Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually in the real world f*ckups like this happen all the time. Usually it's the Project Managers or Marketing who insist that they can deliver a working product only for it to possess a ton of roll out defects. And when it makes its way up to the CEO then people get fired. Eventhough, in this case, the CEO would basically be Sebelius.
That's like blaming Obama for the applications I'm involved with on at the Government Agency I have business with. Yeah they are mission critical and if they have rollout defects they aren't gonna be his fault.
I work for a very large IT company. we have major upgrades every 4 months that involve millions of lines of code.
Changes that rank in the hundreds every 4 months.... we have projects every single year that are larger and more complicated than this website by a factor of 10 at least.
and we NEVER have the level of issues this site has had.
and oh, by the way, did you see that the Obama people picked a company to build the website that has a track record of FAILURE in such matters????
The CEO of any large business would call a go/no-go meeting of his IT people before they put a business critical website online.
Considering how poor healthcare.gov is, I see several possibilities:
- Obama never had such a meeting to ask "is it ready to go?"
- If he did not have such a meeting he was way too trustworthy of his team to look them in the eye and ask them for the truth
- Obama had such a meeting and his team said "yes we are ready"
---which could mean they lied to him
---or they were too stupid to recognize that it wasn't ready
---they said "we have concerns" and Obama said "go anyway"
------if Obama did that he took a huge risk and it was a big mistake. He should have delayed the start.
It is obvious to everyone the site is wasn't ready at launch and is still not ready. I don't care about firing people, but I do care about learning where the mismanagement and incompetence is.
30 years experience and I have never witnessed a CEO of a major corporation involved in go/no go technology decisions. There are layers and layers of management between the CEO and the folk developing technology. Those layers are paid $ millions in salaries and incentive comp to get the job done. And in spite of this, nothing ever goes according to plan.
In comparison elected officials and political appointees are paid a pittance. This is why a substantial number jump ship and slide into lobbying or superpac jobs.
If a delay in launch meant the difference between a shot at success and certain defeat, most Sr. management teams would roll the dice and go for it.
Any attempt to prematurely assign blame undermines the effort to fix it. No one knows this better than the folk who hate Obama and seek to repeal ACA.
I work for a very large IT company. we have major upgrades every 4 months that involve millions of lines of code.
Changes that rank in the hundreds every 4 months.... we have projects every single year that are larger and more complicated than this website by a factor of 10 at least.
and we NEVER have the level of issues this site has had.
and oh, by the way, did you see that the Obama people picked a company to build the website that has a track record of FAILURE in such matters????
This is true. This is why I edited my comment about the actual contractor.
In summary, what I wanted to say, they should have picked the company I worked for.
I have been on the site (or attempted to get on it) almost every single day since it launched. It IS getting better. I can now log on with my Chomebook, where as a couple days ago, I got a blank page after logging in.
So yes, the problems are getting fixed. And that fact scares Republicans.
I work for a very large IT company. we have major upgrades every 4 months that involve millions of lines of code.
Changes that rank in the hundreds every 4 months.... we have projects every single year that are larger and more complicated than this website by a factor of 10 at least.
and we NEVER have the level of issues this site has had.
and oh, by the way, did you see that the Obama people picked a company to build the website that has a track record of FAILURE in such matters????
Amazon has no need to interface with much other than an inventory management system and a payment feature.
In contrast, ACA is interface real time with the IRS databases, Social Security, 37 state insurance rule data bases, 37 state Medicare System data bases, a bevy of insurers and plans within insurers and state and payment systems. And I am seriously over simplifying it and have not touched on networks.
Social Security # is optional. There's a baked in identity verification process.
Car insurance is sold at the state level and must comply with state rules. Those who attempt to shop for car insurance online are required to provide SS# and Drivers license #. Many may not realize that a final rate and approval are highly dependent upon subsequent independent verification of the applicant's insurance score which depends on sex, age, driving record, prior claims, zip code and to some extent, credit score. All these factors can and do impact the rate.
