Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 58
CHAPTER V11
Management Considerations
When undertaking a task as complicated and wide-ranging as the proposed
SSA system, there are many management concerns. This chapter examines
the concerns considered to be the most critical to the success of the
SSA plan. In the course of the review of the proposed system, the panel
has been impressed favorably by the ability of the SSA staff to discuss
systematically both the present procedures and the transition to the
proposed system.
STAFFING THE PROJECT
Staffing Is one of the most important considerations facing the
SSA. The project manager can make the vital difference between success
or failure. The consensus of the panel is that, if it were possible,
the project should be manned entirely by the SSA. However, the panel
realizes that this is not likely to happen because of the amount of
technical expertise required in the proposed system, the salary require-
ments of those capable of filling some of the more specialized positions,
the length of time required to build up a staff under Civil Service, and
other administrative constraints.
The panel recommends that the project manager should come from
within the SSA, and not be supplied by a vendor. In addition, the
relationships among the SSA personnel, contractors, and consultants need
to be closely monitored and controlled by the SSA.
Early selection of the project manager is essential. The project
manager should be available to influence the selection of other key
members of the project team. The team must work well together, and one
way of assuring this is to involve the project manager in the selection
of those with whom he must work closely. This is true whether the candi-
dates come from within the SSA or other government agencies or are hired
through the Civil Service, or from other sources. The panel is aware
that a considerable number of additional project positions will have to
be filled. It is essential that, after the new system is in place and
a level of staffing necessary to maintain the system is reached, the
SSA be able to provide leadership for all parts of the system.
To achieve this level of competence within the SSA, whenever a
consultant, either from another government agency or from a consulting
58
OCR for page 59
59
firm, directs an area or function for development or implementation, the
consultant should be understudied by a qualified individual from within
the SSA. This will make it easier to ensure consistency in approach
over the lifetime of the system and provide on-the-job training for the
SSA personnel.
User Particication
The panel is unanimous in its opinion that the ultimate user per-
sonnel in the district offices and the program service centers need to
play an active and positive role in the planning and implementation of
the future SSA system. A design review group (DRG) comprised of
representatives of the district offices, program service centers and
SSA headquarters staffs should be established.* The DRG should have the
responsibility and the authority to pass on all proposals for
implementing of,any function in the future system. The DRG should
report to the senior SSA management. Problems and procedures not
resolved within the DRG should be referred to the senior SSA management
for resolution. The DRG should also be responsible for ascertaining
that all SSA functions are included in either the electronic data
processing (EDP) system or in the manual procedures supporting the EDP
system. The flow of work should be reviewed to ensure that the future
system addresses all required functions and that these are performed
in the most efficient and economical way possible.
The DRG should also have the responsibility for developing a system
model for testing. With the user involved on a continuing basis, there
will be less chance for surprises when the system is installed. In
reviewing the plan, the DRG will be in a position to develop test cases
that will help verify both the EDP processing and the manual procedures
that support the total system.
Present System Upgrading
The present system will continue to be used during the design and
implementation phases of the new system. The panel suggests that
enhancements to the existing system be directed toward the common goal
--the future system. The panel also suggests that enhancements to
provide operating economies and efficiencies not be put aside while the
future system is being planned and implemented.
Many of the changes proposed by the district offices and the pro-
gram service centers provide an evolutionary way of building a bridge
between the old and the new. SSA should continue to modify existing
procedures, both EDP and manual, to introduce economies and efficiency
in the present processing. For example, the panel urges that the total
time required from the initiation of a process to its completion be
*The panel notes with approval the establishment of a User Liaison
Committee by the SSA in August 1977.
OCR for page 60
60
reduced to the extent possible without waiting for the full implemen-
tation of the future system.
Project Overview
_ .
. ~ .
in;, .. .
The size and complexity of the proposed system, and the attendant
problems of converting from the existing SSA process, require that
management apply sophisticated and effective planning and control
procedures over the entire time frame of this project. It is critical
that today's SSA system be maintained and pass through a non-disruptive
evolution in order to advance and simplify the conversion to the future
system. Concurrently with this, and in view of the time span involved,
the current system needs to benefit from any opportunities to improve
its efficiency as well as to respond to legislated changes or new pro-
grams. An effective meshing of such potentially opposing thrusts is a
critical management issue.
In projects of this magnitude, regardless of the methodology of
planning, there is a tendency of the implementors to lose the needed
sense of urgency with respect to early milestones because of the
apparent long period ahead for implementation. It is essential that
the early milestones be met in a timely manner or the time frame planned
for the transition to the future system could prove to be insufficient.
It is important to stress the need for frequent and regular formal
reviews of progress. Such reviews, held no less than quarterly, should
give each individual with responsibility for a major portion of the pro-
ject an opportunity to discuss the progress and problems with management
and to show management that each area of responsibility is on schedule.
The panel recommends that the project manager's responsibilities include
the maintenance of PERT-type schedules, the details of the review
process, and the general administration of the phasing of the many inter-
related parts of the total project.
The plan for developing the future SSA system may be viewed in four
phases:
Design
Implementation
Transition
Maintenance and Control
Each phase presents unique management challenges.
Desian Phase
The design phase deals essentially with the conversion of the
concepts of the SSA future system into discrete and specific implementa-
tion modules. The actual design is usually best accomplished by a small
group that is able to collaborate closely and has a broad overall
understanding of the objectives of the SSA's future system. However, it
is important that the design group not only contain individuals whose
experience covers all areas of the program, but that their design
OCR for page 61
61
specifications be effectively reviewed and approved by those who operate
and maintain the future system.
