The nation loves its darling IBM but the facts are that IBM costs this nation hundreds of $billions through its proprietary obsolete software. This is perpetuated by its domination of the Information Technology market in government and in business and controlled by its IT managers.

How did this Happen?
This came about mostly by the failure of decision makers in the past who were not computer literate and by the piecemeal stop gap fixing of obsolete stand alone computer application programs. Decision makers in many cases were led astray by self-serving IT Managers who wanted to keep their programmers busy by developing new application programs to make the proprietary system work. Another area where they were lead astray is through focusing on the efficiency of an individual application program and not how it could be integrated with the organization’s overall information systems. The result is the creation of stand-alone computer applications which must have separate patching programs written to achieve integration with other application programs. System implementation planning failures are generally the fault of the CEO funding the project. It wasn’t but a few years ago when almost none of management in private companies and in government had any computer experience at all. They relied completely on their IT Manager for planning and implementation of computer systems.

Among computer literate personnel an organization’s computer department is known as an “IBM shop” or a “Digital Equipment shop” meaning that the organization only uses a specific proprietary type of computer hardware and software. When the IBM Operating System software is used all application programs are written to run on it. Meaning that if the organization only has IBM computers you will most likely get an IBM proprietary solution and you are unlikely to get a system that can be integrated with other non-IBM systems. I have observed that most IT managers are more loyal to their “shop” whatever it is than they are to their own CEO. Granted that once you have invested in an IBM solution few if any competitive software or hardware can be integrated with the proprietary system.

Most current proprietary application programs are written with the data they need stored within the application. When data is called for during processing of the application the request goes to a numbered storage location within the application, retrieves the data and sends it back for continued processing. The numbered location is a unique part of how these obsolete systems work. With hundreds of application programs used by the organization each with their own data storage, data is duplicated many times. It is easy to see why the maintenance of them can cost millions more than with the following integrated solution a Relational Database Management System (RDMS).

How Does an Integrated Computer System Work?
The integrated Computer System consists of a network of data processing computers each with application programs loaded on them connected through the network to a number of separate databases each with specific related information stored on them. The databases are called Relational Databases and each uses the Structured Query Language (SQL) in the RDMS.

Systems integration is achieved when separate databases for storing data are created using the Structured Query Language (SQL) database language. This allows IBM or Digital Equipment and other proprietary computers using SQL to access the databases using a unique “name” for the data. The process works this way when an IBM application program needs to retrieve or store data it uses an SQL request to find or store the data. A Digital Equipment computer can also retrieve and store data in the same database. This is similar to the database structure used on the Internet and allows queries to be made easily without having to write a program for the query much like Google. Since this software can be universally used on many different computer platforms once it is developed it can be transported to any of the organization’s computer platforms.

So what’s all this fuss about IBM?
Simply this, IBM is in business to sell a proprietary system that shuts out competitors and forces the customers to use its software. The RDMS is an open software system where an IBM computer could be replaced by a competitor. Computers can then be purchased simply for their competitive computing power and not just because it will work with the software. It is obvious that IBM has known about the RDMS for some time but it is simply not good business for them.

What is this Costing Us?
Nation wide we should take a hard look at shifting from “hardware-centric, expensive, proprietary silos of data trapped in old databases” into new systems with more of the same obsolete systems architecture. These proprietary systems are difficult and expensive to maintain and cannot be easily integrated with other systems.

The failure to manage state resources in all areas but especially in welfare and Medicaid is costing states billions. Most state computer systems are incredibly obsolete with information silos, duplicated data and inability to share information leaving the state vulnerable to open fraud. The management of Medicaid rests on being able to trace fraud and prevent it through the use of a SQL RDMS. This is reason enough to look into the replacement of current obsolete systems besides the significant savings in data processing costs over the old proprietary systems.

VIRGINIA
Virginia hired Northrop Grumman the giant defense and systems-management company in 2005 under a controversial 10-year, $2.3 billion contract to run its computer and communications networks providing IT services to 90 agencies. But the state also pays the contractor for work outside of what the contract covers:
Covered: Supplying new equipment, including laptops and services; running the state data centers; maintaining and repairing computers; and running a help desk.
Not covered: Specialized software that only one agency needs.

