In early 2016, they fired us all. We were made to train up our replacements (at IBM in India) in order to receive severance packages. Later we found out that Accenture had picked up the initiative. And now the world knows the rest of the story.
All the points made here (ie warning signs, organic initiative) were passionately made at the time to Hertz brass. But someone, no doubt on a golf course somewhere, sold them the idea that they can save millions on paper. And, on paper, they were right: Shortly after firing us all, the CIO received a $7 million bonus. Unfortunately for everyone involved (except the CIO, of course), paper doesn't reflect reality.
Is there anywhere some study/statistics that shows the impact of those 3 elements together? Because I am quite sure it's extremely common, or I just stumble upon such cases really frequently....
Maybe this time it didn't go out unnoticed because someone actually tried to use their website and got pissed off it didn't work
Why is that?
I know a few of these people, moving around in similar positions in every company. They are brought in as hatchet men, with full knowledge that it will be a fiasco. But before this becomes obvious everybody gets to tout cost savings, optimizations, etc. to get their bonuses. Then the person is paid handsomely to leave and take all the blame with them. Their LinkedIn profiles are chock full of 12-24 month stints at all kinds of companies with "successful" projects... until you ask someone involved with those projects.
We should name and shame those who do that. It's a short term success for long term damage. (It's going to take a long time for Hertz to recover from this, and I can't imagine their lawsuit is going to be too successful [they still need a new site])
For me generally, it's execs that come from Cisco or GE tend to do this kind of thing.
All the firms we spoke to were onboard with this and continued on with their proposals except Accenture. One of their lead devs was extremely combative and trying to tell us that going with Angular was a much better idea / React is a failure. On top of this, they kept pitching that they were going to rewrite all the backend services, which was not part of the RFP or even brought up as something wanted.
It really felt like they already had a generic turnkey product in place and wanted to sell us that instead.
To be clear, this isn't a knock against Mexican or Indian people. But the people working in these accenture buildings are literally writing code using windows notepad, in un-airconditioned rooms, and fired if they don't deliver on time.
They then, obviously, write buggy code, which Accenture then offers to fix to the client for an additional fee. They used to have onshore American developers responsible for being the white/professional face to the client, but they've since dropped that as well, and now only hire on a management level for that role.
The crazy thing is IBM consulting is worse. I've been forced to work with IBM .Net Consultants who didn't know what visual studio was. Not how to use it, but literally didn't know what it was. And when shown what it was, couldn't figure out how to start the installation process. Again, not install the whole thing, couldn't figure out how to double click Setup.exe.
The very best though, was a small consulting company that was competing against my Accenture project back at the time. He was, of course, also an Indian outsourcing company. But he came with the additional twist that everyone he hired as a developer was a woman from India, and was only on-site in the USA on temporary work permit.
He was the only man. So if they didn't do exactly what he said, he would kick them out of the country, and send them back to India. No potential for gross abuse there.
There are great offhsoring companies, but they don't work for offshoring rates. I now firmly believe that if your company is seriously looking at offshoring their technology for cost savings, it is not a competent technology company already.
I just stopped reading after this. You are full of yourself.
I had the chance to work with a team in Accenture Mexico, and they offices are nothing but great, just look at the pictures:
Your entire comment is just a bunch of lies, not sure what you are trying to accomplish.
I'm not defending Accenture over this lawsuit, but it seems that you bring so much hate with that comment.
I also was definitely overreacting when I wrote the above, as I am currently dealing with an issue with an overseas contracting team at the moment, and used the above comment to blow off some steam. I apologize for the vitriol.
Monte Ray is the new facility they were building when I left. I'm happy to hear it might actually be a good building.
When I left, it was explained to me that on Monday mornings, many of the Mexican development team were driven via school bus over the border to work in the SouthWest, and that as a result, American hiring was going to be at least temporarily frozen, and that they would be responsible solely for WPF applications.
The line about un-airconditioned buildings and notepad is how the office we were working with in India was described to me by the manager in charge of that team on my project.
I thought, given the similarities of those two stories, that conditions would therefore be similar to the Mexican office.
I apologize for the mistake, and am happy to hear that I am wrong. Apologies for the incorrect comment.
I worked in Bangalore in 2005, (the city with the best weather among cities with tech offshoring offices). Even Bangalore had airconditioned offices.
Second-hand bullshit is still bullshit.
2. It's an open office environment with very little desk space. Most of the in-office pictures are stuff on desks.
We were largely a VS/Java shop when I was there then we started to invest more in Angular, so that's probably why they fought so hard to convince you.
Once the management had settled on a strategic direction, they should have hired key executives , managers and architects and developers. They should have then supplemented this taskforce with contractors or even outsourcing companies.
