Caveat emptor: St Albans DC vs ICL

Roll back the mists of time and cast your mind back to the 1980s and early 1990s. The last government had been unleashing a torrent of legislation, which local authorities were expected to implement at the drop of a hat. Most of this entailed the introduction or replacement of large information systems, together with the installation of additional equipment and communication networks.

The mettle of package software suppliers was sorely tested. Quite a few cracked under the strain. Others responded well. Most of us were heartily relieved that key systems were delivered at all. How many IS/IT users and managers in local government felt that we were being forced to procure in haste and repent at leisure?

This is a tale of an authority which took a careful and disciplined approach to a major procurement during those difficult times. One could say that they made the best of a bad job. When things went wrong, they were able to work successfully together to challenge questionable contract conditions and recover a substantial amount of the public money which had been lost. It is worth remembering that real people had to pay more Community Charge than was necessary.

We have to remember, too, that this story is told from a local authority perspective. No doubt if it was written from the perspective of the supplier concerned, there may be some different facts brought out, some different observations made and some different conclusions drawn.

But is this not all in the past? Not necessarily! We are about to enter another turbulent era. There are bound to be some problems with the performance of software in the run up to Year 2000. There will probably be discrepancies between what was promised and what is delivered with significant business impact. Until now, those who manage the procurement, implementation and use of software probably thought that they might have to attend an Industrial Tribunal at some stage in their career as a result of some staffing difficulty, but a court of law? Never! All this may be about to change.

This MAPIT special issue paper is essential reading. It will be as relevant in three years’ time as it is today. Given the lifespan of some legal precedents, it might still be relevant in another fifty. Learn the lessons now and be prepared.

Mark Wheatley, President of Socitm

Main body of the report written by Martin Ferguson, Head of IT Services and Michael Lovelady, District Solicitor and Secretary, both of St. Albans D.C. Supplementary commentary and editing provided by Martin Greenwood, MAPIT Project Manager with support from Roger Marshall, Director of Computer Services at the Corporation of London.