I tendered to a small LGA to undertake a consultancy for them as to their
IT direction. The tender detailed the work my associates would perform
and the time to perform that work, and I have to say that it was a well
considered tender submission.
We did not get the contact to perform the consultancy, it went to one of
the large accountancy firms, ironically the one that undertook their LGA
auditting. The price that that firm put in would have just about covered
a junior clerk (with IT 101) for 5 days including rural accommodation and
travel, working on "Template for Standard Report No. 3 for Mug Punter
LGA's".
A few months later the same LGA called for tenders to perform the work
resulting from the report.
Well, the recommendations of the report were horrendous. Over spec'd,
inaccurate, unnecessary, you name it. Basically, in my subsequent tender
I said as much, pretty well knowing that I was unlikely to get this
subsequent work, so feeling that I had little to lose.
When I followed up on the tender after its closing date, the CEO of the
LGA admitted that they had not decided to let any contracts as the
feedback from the second round of tenders was very much along the lines of
my own, and that they felt that the original consultant's reports appeared
to be grossly in error.
I don't think they ever attempted to recover their costs from the original
contract, and I discovered that they subsequently let the work to a mate
of a mate, without further tendering.
The ratepayers unknowing got to pick up the tab.
-- Howard. LANNet Computing Associates - Your Linux people Contact detail at http://www.lannetlinux.comOn Thu, 30 Aug 2001, Rick Welykochy wrote:
> Anthony Healy wrote: > > > "And Wall Street notices; a company's stock price tends to fall if it files > > a proxy statement that reveals large fees for non-auditing > > services--basically consulting and information technology services--from the > > accountant," says CNet. > > I've been at the coal face with accountacy-based IT consultants. I have over > 25 years experience in the IT and computing sectors. These clowns had a > combined experience of a handful of untrained years using spreadsheets, and > no Comp.Sci. or IT training was in evidence. > > Someone's pulled a fast one in these cases. Inexperienced, overpriced (5 times > what I was being paid) and overtime. Incredible that management buys into these > types of consultants. They literally hold the company to ransom as they > pillage through masses of funding and deliver a consistently late product, > often one that doesn't work. The final stinger: they are of course outsourcers, > so they use naive understaffed clientele to apprehend and take up new technologies, > then run off to their next client as supposed "experts" in emerging IT methodologies. > > And their original client is left in the dust with a huge knowledge and information > gap, filling in the blanks left behind with underpaid, under-appreciated permanenet > staff fixing the mess. > > I won't mention any names to protect my own butt ;) > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.1 : Fri Aug 31 2001 - 03:10:05 EST