Fbi Virtual Case

...

communication could make the project more problematic. Even though it was agreed that project would be ready by the end of 2003 and it was clear that deadline couldn’t be met, the project could have been more successful with timely communication and eliminating less important requirements of the project.

d. Lack of leadership, repeated turnover of management: FBI kept adding requirements as the project moved on and no one showed responsibility to focus on implementation instead of formulating requirements. FBI cycled through 5 people in 4 years and accountability appears absent. A focused leader right from the very beginning is needed to handle such crucial projects to look after if such problems arise time and again. Lack of clear accountability can jeopardize progress of the project.

e. Cost plus contracting: The cost plus award fee type of contract did not require specific completion milestones and did not provide for penalties if the deadlines were not met. The result of vague scoping and such incentives made it hard for the FBI to hold their contractors responsible.

Conclusion: In this case, there is an equal blame for both the parties involved – FBI and SAIC. The program lost $104 million in taxpayer money and FBI continued to use the old ACS system that was slowing down FBI’s output and hampered their counter-terrorism mission. Every product calls for a different approach and each product can be brought to a good end when there is a clear goal that can be reached with timely communication with accountability for damaging advancement of the project.

...