Treasury Board talking a single CMS for government

We encourage users to post events happening in the community to the community events group on https://www.drupal.org.
LeeHunter's picture

This summer, the Treasury Board told Canadian government departments not to go shopping for new web content and EDRMS systems because they're planning on procuring a single solution or set of solutions for the entire government (i.e. everyone will have the same solution, possibly centrally managed).

This has obvious implications for open source products like Alfresco and Drupal, especially if TB is going to go through the typical RFP process.

Anyone heard anything more about TB's plans and whether they're taking OSS into consideration?

Comments

There is some federal Drupal stuff here in Montréal

Ryan Weal's picture

I know of at least one Montréal company that has a few federal government contracts which I am quite certain are all running on Drupal... so I would assume they would look at what is currently in use, and what is most cost effective, assuming that the government acts rationally...

Rational government? I wish.

LeeHunter's picture

There are actually quite a few Drupal projects in the federal government but I'm not sure whether it's going to make much difference. There's a lot more money and resources poured into Sharepoint and I'm sure that departments that have already invested in that product will be pushing to have their direction validated by TB.

Then there are the vendors who will by lobbing to have any RFP skewed to something that only a commercial product can fill.

For a project of this size, one of the requirements will certainly be enterprise support from a company of significant size. Unless someone like Acquia steps in (and even then they'd probably need a partnership with a larger, more established company) I don't think Drupal or any other OSS will have a chance.

Source?

colan's picture

What is the source of the original announcement? Please provide a link, quotation, or something similar. Thanks!

It's from the CIO. I don't

LeeHunter's picture

It's from the CIO. I don't have any links.

Shared IT services

SHARE CANADA

peijun's picture

I heard from CBC radio on my way to work this morning that the government is considering to set up a new agency called SHARE Canada (or something like that). All IT infrastructures and projects in every department will be moved to there.

Doubt it's related

colan's picture

...but here's the official announcement: http://news.gc.ca/web/article-eng.do?nid=614499

Semi-related

LeeHunter's picture

The data centre and email consolidation announced yesterday isn't directly related, but it's all part of a big drive to consolidate everything that has generic requirements.

Web content and document management is definitely high up on the to-do list.

From the taxpayer's perspective this is a good thing and long overdue, regardless of the technology they choose, but it would be even better if they evaluate OSS on a level playing field.

I recognize this anti-pattern

aross's picture

Government consolidates massive amounts of IT into a single RFP. Guess what? Only a very small number of massive companies (who just happen to be incumbent suppliers) are big enough to make a credible bid that size. From the government's perspective "it saves money" because it means less administration of many smaller contracts and provides a "single consistent solution".

The net result absolutely prevents small and medium business from having any shot. It makes it trivial for large corporations to push shrink-wrapped software that may or may not provide effective solutions. Some times this works great, and when it does wonderful. All too often it misses the mark however, embraces lock-in from a particular vendor, lines the pockets of companies that likely plan little to no hiring or development as part of the initiative, and ultimately wastes money.

I believe in the value proposition of Drupal and Alfresco. Drupal in particular would offer a chance to source work from many suppliers and get the best deal. However, anyone want to wager whether the solution chosen ends up being Sharepoint & Exchange?

Andrew

Andrew, Your post makes a lot

peijun's picture

Andrew,

Your post makes a lot of sense. I dont believe they can save any money ultimately, too. ( In theory, they can. But in practice, they cannot.) What I worry about is their efficiency. Say if we need a small project for data management or issue tracking, we can start it immediately. I guess you may need to wait months or years for them to consider your request for small projects. Furthermore, imagine the business analysis and project design processed. The IT team and users may locate in different locations, even different cities. If you have ever been involved in any project design, you know how this will affect the efficiency of the process.

'We can travel.' they may argue. Travelling needs (a lot of) money. Or they say ' we can set offices in all departments'. Then, why we do it. We are in that way already.

If they save money that way, I would call it a waste.

Advocacy Initiatives

RobinGalipeau's picture

Hey Lee, good post... and certainly warrants group discussion.

Ironically, here is an article on CBC on the "Shared Services" initiative which I was reading the morning of your first post: http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/story/2011/08/04/pol-it-savings.html

As per the article, they will be targeting common systems (e.g. email)... and CMS may very well fall into that silo.