You are grossly understating the significance of Amazon's IT. There are thousands of sellers connected to Amazon. Millions of dollars are spent every day for goods that don't ship from an Amazon warehouse. They link to sites with used goods. They store user reviews. They link to UPS, USP, and probably many other shippers around the world. Do you think the database for items bought via download (such as Kindle) is the same as the database for automotive parts (which have a "what works with my car" section)?
Amazon dynamically changes prices based on your status as Prime or not. And it stores massive amounts of graphic images.
All of this happens at an extraordinary rate of throughput.
Healthcare.gov is not a piece of cake. But wrongly calculating subsidies and linking family members wrong is just bad software.
In your try for an example it appears that the managers and CEO you reference have an understand of what is important and what isn't. This was probably gained from experience and sound judgment in similar situations.
In your try to put together a response it appears you didn't include all the letters you intended and may have left out a word. You're obviously reacting rather than responding, posting unfinished messages. Try again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimazee
The truly dense will assume it is all about a computer glitch or two.
I doubt you have any idea what this is. By contrast, I have insights from colleagues about precisely the nature of the issues that are being encountered.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus10
It may be an operations issue... but it happens enough times the business gets a bad rap and the stockholders (in this case we the taxpayers) expect heads to roll.
I said very clearly earlier in the thread that Sebelis will be fired due to this, eventually. That's despite the fact that no reasonable person really would think she could have done anything to change the end-result we're seeing. Americans demand blood, and so they shall have blood no matter what.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
we have projects every single year that are larger and more complicated than this website by a factor of 10 at least.
Thanks for proving that you have no concern about not actually knowing what you're talking about but yet still talking about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferd
and oh, by the way, did you see that the Obama people picked a company to build the website that has a track record of FAILURE in such matters????
Actually, the Bush people picked CGI. They put the procurement system in place in 2007 that qualified a group of contractors, who would be invited to bid on future projects, including eventually ACA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by btsilver
The company was qualified for no bid contracts since 2007. I'm sure there are plenty of people profiting from this.
It wasn't a no-bid contract. However, there is some dispute about how many of the contractors that the Bush administration qualified bid on the contract - CGI may have been the only one.
Obama isn't in charge of this or any IT issues. You can say a lot about what you don't like but blaming the POTUS for IT issues isn't one of them. Although you and the 16 other OP's with the same thread seem to think it's a thing.
That's bull. This is his signature program. Up until it launched he was probably briefed every day. While he isn't about to fix it, himself, he would have barked to Sebelius, "What do you need to make sure this is ready to go when it launches," if she was reporting problems to him and then he would have ensured all resources were directed to fixing the problem. If the POTUS can't make it happen, who can? The fact that she hasn't been fired tells me she kept him abreast of the situation. After that, who knows?
30 years experience and I have never witnessed a CEO of a major corporation involved in go/no go technology decisions. There are layers and layers of management between the CEO and the folk developing technology. Those layers are paid $ millions in salaries and incentive comp to get the job done. And in spite of this, nothing ever goes according to plan.
In comparison elected officials and political appointees are paid a pittance. This is why a substantial number jump ship and slide into lobbying or superpac jobs.
If a delay in launch meant the difference between a shot at success and certain defeat, most Sr. management teams would roll the dice and go for it.
Any attempt to prematurely assign blame undermines the effort to fix it. No one knows this better than the folk who hate Obama and seek to repeal ACA.
I have been doing business with enterprise IT organizations since 1981. CEOs do not pay attention to mundane IT issues. But they certainly do on the corporate front door - when their business depends on it. The CEO of an extraordinarily large IT user in Europe just sat in on a meeting to discuss the purchase of a few million euros of security software (including my company's product). I KNOW he would not let his company launch a new web based business without assurance it would work.
Obama made ACA the centerpiece of his time in office. For him to not know when the site went live that it had a high probability of success is ridiculous.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