It appears that the VITA, Northrop Grumman contract does not include a provision for the development of a centralized IT system. So far NG has spent a good deal of funds on linking all of the Virginia Agencies with a new protected email system and the question of centralized application software and database development is still up to the individual agencies. This has prompted state legislators to ask just what is the state getting for its money.

The shakeup in VITA is an attempt to extract VITA from months of political turmoil and put back on track a shift to privately managed information-technology services beset by delays and mounting costs. Since the RDMS solution is the best and most cost effective solution Virginia’s VITA appears to be floundering making it the biggest ever boondoggle in State Information Technology.

WASHINGTON STATE
In a related situation the question of what the IT architecture should be for the Washington State Centralized Data Center has also surfaced. In a letter to Gov. Gregoire, State Rep. Reuven Carlyle and Rep. Hans Dunshee urged the Governor to seek a second opinion before selling the construction bonds. They wanted her to take a hard look at shifting from “hardware-centric, expensive, IBM proprietary silos of data trapped in old databases” to newer technologies such as the Cloud a proprietary system from Microsoft. It now appears that Washington State is considering the implementation of a RDMS in its new Centralized Data Center.

GEORGIA
Georgia signs $1.2 Billion IT Outsourcing Contracts with Last Vendors Standing By Paul W. Taylor

IBM and AT&T were effectively sole bidders after two other companies withdrew their bids before the apparently successful vendors were announced.

This has all the appearances of another boondoggle in the making since IBM is unlikely to propose a RDMS.

TEXAS
The above award comes on the heels of a decision late last month by the state of Texas to suspend an $863 million outsourcing project with IBM to transfer state records to a centralized computer system. In a letter to state IT officials, Governor Rick Perry said the company had failed to backup the data of more than 20 state agencies.

This Texas boondoggle appears to be just ending.

INDIANA
Ref: Glitches Mar Indiana’s Effort to Outsource Social Services By WILLIAM M. BULKELEY WSJ August 12, 2009

Processing of welfare, food-stamp and Medicaid claims in Indiana was plagued with difficulties when the state outsourced the system to International Business Machines Corp. and Affiliated Computer Services Inc. two years ago. The problem hasn’t been resolved since then.
“There’s a myriad of problems,” said Anne Murphy, secretary of the state’s Family and Social Services Administration. “Error rates are too high. We’re not processing claims within federal guidelines.”
IBM, the prime contractor, along with Affiliated Computer and other firms agreed to run the programs for $1.34 billion over 10 years. Ms. Murphy said she ordered IBM to delay a planned roll-out to the rest of the state — about 40% of the population is currently covered — and to fix the problems by the end of September.

Outsourcing critics say Indiana’s problems show why government functions, particularly human services, shouldn’t be turned over to private contractors. Outsourcing of state-government functions remains rare but is attracting growing interest from states anxious to control costs and avoid capital outlays on new computer systems. Many such projects aim to use digital records to replace paper, much as health-care reformers promote electronic health records. Indiana estimated that outsourcing its benefits operations would save nearly $500 million overall.

The Governor and the state’s Decision Makers have all missed the point that substituting one a bad manual system for an obsolete computer system leads to a second failure. What should be done is for the state to develop a State Centralized Data Center with a RDMS and bring back in house its privatized services.

A WORD OF CAUTION
If you follow IBM around begging them to take your money they will!
Why not ask Google for advice they are the leaders in this technology and they have something IBM does not have, integrity.

Other related articles on my website:
Article 46. Why some Computer System Implementations Fail
Article 84. The Failure to Manage State Resources due to Obsolete Computer System
Article 138. State Information Technology Centralized Data Centers
Article 142. Huge Savings from State Centralized Services
Article 143. Examples of a Relational Database Management System
Article 144. Why States Lose Millions by Using Obsolete Computer Systems
Article 145. The Coming Revolution in Information Technology Systems
Article 150. The Biggest Boondoggle Ever in State Information Technology
Article 153. Example of the Advantage of a Relational Database