Born to Lose?

This article comments on the failure of the Trilogy project conducted by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). The bureau set out in the late 1990s to update an out-moded infrastructure. The project grew to include the perfectly sensible goal of digitizing key portions of its paper-based case tracking system. Some projects are doomed to fail, and the so-called Trilogy project had several earmarks. For one, requirements never stopped changing. Plus, many revisions were driven by events beyond anyone's control--most notably the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, which led to a thorough shake-up of government security agencies. Similarly, companies often fall in such traps when they undertake a bet-the-farm information technology makeover in the face of dramatically changing market conditions. Ironically, this is exactly when most companies try something dramatic, as obvious dangers mitigate management's normal aversion to risk. Such projects have a chance of succeeding if the market does not suddenly change again and if management's plan is sound. Sadly, neither is guaranteed--and when outside forces perpetually reshape internal priorities, the outcome is often unhappy. Large projects should proceed in small steps, each of which should be an improvement even if the rest of the plan never happens. That is hard to do in the real world, of course, and Trilogy suffered an additional twist--the so-called flash cutover. The idea was to replace the old system at a single stroke. There are industries in which such draconian measures are necessary but Murphy's Law guarantees the transition will be painful. Change must start at the bottom. Much of the Trilogy project remains secret. But apparently, the original plan would have done little to reform an antiquated paper-based case management system in which, according to analysis from the Department of Justice, information could not be changed or updated electronically. That was probably a mistake.