Changing the AIS

Changing the AIS Student`s Name: Professor`s Name: Course Title: Date: Abstract An accounting information system (AIS) gathers records, processes and stores information to produce data for administrators. AIS can be a very complex system employing latest computer and information technology or a very easy manual system, or somewhere between the two. Despite the approach used, the process is similar. Even so, the AIS and the individuals utilizing it have to gather, enter, process, store and report information and data. This research paper is about a failed accounting information system, the FBI`s Virtual Case File. Key Words: AIS, FBI, VSF, Changing the AIS: Virtual Case File Introduction An accounting information system (AIS) gathers records, processes and stores information to produce data for administrators. AIS can be a very complex system employing latest computer and information technology or a very easy manual system, or somewhere between the two. Despite the approach used, the process is similar. Even so, the AIS and the individuals utilizing it have to gather, enter, process, store and report information and data. The computer software and hardware or pencil and paper are just the tools used to create the information. AIS comprise six main parts, namely: the people, instructions and procedures, software, data, internal controls, security measures and information technology infrastructure. Virtual Case File (VCF) refers to a software application that was built by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) between 2000 and 2005. VCF was created to meliorate the FBI modern case management system. Nonetheless, the project was formally abandoned in 2005. At that time, VCF was still in development phase and cost the government virtually $170 million. The project is an example of wasted tax money in an unsuccessful attempt to fix an outdated government system. Science Applications International Corporation was contracted to coordinate VCF (Bernstein & Yuhas, 2005). Accounting Information System Failure: Factors VCF failed because of a number of factors: 1 Planned utilization of a flash cutover deployment, which made it very hard to adopt the system until it was honed. 2 The inclusion of numerous FBI Personnel who had little or no formal training in computing as engineers or managers on the project. 3 Scope creep: Requirements were constantly added to the program at the same time as it was falling behind schedule. 4 Micromanagement of software programmers. 5 Code bloat because of scope creep and changing specifications. At some point, it was approximated the software had above 700,000 lines of code. Impact to the Business FBI was confronted with a lot of criticism after the VCF program failed. Because of the program, the taxpayers lost $104 million. Additionally, FBI kept on using the antediluvian ACS system several years after. In fact, many analysts felt that the bureau`s counter-terrorism mission would be hampered. In 2005, FBI announced another, more ambitious software project called Sentinel after VCF failed. At the time, FBI and its senior management lost credibility (Bernstein & Yuhas, 2005). Senior Management Responsibility for the Failure The collapse of the effort to refashion the FBI`s filing system originated from failures of virtually every type, including poor conception and jumbled execution of the steps required to make the system work. FBI director, Robert S. Mueller, III agreed that FBI senior management in a way led to the collapse of FBI`s Virtual Case File system. He admitted that FBI management never had a set of clear VCF requirements at the time of signing of the original contract in 2001. The contract was established upon hours worked i.e. cost plus an award fee. These forms of contracts are not easy to manage. Even though the requirements were consolidated in 2002, the contract continued to be a cost-plus-award-fee contract. The senior management did not demand skill sets in FBI personnel, for example, program management, contract management and qualified software engineering. The agency experienced a high turnover in Chief Information Officers and Trilogy program managers. The management underrated the intricacy of interfacing with FBI`s legacy system, establishing enterprise architecture and addressing the agency`s security needs. The director acknowledged that he partly contributed to the setbacks experienced with VCF and Trilogy. The Office of Inspector General (OIG) reported that FBI management never had sufficient influence over the Trilogy undertaking and the way it was doing in the initial years of the project. OIG also found that with new organizational structure and power accorded to the CIO in 2004, project management was given the attention that was necessary for the entire Trilogy project. Additionally, the management did not ensure or manage accountability at the contractor level. A clearer accountability was needed within the FBI. What the Senior Management could have done differently The FBI senior management would have thought of using a step-by-step approach in the design and implementation of the program. The management would have designed a clear contract policy and an all-inclusive budget so that additional costs would not have been incurred. It would also have ensured accountability, at least within FBI. Moreover, the management should have had clear VCF requirements at the moment of signing the original contract. The management would have devised a better strategy to recruit the most qualified workforce in the implementation process. Phase of most Significant Failure The project fell most significantly at its system design phase. As detailed in the audit report of the OIG (Office of the Inspector General) in February 2005 on the bureau`s larger Trilogy Information Technology Modernization Project, the VCF project failed for a variety of reasons, including poorly defined design requirements, lack of mature Information Technology Investment Management (ITIM) processes, and poor management continuity and oversight. Revealingly, the selection of a project manager was done late into the project. The agency cycled through five individuals in the role of Chief Information Officer in four years and accountability seemed to lack because decisions were made by committees rather than knowledgeable people. In the VCF project, the agency lacked an effective, reliable system to track and validate the contractors` costs. According to McGroddy and Lin (2004), the agency failed in crafting a good architecture to define a strategic analysis of its goals, mission and needs that could be linked through information technology to its functioning and processes. Consequently, FBI did not manage to establish how such investments could be tied to its operational objectives. Moreover, the committee reasoned out that the bureau`s attempts and outcomes in the field of enterprise architecture were limited and late, and failed to conform to the expectations. The second area of concern reported by McGroddy and Lin (2004) centers on System Design, or, more specifically, the agency`s planned "flash cutover" from the old ACS to the innovative VCF. Their opinion was that a limited initial rollout would provide an early warning for potential problems. Moreover, the committee expressed its concern that the rapid development approach and compressed project schedule took success at each stage for granted and did not give adequate thought to testing. This would in effect implement a prototype throughout the bureau where users would almost certainly be the testers after implementation. FBI had an extreme shortage of experienced project managers, senior IT managers and contract managers with good communication skills. On the other hand, the FBI hired very competent IT professionals without requiring extreme pecuniary sacrifices from them. The agency never borrowed personnel from other bureaus, not even from the citizen sector. Additionally, the agency worked under several external restrictions that inhibited its flexibility. What FBI could have done FBI would have defined all design requirements. The agency would have made mature Information Technology Investment Management (ITIM) processes available. It would have ensured proper management continuity and assumed an oversight role. The agency would have borrowed personnel from other bureaus, including the citizen sector. This would have ensured that the personnel were not only competent but also experienced to handle major tasks. Moreover, the agency would have done enough to deal with the many external restrictions that inhibited its flexibility. This would have been achieved by acting as per the schedule. The bureau would have hired proficient personnel at the initial stage. For instance, the project manager, who is extremely important for any project, would have been hired at the design phase. How Implementing Best Practices would have reduced the Chances for Failure Availability of a comprehensive R...