in reply to Re^5: IT decisions are driven by business needs
in thread IT decisions are driven by business needs

It has to be of some value to society, commonly expressed through money.

I think that it is very difficult to put a monetary value on pure research, and a huge amount of what NASA does is pure research. It is valuable. And in the long term, it can create wealth. But that research is usually spun off to private companies to develop and market. It is they rather than NASA that earns the wealth, as well as bearing some risk.

Take Mars Global Explorer. $247m, for 240,000 pictures. A cool $1m a pop. Is that good value? Will they ever pay for themselves? Human error and a faulty software upgrade prevented it from operating for another 2 or 5 or 10 years? Another 25,000 or 50,000 or quarter of a million more pictures. Would that have made the pictures value for money?

The rewards of NASA discoveries and developments, as value to the US economy over 40 odd years, is probably huge. But is it calculable? Did they make a profit?

Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
"Too many [] have been sedated by an oppressive environment of political correctness and risk aversion."
  • Comment on Re^6: IT decisions are driven by business needs

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^7: IT decisions are driven by business needs
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Apr 14, 2007 at 22:56 UTC
    The only people who have the right to determine if M$1/picture are the people who paid for it. And, they determine if it was worth it by choosing to purchase further products/services from that provider. So, if the US government chooses to fund NASA again, then they obviously were satisfied with the products/services provided.

    As I don't fund it, I don't get to make that determination.

    My criteria for good software:
    1. Does it work?
    2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
[reply]

      Sorry. I wasn't suggesting I, or anyone else here, nor any individual or company should make that decision.

      The point was, how could anyone make that decision? This year, or this decade for that matter. The value of those photos will only be realised over the very long haul. Certainly not in time to make next years, or the next 5 years of funding decisions.

      And the bigger point is that whether those charged with allocating NASA its budget for the next 5 years, or the 5 after that are "satisfied with NASA", will depend as much on the outcome of the next US election. Will the new incumbent of the Whitehouse be satisfied with NASA's response to Bush's Mars adventure? Will the makeup of the House, or the Senate or the appropriate committees be pro or anti manned space missions? What other measures will be tacked on to the NASA budget bill? How effective will the lobbyists be? Will some Senator choose to vote against the bill because some town in his state is facing hard times, because the factory that provided most of the town's employment was shut, with the closure blamed upon it not getting the NASA contract that it felt is deserved?

      Once you get away from the "make a product and sell it at a profit or die", typical retail and wholesale business model, and introduce all the complexities of pure research, expanding the world's knowledge, and government funding, you cannot apply the usual business criteria. Government funding is as often allocated on the basis of its wider social and political impact, as it is on the basis of who provides the most competitive tender.

      As such, that makes NASA a poor counter example to the type of business that fits your OPs assertions.

      Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
      "Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
      In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.
[reply]
        I would argue that NASA is an excellent example of the type of organization that fits my OP assertions. It has a set of customers that provide it with funding. As such, all projects, especially IT ones, need to be aligned to meet the needs of those customers.

        I think most people have been looking at the NASA example the wrong way. It's not about how you would evaluate the value of NASA's products/services. It's about how the NASA management perceives how the US government values NASA's products/services. It is only then that business alignment can take place.

        My criteria for good software:
        1. Does it work?
        2. Can someone else come in, make a change, and be reasonably certain no bugs were introduced?
[reply]

In Section Meditations