Author Topic: AUK CHAIRMAN STATEMENT  (Read 20227 times)

Re: AUK CHAIRMAN STATEMENT
« Reply #450 on: September 29, 2018, 08:37:43 am »
At least us normal folk know that AUK has loads of IT professionals and we can make allowances accordingly. 

I’d always wondered why you were all so weird, but had just assumed you were all GPs or actuaries.   ;)

POTD !

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: AUK CHAIRMAN STATEMENT
« Reply #451 on: September 29, 2018, 12:18:14 pm »
At least us normal folk know that AUK has loads of IT professionals and we can make allowances accordingly. 

I’d always wondered why you were all so weird, but had just assumed you were all GPs or actuaries.   ;)

Surely the hand writing on the brevett cards would be a give away ? :p

J
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

Re: AUK CHAIRMAN STATEMENT
« Reply #452 on: October 15, 2018, 11:43:48 pm »
I've been adamant from the instant all this website hullaballoo came to light that the membership needs to be balloted on what we do.

FWIW I don't quite agree with this.

I wish that the board would do the right thing. I don't trust the membership to be able to be informed enough to make the right decision if it went to a ballot.

What I wish the board would do is stop at the end of Phase 1 and reassess. Don't fall for the Sunk Cost Fallacy and throw good money after bad with Phases 2/3.

Look at what really is the problem (the current infrastructure is shaky) and the proposed solution (which does not change this) and realise that it is pointless to continue with Phase 2 or 3 as it stands.

Phase 1 has cost enough and scared enough people that a proper rethink is required. Balloting the members suggests that there is a viable alternative plan, there isn't yet.

This.

Re: AUK CHAIRMAN STATEMENT
« Reply #453 on: Yesterday at 12:25:13 am »
What I find difficult is the absence of any sense of vision of what the new website is supposed to achieve, what functionality and benefits it will offer members and the delivery proggramme.

The vision thing is especially important because if you're selling the family silver to pay for a system then you have to be focused on the long term, looking to develop a system that will be relevant in 5 or even 10 years time. That in itself requires a fairly solid vision of the future of Audax UK and how it will present itself in an increasingly online world. If a purpose of the website is for example to help promote audax - and help orgs promote their events - where are the photo galleries and social media elements? Yes, anathema to some but absolutely essential in the modern world (and standard elements of a modern website).

Its not unreasonable to expect this to have been nailed before issuing contracts and for it to be communicated to the users/members/customers. All we've had is a few column inches in Arrivee and the odd forum post, mostly consisting of statements to the effect of, 'we've gotta have it and very little of this has anything to do with you'.

Meanwhile the budget (so far as can be ascertained) has gone from a nominal £150k to a projected five year (additional) spend of £500k or more. A large chunk of the current overspend seems might have been avoidable either by stronger project/supplier management and/or by taking an approach which didn't neccessitate wholesale integration with old/existing systems.

At the end of the day, instead of having a complete solution/service we'll have a shiny front-end website developed and maintained by costly contractors who we are essentially going to be paying forever for every minor enhancement/change to come (anybody here believe we'll get everything right first time?), whilst club volunteers will continue to kept busy (re) developing and maintaining  the backend database. What could possibly go wrong with this approach? And was it not part of the rationale for the project to allow the club volunteers to retire, i.e., to avoid being dependent on just one person? (AUK ought to put up a statue to Francis for all he has done and is continuing to do for the club).

The really worrying thing is that what has been implemented to date is relatively straightforward webstuff. All of the more technical elements are yet to come, so assertions that the later stages will not incur similar cost overuns seem naive at best.

I don't doubt that a vast amount of work has been put into this project by volunteers but much of the return will be lost if it is misguided.

The real tell is that those most involved with this project mostly want out. That does not bode well for the future.