what is stopping software companies from developing reliable government projects? This guide to some of the weaknesses within the software construction process will shine a light on the dilemma.

Users Don’t Come First

The first issue is a big one, and it should be glaringly obvious to government agencies. If you do not let users have a hand in developments, how do you know that they will satisfy the public needs? Government contracts get handled by CORs and individual owners, most of whom will never actually test out the services. As a result, they are often persuaded to prioritize aesthetic and flashy features over functionality.

Process Is Too Self-Involved

It takes an unfeasible and long deadlines for developers to request the use of shared software libraries. In fact, in most cases, it takes less time to rewrite the code from scratch. It has much to do with liability. Every step of the process must include many assurances and guarantees of accountability.

In other words, everybody wants to make sure that the blame is placed elsewhere if the project fails. While self-preservation is understandable, to some extent, government software projects would run into fewer obstacles if there was less pressure to escape liability, even before mishaps have occurred.

Budgeting Is a Tricky Requirement

The budget for government software projects gets requested at the outset, in one full sum. Clearly, this is going to present difficulties, particularly for long-term initiatives. The longer a project lasts, the more difficult it is to accurately estimate how much cash is needed before launching any work. With no other option, developers make a guess and hope for the best. Learn more Acquora — a social security based framework for financial inclusion.

Often, the process encourages development companies to ask for more money than they perhaps need. Even if it is possible to construct the software quite cheaply, it is safer to overstate your estimate than to do the opposite. So, overhauling this tricky budgeting process could end up saving the government lots of funding.

All or Nothing Conundrum

Finally, the culture around government software does not make things easy. It has become relatively rare for services to be gradually introduced to users, as they might have been in the past. Instead, agencies believe that the only option is to launch a fully realised, entirely complete product. While this is possible, it is much harder, and it is not compatible with tight deadlines.

Furthermore, users tend not to mind ‘trial’ services, especially if they are encouraged to feedback on possible improvements. It makes them a part of the journey, and they get the assurance that their government cares about their needs. The reality is that there’s only one way to test a piece of software. You have to use it.

Did you know, a recent demonetization activity had resulted in wide spread panic and disparity only due to failed IT back-end. 9 of 10 ATMs did not work for weeks. The government had so inefficient platforms that can’t even track more than 7,00,000 financial transactions per day. What would you say if such a system can’t even track history data even 30 days after such an activity? The worst crime you can commit is telling the audience something you already know.

Why shouldn’t Government is partner with open source cloud partners, open course platforms which can offer public data for analytics. The time is now. And, we in the development industry should be responsible to show policy makers how well data can be used for good. We in the tech have an opportunity to go ahead and be the change. And that is why every civilized techizen must.

Thanks for reading!