The total design of the system and the integration of all parts
of that design should be completed and approved before detailed
implementation of the transition phase begins. The design documentation
becomes the recipe for the implementation of the system and should be
subject to control by a design review group. Such control is needed so
that changes can be accommodated and coordinated for consistency with
all other aspects of the design.
Within the design effort, the criteria should be established to
design for flexibility in order that the system can respond to future
changes in policy direction, legislation and technology. The design
approach should strive for simplicity and modularity so that portions
of the project may be easily delegated to various implementation groups
and to facilitate the accommodation of change.
Another factor worthy of major consideration during the design
phase is the smooth integration of the new system design with the
existing data base and process without disturbing the flow of services
by the SSA. The panel considers that this aspect will influence the
design as significantly as the expressed objectives of the SSA's
future system. In view of this, the SSA might well consider
assigning responsibility for this part of the design to a deputy project
manager or similar official.
It is important that the design phase be scheduled in a realistic
manner. Not only is this necessary to allow sufficient time for
redesign, but the implementation schedule of the total project must
become the forcing function that causes the termination of the design
phase. Without this forcing function, the iterative nature of the
design phase could continue far beyond the point of justifiable benefit
and bring about cost and schedule overruns.
Implementation Phase
The implementation phase embraces the development and testing of
programs and the conversion of data to fulfill the requirements
expressed in the design process. At this point, it should be possible
to break the proposed future system into several smaller modules, each
to be implemented by a different group of programmers. Such assignment
of responsibility, while necessary if the project is to be completed in
a timely manner, carries the risk that implementing groups may not
rigorously adhere to the design specifications. As significantly more
people will now be working on the project than in the design phase,
it is important that program standards and conventions be established
and enforced rigorously. It is recommended that the original design
group serve as a reviewing authority for each implementation group to
assure conformity to the design specifications.
When each implementating group completes its part of the project,
the part will need rigorous testing, both as a free-standing module
and as an integrated part of the system. One approach to this phase
would be the establishment of a quality assurance function with a
OCR for page 62
62
responsibility to test the modules and verify that they meet the design
specification and conform to the established standards for documentation
and operation. This quality assurance group would also be responsible
for the extraction of reasonable test data from the current system files
so that the testing environment can be as realistic as possible.
Transition Phase
The transition phase involves the transfer of the SSA service
delivery functions from the current system to those elements of the
future system that have completed the design and implementation phases.
It is at this point that the SSA's services to its clients are most
likely to be disrupted, as failures and deficiencies appear in the
newly implemented segments. It is critically important that fall-back
procedures be established, so that, in the event of the failure of some
portion of the new system, it is possible to return the operation quickly
to the old system and continue the service without interruption.
For some parts of this phase, it may be necessary and desirable to
run completely parallel operations for the current system and the new
one. This may entail additional costs in people, equipment, and time.
However, in view of the criticality of the services provided by the SSA,
the assurance of a non-disruptive conversion warrants such an investment.
Equipment that is duplicated to improve system reliability may be useful
to help some start-up, real-life training and testing, and other tran-
sition problems by being available to operate in parallel with the
operating system.
Maintenance and Control
In systems as large as the SSA's future one, the problems of main-
taining and controlling the operational system must be given full
recognition, starting with the design phase and continuing throughout
the project. The recurring need to make changes to the system in
response to legislative or other actions must be planned in an orderly
manner. The key to successful adaptation to change is to keep the
process as simple as possible, build the system in a highly modular
fashion, and provide complete and effective documentation for all
aspects of the system.
In consideration of the large amount of public money involved, and
because of the stringent requirements for privacy and security, the
panel recommends that the future social security system have the capa-
bility to provide detailed auditable records of its usage. The audit
trails must provide a record of all data accesses, and the initiator of
all data changes, in addition to normal accounting controls. Moreover,
the audit and control functions must initially tie into and be consistent
with the audit and control functions associated with the current social
security process to assure the integrity of the conversion. Because such
operations are not normally part of the main thrust of the design, they
tend to be forgotten or tacked on after the fact. It is important that
recognition of this requirement for audit trails be given prominence
OCR for page 63
63
throughout the entire project and form part of the original design
specification. The panel notes that the SSA has made audit trails a
fixed requirement for the future system.
Useful Experience
Projects of this magnitude and complexity are difficult to control
and manage. Experience has shown that an organization that is normally
oriented toward daily operations frequently gets into great difficulty
when it undertakes a large, comprehensive project. Such an organization
is attuned to the daily needs of operational situations. It is struc-
tured to respond to such needs and has developed managers and management
styles accordingly. When such an organizational structure is suddenly
thrust into a complicated new project, the organization typically fails
to see the effort as an engineering development job that must be dealt
with quite differently from its accustomed style. Commonly, the internal
managers are not properly experienced nor adequately trained for the new
tasks. Neither is the organization properly structured for the develop-
ment environment. Thus, budget overruns, schedule slippages, technical
difficulties, and all manner of problems stem directly from the failure
of a line-oriented organization to adapt to a new perspective.
However, within the government are several other comparable system
development efforts that are underway or have been completed with varying
degrees of success. The broad range of expertise acquired by the
government in such other ventures should, if possible, be exploited by
the SSA. This review did not attempt to define the types of management
tools and controls that can be applied to this project. However, current
literature on the subject of "Top Down Design,' Structured Programming,
PERT, and other scheduling approaches is available in abundance and can
provide significant guidance.
Representative terms from entire chapter:
district offices