Let Accenture own the whole initiative from soup-to-nuts was dumb. Fire that CIO!
All they wanted was a mobile-first website.
Did that really require a $32 million investment? An in-house team could've handled that for less, with more trust involved.
Focus on hiring good people!
* multi-language and accessible
* desktop, tablet, mobile -- doing this well requires pretty good design chops and a lot of testing
* handles money and credit cards, so requires PCI compliance -- there's little chance they're going to move to something like Stripe at their scale
* probably connects to a godawful homegrown inventory system
* very high uptime requirements
* integration with their analytics chain, to provide highly complex ad reporting and conversion optimization flows
* an administration UI that functions both at the global level and at the store level with complex permissions and reporting given the various management chains involved
Considering even a mid-tier dev costs order $200k fully loaded, a small front-end scrum team of 5 front end eng, a designer, and a PM runs you $1.4/year; a backend team of 10 also with a PM runs $2.5m. That's $8m over 2 years for a pretty small team and not super-expensive talent. I'd initially spec the Hertz site as over $20m to build. And that cost could easily rise.
I've told people who scoff at $32 million "for a website" that $32 million might actually be low, depending on requirements.
Sorry but I've seen "in-house" code and it's utter shit as well. I work as an outsourcing developer from a Consultancy agency, and all the management is done by the client.
So, even if the code is all "in-house" that's not enought to build quality code.
Nobody got fired for hiring Microsoft or IBM for a project. The person who gets fired is the executive that says "we can do this in house" and comes up at 90-110% but stepped on the wrong board member's toes.
So I remember they had a program manager from the middle east and he tried every underhanded trick to undermine my credibility. So I buffered myself by hiring a small crew of IBM's Solutions Services and borrowing the top UI designer from Apple on a consultancy basis, these guys are not global services but rather very high end DE's from IBM such as Roland Barcia and Mathew Perrins. Anyways we built a point by point rebuttal against all of Accentures proposals and how we could not achieve our goals using old page-post model that they where proposing.
So anyways, Accenture is arguing that JS based front end technologies are not mature, rest is not proven, etc, etc.
Anyways so we are in the board, meeting with the CTO, CIO and CFO from Marriott as well as my direct line president who is totally on my side. And this program manager starts going on and on about this (it was basically them covering for the fact that they had nothing but sub par Java talent in their org.). So while he is going on and on, I start walking around the table and start dropping packets in front of all my execs. Then I start dropping them in front of the Accenture top brass finally the program manager. The packet contained a Gartner research article from Accenture's CTO about how enterprises that fail to adopt disconnected JS and mobile UI's based on components communicating with legacy enterprise systems via rest ran the risk of becoming outdated and increase technical debt.
Anyway, program manager lost his shit, and came over the table at me. Accenture was escorted out the door, I was asked to provide a budget and a resource plan for implementing it in house. I went to my program manager, and two of my contracting outfits about scaling resource and we came up with a conservative figure of around 7 million, and a 1 year time-frame. We finished in 8 months, at 4.5 million total spend.
TLDR - I saved Marriott 35 million dollars by getting rid of Accenture, did it in house, was attacked by an Accenture personnel and was asked to consider the interim CTO position due to the overwhelming success. I resigned 2 months after the project was finished and went back to remote development, I have never considered a executive or CTO position again after that and other experiences as a CTO with other orgs.
80% of the blame lies with Hertz management. It's professional negligence and mismanagement.
Most likely, they were probably advised against the decision. Even if they weren't, there likely were plenty of warning signs along the way.
This is a service I'm very happy to offer!
"The federal government’s Obamacare enrollment system has cost about $2.1 billion so far, according to a Bloomberg Government analysis of contracts related to the project."
They got to blame any failure on Obama, so why not I guess.
The website was a big part of it, but it was a lot more than that. The actual scope is roughly outlined in the article.
Only really the big guys get away with it though.
Everyone has the ability to make mistakes, but you probably wouldn't hire a plumber to change your electrics. And I would think that the chances are that the actual work is being completed by people who have little understanding of the job they are supposed to be completing (and it appears maybe even the tools they are supposed to be using).
The extra frustrating things are that I am sure this will be used by people to suggest at why software projects fail; whereas, it is probably more symptomatic of a string of errors over project planning and understanding.
Anyone know about what they're talking about?
Are they trying to use Hertz instead of hurt??
... for acceptable wages. That's the kicker.
Good talent doesn't sign up for large-scale web projects at $20k/year.
I feel like they're speaking to a non-technical upper management audience. Surely someone familiar with managing IT projects would see those words and run for the hills.