That said, and in speaking to other industry colleagues... The repercussions to the business aspect of this alone are mind numbing! ...and don't see how they would undertake this from a CMS standpoint.
First, there is the shear element of "competition" - which does stimulate government IT innovation.

Second, they already have lack of resources for many of the technologies (Interwoven, Sharepoint, Drupal... etc.). So how would they adopt/handle an explosion of resource demand, even with the efficiency you'll need lots of bodies ... the task seams overwhelming for things as diversely integrated as a CMS. Email however seams like a much more attainable project, and makes sense as a shared service initiative.

Finally, can you even imaging the lobbying & lawsuits and all that goes with a move like this?

Although I admit I have concerns about this, It's mostly with the disruption and concerns it's causing in several departments. (I've already seen references in RFPs about departments referencing "Shared Services TB initiative)... and concerned it will take the wind out of some sails, even though I don't see it going through from a CMS standpoint.

On a brighter note... I believe Drupal/Alfresco can be contenders:
There is the possibility they won't stick to "one" solution, and Mature enterprise-level FOSS make a pretty friggin compelling argument. Also, the fact that you don't have to "Procure" FOSS software may actually open doors for "grey areas" to allow side integration. (e.g. Alfresco is the only FOSS based ECM that supports the SharePoint Protocol).

On the advocacy front... We are hosting a private GoC/NGO FOSS awareness symposium end of September - As a pre-GTEC event. (Sponsored by Modis). We will be focusing on Drupal / Alfresco, and discussing business factors, mobile, accessibility, procurement, support, etc. The event is by invite only and geared towards senior management... we already have a few ministry CIOs committed to coming to the event. (as there is great interest in these technologies). - Fill you in with more details over the next few weeks... in the event you'd like to sponsor an invitation.

Also, FYI: As the only Ottawa Gold-Level Alfresco partner, we have secured space at GTEC to formally represent Alfresco... and will showcase some Drupal <-CMIS-> Alfresco integration neatness:)

P.S. If some of you have GoC or NGO FOSS/Drupal/Alfresco Success Case Studies you'd like to share... I'd appreciate you contacting me (we can potentially use them in our symposium).

Robin Galipeau - Managing Partner
http://www.openplus.ca

Article Link

RobinGalipeau's picture

Here is the non-mobile URL to that post on CBC (oops)
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/story/2011/08/04/pol-it-savings.html

Robin Galipeau - Managing Partner
http://www.openplus.ca

David Eaves has posted on this subject

dwhutton's picture

You may be interested to know that IT/Open government blogger David Eaves has published a post in part based on what he read in this thread:

http://www.google.com/reader/view/#stream/feed%2Fhttp%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.feed...

David Hutton

The Holy Grail of IT Consolidation

mgifford's picture

There's been some very interesting discussions on this thread & elsewhere about this initiative. It could well be not much more than a way for the Conservatives to break their unions. I like DBast's post here where he points to modifying the procurement process rather than setting up a government department:
http://blog.dbast.com/?p=1012

I like the model that the UK tried to force procurement officers to verify if an open source solution before purchasing a proprietary one. It had some other great ideas around innovative procurement, but with the change of government I don't know what has happened to that policy.

The vision of a one stop solution inspires lots of management, but in reality problems don't arrive in neat little packages that can be dealt with that way. One has to be able to make rational decisions about the use of IT knowing that every different solution that you employ has a cost associated with that. But solutions should also be built in a modular way which allows for individuals to extend & build on the features provided by the core framework.

The best example that I can think of from my experience is an organization that decided to standardize which database they used. They decided on Oracle for everything from their financial system to a simple address book. This is clearly not a cost-effective solution.

Breaking down silos in government is good, but I think this would be far more effective if there was an effort to push for more collaboration. Using open source is a good means to do this, especially if departments are contributing back through tools like http://tbs-sct.ircan.gc.ca

It's shocking to read that there doesn't even seem to be a business plan for this new agency. Just a "common sense" view that if you have fewer tools it will cost the tax payer less money.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/business/federal+agency+Shared+Services+Can...

Big, one stop solutions only support the giants like IBM, Oracle and of course Microsoft.

Ottawa

Group notifications

This group offers an RSS feed. Or subscribe to these personalized, sitewide feeds:

Hot content this week